On Fri, Nov 25, 2005 at 10:23:22PM -0500, Timothy Miller wrote:
> On 11/25/05, Jack Carroll <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On Thu, Nov 24, 2005 at 06:45:05PM -0500, Timothy Miller wrote:
> > >
> > > Although nothing is set in stone, there may be grounds for not
> > > supporting AGP. Or if we do, it won't be right away. But there's
> > > still time to debate that issue.
> > >
> >
> > Hahh??! That's going to exclude a heck of a lot of installed base
> > -- including my expensive new workstation.
>
> I have had people make arguments both ways. I have always wanted to
> include AGP, because we are targetting a lot of people who already
> have systems with AGP.
>
> If I can help it, we'll have AGP.
>
> But the thing is, anyone with AGP also has PCI, and if it's "fast
> enough" with PCI, how much do we care about AGP?
>
> Really, those with AGP aren't excluded. They're just at a
> disadvantage relative to those who have AGP cards.
Hmmm. That clarifies it some.
> But there are lots
> of disadvantages to OGA; they're just ones we are willing to tolerate
> because we demand open source drivers.
Presumably the disadvantages are because OGA had to start from a
clean sheet of paper, and therefore will reach a basic usable condition long
before it can equal the performance of the closed-standard products it
replaces?
_______________________________________________
Open-graphics mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.duskglow.com/mailman/listinfo/open-graphics
List service provided by Duskglow Consulting, LLC (www.duskglow.com)
