On 7/16/07, Dieter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I may be wrong, but this doesn't sound accurate to me. It seems like
things are getting worse rather than better. For example the 9200 is
documented but newer chips are not.
If your statement *is* accurate, then why bother with OGP if we can
now get graphics cards that work well with Free Software?
Right. I have considered this:
To varying degrees at different times, it's been hard to get graphics
cards that work well with Free Software. Even now, most available
graphics solutions are proprietary cards with proprietary drivers.
Or perhaps this:
Historically, it's been hard to get graphics cards that work well with
Free Software. Even now, most available graphics solutions are
proprietary cards with proprietary drivers.
Do we have info on which chips have sufficient documentation?
We could get it. But I have a week until I have to present this.
Even if I had this information right now, it might be too hard to
integrated it coherently into the speech. On the other hand, I
haven't timed myself yet, so I don't know if the speech is too short.
Did Nvidia ever document their graphics chips?
My understanding is that they never have, but perhaps they had
documented something a very long time ago.
Matrox? S3? ...
Generally, yes.
Maybe you could have a chart/graph/timeline showing when the
various companies stopped providing sufficient docs?
In principle, this would be nice.
Brand A |--------------------
Brand B |-----------
Brand C |-----
Brand D |----------------
1985 1990 1995 2000 2005
Maybe say "cards" rather than "chips" to avoid Intel.
Perhaps a graph is more detail than needed for this talk. Maybe
just something simple like
Recent graphics cards do not have enough documentation
available to write a fully functional device driver.
> I do like the IDEA you're trying to get across. I just don't want to
> be so specific. Feel free to argue otherwise.
I'm not going to argue for mudslinging. I might argue that a
simple statement of fact, with no pejoratives, isn't necessarily
mudslinging.
In fact, this may come up. I have a Radeon 9250 as the console
graphics card in the PC I'm bringing.
it is more work to determine if it will or not. I'm thinking that
a manager might ask their head engineer what to look for before
going to the talk. Engineer says "If it does OpenGL 2.0 it will
do what we need."
This crap happens all the time. Requirements are listed that the
customer is NEVER going to use, but it's included because it's a cool
buzzword.
--
Timothy Normand Miller
http://www.cse.ohio-state.edu/~millerti
Open Graphics Project
_______________________________________________
Open-graphics mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.duskglow.com/mailman/listinfo/open-graphics
List service provided by Duskglow Consulting, LLC (www.duskglow.com)
