In message <[email protected]>, Josephblack writes: > Our front page does not adequately explain why we need an open > graphics card. Here are a few problems I have seen with helping those > who insist upon nvida cards and closed drivers: > > You cannot always update the kernel when you like. How you like. > no one can alter it, debug it nor fix it. > You have given up your freedoms over your own computer. > > Please list what problems you see with using proprietary cards: What about > ATI? > for example: Andy mentioned in the past, their bios restricts how it is used.
Binary drivers have many problems: - Some cause data loss in unrelated parts of the system. - Some have security holes. - Some have bugs. - None support the variety of OSes and CPU architectures we need. For example, NetBSD supports 59 platforms. - Even if they provide a binary driver for your OS/CPU, it probably doesn't support all the hardware features. Even proprietary chips that are getting documented have problems: - We need hardware video decoding. ATI has not documented UVD/UVD2, and might not ever document it. OGP doesn't have hardware video decoding yet, but when it does it will be documented. - ATI doesn't support sync-on-green. (And probably doesn't support composite sync either.) - OGP will support using a TV as system console. None of these problems can be fixed by the end user. Any one of them could be a total show stopper. -------------- Joseph, re your recent email. They broke gmail and it no longer accepts mail from me. I haven't had any ideas for posters, sorry. _______________________________________________ Open-graphics mailing list [email protected] http://lists.duskglow.com/mailman/listinfo/open-graphics List service provided by Duskglow Consulting, LLC (www.duskglow.com)
