[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: Could tthere be an update iso distribution



On Thu, 2006-03-16 at 12:11 -0500, sean wrote:
> On Thu, 16 Mar 2006 11:01:35 -0600
> "Jonathan Berry" <berryja gmail com> wrote:
> 
> > Umm, the nv driver is far from being "perfectly good," sorry.  Most of
> > the time it works for 2D, yes.  As you mention below, it does not
> > support 3D at all.  Also, for me, the nv driver does not even support
> > simple 2D OpenGL programs for some reason.  Especially right now
> > OpenGL support is essential since I am taking a class that involves
> > writing OpenGL programs.
> 
> You fall into the minority then; most people today aren't using any
> Open GL at all in their day to day use.
> 
> > > nvidia driver that should be used by the _vast_ majority of people
> > > saddled with nvidia hardware.   Only those playing 3d games under
> > > Linux or driving multiple displays need to even consider the
> > 
> > Consider?  No, they *must* use the nvidia driver in those cases. 
> > There is nothing to consider.
> 
> Wrong.  They could (and IMHO should) consider changing hardware.
> 
PLEASE feel free to make a recommendation for a manufacturer that
provides a video card that is competitive with either ATI or nVidia in
quality and performance (and with the full 3D capability) and has open
source drivers????

I thought so.  You can't because there are none.  Don't make such
impossible suggestions for those of us who MUST use the video cards
available to do the graphics they need.

Those of us who use cards with no open source drivers available have no
choice.  As Jonathan said, nothing to consider in which card to choose
nor which driver to use.  Since we do not have the option to select a
better card that has open source drivers available then we have a right
to feel that software that breaks the drivers that are available is
wrong.

I do not have statistics of the percentages of Linux users who fall into
that category, but there are a lot and getting to be more all the time.

> > > proprietary driver.   Way too many people end up installing the
> > > binary albatross just for everyday desktop use, which is nuts.
> > 
> > That may be true, but when I spend a not insignificant amount of money
> > on a nice video card, I expect to be able to use all of the
> > functionality.  At least nVidia does a decent job of supporting their
> > hardware and providing Linux drivers that most of the time work (and
> > usually work *very* well).  That cannot  be said of some other video
> > chipset manufacturers...
> 
> I'm not interested in excuses, i'm interested in using and enjoying
> the benefits of open source software.  My point was that many people 
> who share this desire are "helped" into installing the binary crap 
> when they have no real need for it.
> 
And many do need it.

Since you are the one asking for statistics, please provide some of your
own.  Like, what percentage of those who use the nVidia provided driver
do not need it?

Although I wish that all software were open source, I understand when
the developer chooses to keep it closed and that does not prevent me
using what I need.  

I use open source in every way possible, but am free to pick and choose
as I see fit.  Your demand that all software you use be open source is
noble, but should not infringe on our rights to choose our own path.

> Sean
> 


[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]