* On Friday 01 July 2005 20:57, Justin Hart wrote:
> To counter this argument, I would point out that I don't normally
> purchase used 3D acceleration hardware, and that by the time these
> cards are "old" they will also be "obsolete," meaning that you will
> have sunk a good amount of money into hardware that didn't work
> properly for you until it was outdated.

First of all, to avoid wrong assumptions: It's not the hardware that doesn't 
work properly, it's the proprietary software driving them. My experiences and 
my point of view is just the following:

I don't care if my hardware is outdated or even "obsolete", as long as it 
works. I'm not even interested in squeezing out the last frame per second 
playing the most recent shooter of the year. Things I do care for example is 
the ability to suspend my systems, and to gracefully resume afterwards. Both 
cards have no problem in doing so, it's just the proprietary drivers that 
suck, be it ATI or nVidia. 

As an addition, I like Xorg's eyecandy, and even the most "obsolete" card here 
has enough power to support it, it's just the drivers that suck, be it ATI or 
nVidia. I know that nVidia's drivers may work fine with brand new cards in 
this context, but they won't ever support the things I'm after using my 
Geforce2 GTS - it's "legacy". I'm pretty sure my ATI FireGL T2 will do so 
sooner or later, just because there's much more information available to the 
developers. They can work on it if ATI won't. With nVidia, you're doomed. At 
this very moment, none of both manufacturers can give me the things which are 
on top of my priorities, so I'm still going with unaccelerated open source 
drivers in both cases. I just got used to wait... ;-)

But while nVidia is forcing me to buy new hardware if I want to keep up with 
features my card would still be able to support, ATI isn't. Free software is 
about choice - so why would I want to have my freedom of choice denied by a 
hardware manufacturer? It's nVidia who want me to spent money in my specific 
case.

As ATI is offering delayed informations about it's hardware, it's no big 
surprise that Zack Rusin's first implementation of EXA[1], a new and resource 
friendly acceleration architecture for Xorg, is done within the r200 open 
source drivers for ATI cards. 

So is it good or bad thing buying ATI cards for Linux? What drives open source 
development? I'm still pretty sure there's no clear "yes" or "no" suitable 
for all situations and intentions. It's just the old "ATI sucks, nVidia 
rocks" rant that gets on my nerves. Things ain't that simple, but I can see 
and understand your point - it just differs from mine. ;-)

Regards,
Jens

Footnotes:
[1] http://dot.kde.org/1119948104/

-- 
Patriotism is the virtue of the vicious.
                -- Oscar Wilde
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Reply via email to