Re: VGA cards

2009-12-18 Thread Miles Bader
Dave Witbrodt writes: > Camaleón wrote: >> On Tue, 15 Dec 2009 15:28:19 -0800, Kelly Clowers wrote: >>> I wasn't speaking of the independent xorg devs (although they also do a >>> good job), I was saying AMD is doing a very good job. >> >> In what way is doing a very good job? A good job could be

Re: VGA cards

2009-12-18 Thread Mark Allums
On 12/17/2009 4:33 AM, Chris Bannister wrote: On Wed, Dec 16, 2009 at 10:58:46PM -0600, Mark Allums wrote: On 12/16/2009 4:27 PM, Johannes Wiedersich wrote: In what way "trolling"? Are you kidding? :-/ You are repeating your arguments in a circular fashion without considering the arguments

Re: VGA cards

2009-12-17 Thread Chris Bannister
On Wed, Dec 16, 2009 at 10:58:46PM -0600, Mark Allums wrote: > On 12/16/2009 4:27 PM, Johannes Wiedersich wrote: >> >>> In what way "trolling"? Are you kidding? :-/ >> >> You are repeating your arguments in a circular fashion without >> considering the arguments of others. Thats what we call trolli

Re: VGA cards

2009-12-16 Thread Celejar
On Thu, 17 Dec 2009 08:56:28 +0100 Sven Joachim wrote: > On 2009-12-17 03:36 +0100, Celejar wrote: > > > I've discovered that kernel modesetting seems to consistently crash my > > 945GM within a few minutes of starting X: > > > > https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=25681 > > Which kern

Re: VGA cards

2009-12-16 Thread Sven Joachim
On 2009-12-17 03:36 +0100, Celejar wrote: > I've discovered that kernel modesetting seems to consistently crash my > 945GM within a few minutes of starting X: > > https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=25681 Which kernel version is that? I have a rather similar machine (Acer Travelmate 249

Re: VGA cards

2009-12-16 Thread Mark Allums
On 12/16/2009 4:27 PM, Johannes Wiedersich wrote: In what way "trolling"? Are you kidding? :-/ You are repeating your arguments in a circular fashion without considering the arguments of others. Thats what we call trolling. That's not trolling. It may not be a good argument, but it's not

Re: VGA cards

2009-12-16 Thread Carl Johnson
Johannes Wiedersich writes: > Carl Johnson wrote: >> I agree entirely with you. It is obvious by now that the original >> poster has an irrational grudge against ATI and is not interested in >> any real discussions. > > Ups OP was Rogério Brito, not Camaleón. Sorry, I lost track of the original

Re: VGA cards

2009-12-16 Thread Celejar
On Mon, 14 Dec 2009 13:54:53 +0100 Sven Joachim wrote: > On 2009-12-14 13:28 +0100, Camaleón wrote: > > > On Mon, 14 Dec 2009 13:17:59 +0100, Sven Joachim wrote: ... > >> The best bet is probably > >> to use Intel graphics, *except* GMA500¹. > > > > IIRC, some Intel cards were having *very*

Re: VGA cards

2009-12-16 Thread Johannes Wiedersich
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Camaleón wrote: > On Wed, 16 Dec 2009 10:17:16 -0500, Dave Witbrodt wrote: > >> Camaleón wrote: > Which probably isn't true anyway, with that much in the way of resources, you could reverse engineer it in short enough order. >>> "Reverse en

Re: VGA cards

2009-12-16 Thread Johannes Wiedersich
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Carl Johnson wrote: > I agree entirely with you. It is obvious by now that the original > poster has an irrational grudge against ATI and is not interested in > any real discussions. Ups OP was Rogério Brito, not Camaleón. - -- Johannes Three natio

Re: VGA cards

2009-12-16 Thread Carl Johnson
Dave Witbrodt writes: > More idiocy. More trolling. > > At this point I'd like to ask Kelly Clowers to stop feeding the > troll. The only result of your attempts to correct this troll's errors > has been to give it a chance to spread disinformation in the > debian-user archives. Now Google will

Re: VGA cards

2009-12-16 Thread Camaleón
On Wed, 16 Dec 2009 10:17:16 -0500, Dave Witbrodt wrote: > Camaleón wrote: >>> Which probably isn't true anyway, with that much in the way of >>> resources, you could reverse engineer it in short enough order. >> >> "Reverse engineering" is not legal in some countries and it's not a >> fair appr

Re: VGA cards

2009-12-16 Thread Dave Witbrodt
day. They respond to comments and questions from users, work on development of the drivers (and related components of the graphics subsystems), and work with other developers to improve all of this software. Your comments merely reveal your ignorance. But I have to disagree in regards AMD/AT

Re: VGA cards

2009-12-15 Thread Camaleón
>> radeon/radeonhd drivers. > > I wasn't speaking of the independent xorg devs (although they also do a > good job), I was saying AMD is doing a very good job. In what way is doing a very good job? A good job could be if they collaborate a bit for the development of their drivers

Re: VGA cards

2009-12-15 Thread Mark Allums
Since both ATI and NVIDIA are lacking driver-wise, compare the hardware. NVIDIA was ahead for a long time, but they blundered several times lately, such as the mobile chipset debacle. NVIDIA has tried and failed also to again leapfrog ATI as they did with the 8800 and the 260/280. However,

Re: VGA cards

2009-12-15 Thread Kelly Clowers
>> can reasonably be expected. >>> >>> Well, yes. >>> >>> But AMD could do more for its Linux users and in fact, does not :-( >> >> Yes and no? What is this, a quantum superposition? > > I agree that Xorg people have done a very good job (

Re: VGA cards

2009-12-15 Thread Florian Kulzer
On Mon, Dec 14, 2009 at 20:56:42 -0600, Stan Hoeppner wrote: > Sven Joachim put forth on 12/14/2009 6:54 AM: > > That blob is taken out from the closed > > source driver and probably undistributable, although Nvidia has promised > > not to take legal action. > > Ahem, yeah, it's not a bright idea

Re: VGA cards

2009-12-15 Thread Camaleón
yes. >> >> But AMD could do more for its Linux users and in fact, does not :-( > > Yes and no? What is this, a quantum superposition? I agree that Xorg people have done a very good job (by their own) with radeon/radeonhd drivers. But I have to disagree in regards AMD/ATI. It's not a linux-friendly company and has not released the full specs for their vga cards. Just some papers. In these days, that's not enough. Greetings, -- Camaleón -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org

Re: VGA cards

2009-12-15 Thread Kelly Clowers
On Tue, Dec 15, 2009 at 13:48, Camaleón wrote: > On Tue, 15 Dec 2009 13:24:07 -0800, Kelly Clowers wrote: > >> On Tue, Dec 15, 2009 at 12:09, Camaleón wrote: > On the contrary, ATI gives us all this: http://www.x.org/docs/AMD/ and Intel gives us at least this: http://www.x.org/docs/intel

Re: VGA cards

2009-12-15 Thread Camaleón
On Tue, 15 Dec 2009 13:24:07 -0800, Kelly Clowers wrote: > On Tue, Dec 15, 2009 at 12:09, Camaleón wrote: >>> On the contrary, ATI gives us all this: http://www.x.org/docs/AMD/ and >>> Intel gives us at least this: http://www.x.org/docs/intel/ But Nvidia >>> gives nothing at all. >> >> Still far

Re: VGA cards

2009-12-15 Thread Kelly Clowers
On Tue, Dec 15, 2009 at 12:09, Camaleón wrote: > On Tue, 15 Dec 2009 11:38:38 -0800, Kelly Clowers wrote: > >> On Tue, Dec 15, 2009 at 10:50, Camaleón wrote: > > (...) > >>> So in fact, we get from ATI no much more than from nvidia :-/ >> >> On the contrary, ATI gives us all this: http://www.x.org

Re: VGA cards

2009-12-15 Thread Camaleón
On Tue, 15 Dec 2009 11:38:38 -0800, Kelly Clowers wrote: > On Tue, Dec 15, 2009 at 10:50, Camaleón wrote: (...) >> So in fact, we get from ATI no much more than from nvidia :-/ > > On the contrary, ATI gives us all this: http://www.x.org/docs/AMD/ and > Intel gives us at least this: http://www.

Re: VGA cards

2009-12-15 Thread Kelly Clowers
On Tue, Dec 15, 2009 at 10:50, Camaleón wrote: > On Tue, 15 Dec 2009 10:20:29 -0800, Kelly Clowers wrote: > >> On Tue, Dec 15, 2009 at 07:43, Camaleón wrote: > > (...) > >>> Both, ATI and Nvidia are quite the same: they do not provide a complete >>> access to their hardware specifications and just

Re: VGA cards

2009-12-15 Thread Camaleón
On Tue, 15 Dec 2009 10:20:29 -0800, Kelly Clowers wrote: > On Tue, Dec 15, 2009 at 07:43, Camaleón wrote: (...) >> Both, ATI and Nvidia are quite the same: they do not provide a complete >> access to their hardware specifications and just provide closed source >> drivers. > > ATI provides compl

Re: VGA cards

2009-12-15 Thread Kelly Clowers
On Tue, Dec 15, 2009 at 07:43, Camaleón wrote: > On Tue, 15 Dec 2009 11:33:41 +0100, Johannes Wiedersich wrote: > > > Yes, but people may need some functions that are not provided by Intel > cards. And remember that Intel driver also had its own glitches... Intel works great for me. >> FWIW, I g

Re: VGA cards

2009-12-15 Thread Camaleón
On Tue, 15 Dec 2009 11:33:41 +0100, Johannes Wiedersich wrote: > Camaleón wrote: >> It seems we have not many real choices, then :-( > > One of the remaining options is to complain to the dealer and/or > manufacturer for providing a product that does not fully work, since > neither the specifica

Re: VGA cards

2009-12-15 Thread Dave Witbrodt
Johannes Wiedersich wrote: Camaleón wrote: On Mon, 14 Dec 2009 13:54:53 +0100, Sven Joachim wrote: On 2009-12-14 13:28 +0100, Camaleón wrote: Be sure to avoid Nvidia graphics cards then. Why? There is "nv" driver (2D) and soon it will be "nouveau" (2D+3D) driver available. Both are open sour

Re: VGA cards

2009-12-15 Thread Johannes Wiedersich
Camaleón wrote: > On Mon, 14 Dec 2009 13:54:53 +0100, Sven Joachim wrote: >> On 2009-12-14 13:28 +0100, Camaleón wrote: Be sure to avoid Nvidia graphics cards then. >>> Why? >>> >>> There is "nv" driver (2D) and soon it will be "nouveau" (2D+3D) driver >>> available. Both are open source. >> T

Re: VGA cards

2009-12-14 Thread Stan Hoeppner
Sven Joachim put forth on 12/14/2009 6:54 AM: > That blob is taken out from the closed > source driver and probably undistributable, although Nvidia has promised > not to take legal action. Ahem, yeah, it's not a bright idea to sue your own customers, ya know, the ones buying your products (think

Re: VGA cards

2009-12-14 Thread Camaleón
On Mon, 14 Dec 2009 13:54:53 +0100, Sven Joachim wrote: > On 2009-12-14 13:28 +0100, Camaleón wrote: >>> Be sure to avoid Nvidia graphics cards then. >> >> Why? >> >> There is "nv" driver (2D) and soon it will be "nouveau" (2D+3D) driver >> available. Both are open source. > > The nv driver is h

Re: VGA cards

2009-12-14 Thread Sven Joachim
On 2009-12-14 13:28 +0100, Camaleón wrote: > On Mon, 14 Dec 2009 13:17:59 +0100, Sven Joachim wrote: > >> Be sure to avoid Nvidia graphics cards then. > > Why? > > There is "nv" driver (2D) and soon it will be "nouveau" (2D+3D) driver > available. Both are open source. The nv driver is heavily

VGA cards (Was: Questions regarding hardware for a Free Software (especially Debian))

2009-12-14 Thread Camaleón
On Mon, 14 Dec 2009 13:17:59 +0100, Sven Joachim wrote: > Be sure to avoid Nvidia graphics cards then. Why? There is "nv" driver (2D) and soon it will be "nouveau" (2D+3D) driver available. Both are open source. > The best bet is probably > to use Intel graphics, *except* GMA500¹. IIRC, s

Re: Possibilities with 2 vga cards ??

2004-10-28 Thread dsr
On Thu, Oct 21, 2004 at 01:22:05PM +0200, Philippe Dhont (Sea-ro) wrote: > > > I have an additional vga card and an additional monitor i can use. > What are the posibilities for dual screen and is there a paper about > this ? You have several possibilities: - run a separate X server that can

Possibilities with 2 vga cards ??

2004-10-21 Thread Philippe Dhont (Sea-ro)
Hi, I have an additional vga card and an additional monitor i can use. What are the posibilities for dual screen and is there a paper about this ? Grtz, Philippe Disclaimer : This e-mail is intended for the exclusive use by the person(s) mentioned as recipient(s). If you are not the intend