On Wednesday 07 April 2004 15:07, Freivald, Joseph A, GVSOL wrote: > How is the ATI xfree driver any better than the NV xfree driver?
At least for some cards (everything up to 7500 definitely, and I *think* 8500 and 9x00 series cards as well) have hardware 3D support in the radeon.o driver, while nv.o doesn't. nv.o also doesn't support XV (you'll need this if you want to watch movies/tv in full screen, even on more recent systems) on some of the older cards, while it is supported on all radeons that I've tried. Depends on your needs.... > I'm not trying to start a flame war on how Companies should choose to or > not to support open source projects It really saddens me that linux users are so quick to bitch about nVidia and now ATi providing binary-only drivers and how they should opensource their drivers and blah blah blah. What no one realise is that they probably would provide at least the specs if you could. But they can't because both use tchnologies in their cards that are licenced from other companies and they are not allowed to disclose that information. That is why ATi started with the binary drivers. Their history of linux support should make it crystal clear that they are frienly to the opensource community - they really don't deserve the negative publicity they're getting for it. Neither does nVidia. They've been providing working linux drivers for ages, and have steadily improved their drivers to the point where it's mostly a no-nonsens procedure to install them. Both could have done like many other companies and simply not bothered at all. Now think how bad that would be.... -- Kind regards Hans du Plooy Newington Consulting Services hansdp at newingtoncs dot co dot za -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
