On Sat, Jun 14, 2008 at 1:22 AM, Arc Riley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I cannot tell you how many issues have come up because nVidia uses different > OpenGL headers, to > the point that it sometimes even breaks between legacy and main. It's a > support nightmare. [...] > their custom OpenGL implementation causes build issues with 3D applications
This I have no knowledge of, and cannot speak to. It may well be that if one is creating 3D applications, NVidia causes more pain than other vendors. That's often the case with closed source, so I wouldn't be surprised. When it comes to video cards, I speak only as a "user". > Instead, like good monopolists, they've leveraged their market share to force > us all to > support their vendor-specific implementation. "monopoly. n. 1. exclusive control of a commodity or service in a particular market, or a control that makes possible the manipulation of price" (Quoted from Random House Unabridged Dictionary, 2006, via Dictionary.com) NVidia doesn't control ATI, SIS, VIA, or Intel. What NVidia has done is provide an alternative OpenGL implementation which apparently works better for a lot of people. If people choose to use NVidia's provided OpenGL implementation, presumably they have reason to. I'm a supporter of Free Software for all the well-documented benefits it has, but if a proprietary alternative works significantly better, I take that into consideration. I weigh the significant costs of proprietary software in my decision, and I make the choice. If NVidia had a monopoly, I wouldn't have even that choice. > Um, no. 2 drivers. Some of my test systems here have to use the main, > others legacy. You could at least read what I write. As I wrote, they have one driver, but offer multiple builds. There are *more* than just two build series. Their recommended builds for the Quadro cards (the professional graphics line) are different vs the mainstream gaming cards, and that's in turn different vs the legacy series builds. And the Qudro Plex external graphics boxes get yet another build series. The advantage of the "unified" driver is that the behavior is consistent regardless of which build you use. The same files, API, config directives, documentation distribution point, etc. You still have to obtain the right build for the hardware you have. You usually can't just use one set of binaries for everything. > There are 2 free radeon drivers as well, the standard and the new radeonhd > being developed primarily by AMD and Novell employees. And the proprietary ATI Radeon drivers, which AMD has dropped support for. Sorry if somebody wanted to use those. And the Free drivers that existed from before ATI nuked that project and switched to the aforementioned proprietary drivers. And the independently-developed Free drivers from before ATI offered their Free driver. And those are just the ones I have personal experience with. As long as you limit "video cards" and "support" to the past year or two, ATI looks great. If you include everything back to circa 2000, the picture isn't so rosy. I remember their betrayals, since I was subjected to them. > There is no separate driver for laptops, less common chipsets (which Mobility > x1700 certainly falls into) have lower priority for devs, and that's > reasonable. Reasonable as long as you don't care about video actually working for those products. If one happens to own one of those products, it feels less reasonable. > Exactly, and nVidia has never released their specs. I never claimed otherwise. Indeed, the first few messages I posted in this thread focused on the pitfalls of such closed software. For anyone who is unclear on the problems inherit with proprietary drivers and closed hardware: http://article.gmane.org/gmane.org.user-groups.linux.gnhlug/14394 http://article.gmane.org/gmane.org.user-groups.linux.gnhlug/14431 > So how is it did you obtain the viewpoint that nVidia is being cooperative > with the community while ATI is jerking us around? Because my ATI card frequently didn't work in new distributions, because ATI kept yanking the rug out from under people. In contrast, I have yet to encounter an NVidia card that didn't work when they said it would. That's how. NVidia is quite consistent -- they've never claimed they are going to open their specs, or embrace the spirit of Free Software. Indeed, they've been quite hostile to the idea. It's their hardware, their code, and their property, and they're never going to let the community see inside. When you buy their hardware, you're not buying the right to open the cover. That's always been their party line, and they have never wavered. No false hope. No reneged promises. I know where I stand. All NVidia has ever said is that they will provide closed, proprietary, binary-only drivers for Linux i386, and they have consistently done so. I'm at their mercy for drivers, but so far they've always delivered on what they said they would provide. ATI has not always done so, and has gone back on their promises multiple times. Please understand that I'm not a code hacker. I'm a sysadmin by trade, and at home I'm often "just a user" in my attitude. My idea of a good time is not monkeying around with source code trying to get X11 to build, or to try and find what third-party project has picked up the pieces of ATI's most recently abandoned support effort. >> For all we know, ATI will fall off the Linux bandwagon >> again next month -- it's happened multiple times before, so this is >> not baseless speculation -- and we'll be back to NVidia being the only >> game in town. > > Now that's just FUD. As I said, they've done it to me multiple times. It's their established record. So yah, I have Fear, Uncertainty, and Doubt when it comes to ATI, because they've given me lots of reason to. Kind of like touching a stove -- I have FUD that I'll get burned. > First of all, ATI is no longer ATI. They were purchased by AMD, and AMD is > the one who released the specs. And I'm cautiously hopeful that things will continue to improve under the new regime. But it's going to take a little more time before I consider ATI a friend. > Second, if AMD decided tomorrow to completely discontinue any and all > Linux/Xorg support we still have the specs. Which apparently doesn't help, as ATI has made offerings in the past, and when they reneged it killed progress on driver development. I think it comes down to, independent efforts need support from the manufacturer to thrive. If the manufacturer doesn't want their hardware to be supported, it won't get support. > OTOH, nVidia has the exclusive power to kill Linux support for their > chipsets. Absolutely, and that makes me very uneasy. As I've said multiple times, they all suck. > Despite your expressed brand loyalty ... I don't have any particular loyalty to NVidia; what I have are my experiences over the past several years, which I'm reporting on. Both ATI and NVidia have caused me pain. It's not that I'm a fan of NVidia -- I just think ATI sucks too, for different reasons and in different ways. You seem to be willing to forgive all of ATI's past transgressions because they're offering support this year. I'm not so quick to forgive. If someone betrays my trust, I remember that for a long time. -- Ben _______________________________________________ gnhlug-discuss mailing list gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss/
