Thanks for your continued effort to post updates, clarifications, and (not least) answer back to the sometimes rough comments in these forums.
Though I'm currently "stuck" with the open source drivers for my X1600 Pro (until next month - finally building a new computer!), I really curious about the video acceleration potential in the official drivers. Can you give out any information on AMD's strategy for its implementation (even if only in "marketing-speak")? It would be nice to know if it's awaiting further testing or maybe legal issues holding it back..?
Last edited by anbog; 09-07-2009 at 06:54 AM.
Seriously, bridgman, why do you still reply to the continuous trolling and moaning? Just ignore it.
That'll be a pretty stupid thing to do. You can't just ignore complains. This isn't the place to rant about how the latest Star Trek movie sucked, most of the complains come from people who bought an AMD card and want to get the most out of it. Ignoring consumer complains is BAD. Even if you're not willing or able to do a damn thing about them, you have to give the impression that complains are heard.
Originally Posted by greg
I think what bridgman is doing is right. I disagree with the company's strategy regarding the proprietary drivers and their relationship with the upstream packages, but bridgman is almost always polite and makes the effort to reach out to the disgruntled consumers.
bridgman is responsible for open source community interaction only. That he's on friendly terms with other people and does answer a lot of proprietary stuff is a huge bonus.
Complaints without any proof (i.e steps to reproduce, etc) are ignored by the majority of companies.
Using it in other releases than the one it was given to isn't really that big of a hassle... I'd rather the distros that don't have it probably don't care enough.
Originally Posted by [Knuckles]
Incorrect, the 8.66 driver is a formal release to Canonical. The Catalyst release that most people use is another formal release.
Originally Posted by Ranguvar
The model that AMD uses for engaging with supported distributions is two phase. Both phases are completed in conjunction with AMD and the distribution vendor.
Prior to the release of the distribution we will provide a driver that supports most of the features of the distribution. Then after the release of the distribution, we again work towards a followup release which knocks off high priority (from the distribution vendor - not necessarily the end users) bugs.
So for Jaunty, it was 8.60 and 8.632, for Karmic it is 8.66 and possibly 8.69(ish). The distribution packagers may pick up intermediate versions at their discretions, but the two distinguished versions are the ones that are effectively co-developed.
Thank you for confirming this. There's been all too much speculation about the origin of the fglrx releases in Ubuntu.
Originally Posted by mtippett
When we decided that we'd start building our windows boxes at work ATI/AMD only, it was because I thought you guy were really trying hard to improve the linux support. The nvidia integrated motherboards are cheaper. Yea we sell linux too.
Originally Posted by bridgman
There's no support for my RS690M. Stupid assholes.