Page 1 of 4 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 33

Thread: Standard Radeon vs. fglrx

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    10

    Unhappy Standard Radeon vs. fglrx

    Getting fglrx to work on newer Radeon graphics cards (newer than the 9800 level) is increasing in the hassle factor. On the other hand, ATi makes it painfully clear that older cards aren't supported for fglrx at all in the newer distros (9.04+)--the convenient ol' "phase out of support." The 9.10 (Karmic), community-supported "valid" version only allows one resolution, 640X480, for my 4550....

    I hate to say this: The traditional Linux techies really can't resort to dismissing such issues anymore. Their convenient "Pontius Pilate" response--washing their hands of proprietary driver issues--is annoying and insulting. The standard driver is so clumsy, stupid, and laughable that it's ignored by most of us who use Radeons--it's simply a flawed stepping stone to fglrx. Really, fglrx is essential for most "modern" Radeon cards. Dismissing it as inferior--and not deserving of any attention--insults our collective intelligence, right?!

    I think developers should make certain that key issues in the usable video driver area are fixed and ready for the next version before releasing new distro versions--why so many new releases anyway (Yippee!)? What good are upgrades in other areas if we can't see them or even the screen? Maybe developers should "key" distro versions to Radeon, nVidia, and other (modern) video chipset cards: Developers act like video and graphics aren't very important. Unfortunately, they're key: Such issues generally are far more important than the other stuff they work on.

    If Linus Torvalds on down hate proprietary software so much, why do they let Cyberlink sell software in order to get past codec and DRM issues? (At least that's true on Ubuntu.) We may end up paying for decent video drivers and support--maybe it's worth it. (I see a slippery slope.) It's clear that the Linux techies really can't deal with this effectively....

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    2,929

    Default

    I use the open source driver on a HD 4550 and I have absolutely no idea what you're talking about.

    You're doing something terribly wrong.

  3. #3

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by gsnoorky View Post
    I hate to say this: The traditional Linux techies really can't resort to dismissing such issues anymore. Their convenient "Pontius Pilate" response--washing their hands of proprietary driver issues--is annoying and insulting. The standard driver is so clumsy, stupid, and laughable that it's ignored by most of us who use Radeons--it's simply a flawed stepping stone to fglrx. Really, fglrx is essential for most "modern" Radeon cards. Dismissing it as inferior--and not deserving of any attention--insults our collective intelligence, right?!
    Do you suggest Linux devs should start fixing and working on fglrx?

    EDIT:

    Ok, techies aren't devs.
    Last edited by kraftman; 01-24-2010 at 10:51 AM.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Toronto-ish
    Posts
    7,458

    Default

    gsnooky, I believe the HD4550 was launched around the same time that the drivers in Ubuntu 9.10 were locked down.

    You may need newer driver versions to support the 4550, whether you're using the open source or the proprietary drivers. If you can pastebin the xorg.log from what you referred to as the "community supported <valid> version" (radeon ? radeonhd ? vesa ?) we can probably figure out what's going on.
    Last edited by bridgman; 01-24-2010 at 12:39 PM.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    988

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by gsnoorky View Post
    <cut>
    Wow, I've never seen such an ill-informed post about Linux outside of Ubuntu Forums.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    141

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by gsnoorky View Post
    Their convenient "Pontius Pilate" response--washing their hands of proprietary driver issues--is annoying and insulting.
    Quote Originally Posted by gsnoorky View Post
    I think developers should make certain that key issues in the usable video driver area are fixed and ready for the next version before releasing new distro versions
    These statements are incompatable. How do you suggest developers address "key issues" in drivers for which they have no control, source, or way of testing?

    Whats more, core linux projects should not have to accomodate the whims of fractious hardware vendors with ugly hacks in order to integrate binary blobs.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    6,627

    Default

    @pingufunkybeat

    4550 + dvi needs a fix like this:

    http://cgit.freedesktop.org/xorg/dri...6030604820f4d9

    Kanotix Excalibur uses a driver with that of course.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    28

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by gsnoorky View Post
    I hate to say this: The traditional Linux techies really can't resort to dismissing such issues anymore. Their convenient "Pontius Pilate" response--washing their hands of proprietary driver issues--is annoying and insulting. The standard driver is so clumsy, stupid, and laughable that it's ignored by most of us who use Radeons--it's simply a flawed stepping stone to fglrx. Really, fglrx is essential for most "modern" Radeon cards. Dismissing it as inferior--and not deserving of any attention--insults our collective intelligence, right?!
    Washing your hands of propreitary driver issues is completely valid and warranted. Linux is open source and all its drivers should be as well. If companies want to play in the linux world they need to play by the linux rules which is open source drivers.

    If you have a problem with the quality and/or support of the fglrx driver, take it up with AMD, since it is 100% their responsibility and 0% anyone else's.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Greece
    Posts
    3,791

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by admax88 View Post
    Washing your hands of propreitary driver issues is completely valid and warranted. Linux is open source and all its drivers should be as well. If companies want to play in the linux world they need to play by the linux rules which is open source drivers.

    If you have a problem with the quality and/or support of the fglrx driver, take it up with AMD, since it is 100% their responsibility and 0% anyone else's.
    And people call *me* a troll...

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Have a good day.
    Posts
    678

    Default

    Well, gsnoorky, you see, you are doing "something terribly wrong". If not, how do you explain that you are the only linux user in this planet having problems with video drivers? Oh, wait...

    Let me be the first in giving you this instructive link, which we call Arjan's Doomsday scenario. Somebody was going to, anyway, and at least I saved you some self-righteous attitude :P

    The good thing is that it's actually quite probable that after you spend some time fiddling, giving away logs and digging in forums, you get it to work at the right resolution and spin a cube (or two). That will be awesome compared to what you had before. Advanced features coming soon to your local git repository.

    Quote Originally Posted by pingufunkybeat
    I use the open source driver on a HD 4550 and I have absolutely no idea what you're talking about.

    You're doing something terribly wrong.
    That, coming from somebody who used to run QuakeLive at 2 FPS until a couple of weeks ago, adds a new dimension to the word hypocrisy.

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •