There's also the issue of trying to force manufacturers to disclose their hardware specs and force open source down their throats. If they don't want to, then you've got problems. And the source of those problems is you, not the manufacturer.
Yes, Mesa is lagging on some OpenGL stuff. OpenGL 4 is some ways off. But 3.3 is just around the corner. For me, a driver with VAAPI, OpenGL 3.3, excellent powersaving, blazingly fast 2d and perfect integration is a top-notch driver.and doesn't change the fact that Nvidia produces drivers that support all of the latest GL specs, while Intel doesn't (and isn't even close to - none of the OSS drivers are).
Nvidia driver is fast, but it will fuck up your system if you upgrade the kernel, doesn't support most mobile hardware currently being sold, and is not available out-of-the-box on pretty much anything, requiring jumping through hoops to get it working. Pick what you prefer.
That thread clearly says that the benchmarks are running 6 months-old drivers, and that huge improvements have landed in the meantime, which had not been benchmarked there.That thread clearly cites that they have improved and in *some cases* are catching up with Windows.
It is you who are shoving closed-source down our throats, and into the kernel. Just open up the documentation, then OSS proponents can ALSO have a choice.
For you, forcing closed source blobs on everyone is great, but offering a CHOICE between an open driver and a closed one is "forcing open source down their throats". If you don't want to run a FLOSS system, there are many operating systems for you to choose from. Why are you trying to dictate Linux developers how to license their shit? You have BSD, you can shove any old shit in there, go use that.
and yes, i have 'picked what i prefer' ~ which is Nvidia because it is better than AMD or Intel for GFX in Linux.
Last edited by ninez; 08-17-2012 at 11:23 AM.