AMD Catalyst: Ubuntu 12.10 vs. Windows 7

[gamerk2]

if you want to support 'open sourced' and 'linux' then use the open gpu drivers. If its not good enough for you - make a bug report or attempt to make it better yourself

If you want to support 'open sourced' and 'linux' then use the open drivers - using the closed blobs will not improve anything ....

And this mentality is exactly why Linux is ignored by the public at large.

[D0pamine]

Open Source and Linux are bigger than just graphics drivers and OpenGL. I can support parts of the whole without needing to directly contribute to every piece.

Would you prefer me to not contribute at all and use Windows/Mac simply because I need the performance and features to the blobs?

you can run free software on windows...

EDIT: I can only repeat again - what software are you using that requires opengl 4.x ? and what software are you using that the r600g driver cannot handle?

oil rush?

[D0pamine]

And this mentality is exactly why Linux is ignored by the public at large.

most of the public are like you - morons and i dont care for so called community members who completely miss the point of free software - so fuck 'em - let them play with windows

[Rigaldo]

Exactly, only the "privileged" few matter at all.

[F i L]

you can run free software on windows...

EDIT: I can only repeat again - what software are you using that requires opengl 4.x ? and what software are you using that the r600g driver cannot handle?

oil rush?

First you say the only way to support Open Source is to go Open-Source only, then you advocate using FOSS on Windows?

Also, you never asked which software I needed the blobs for, so your "I can only repeat again" statement is misdirected. I gave you two examples in my first response: Blender and OpenGL. Granted it wasn't clear that by 'OpenGL' I meant OpenGL development, specifically texture compression and GL3.3+ support. I'm an artist and co-developer of cross-platform indi-games/game-engine (in my spare time, engine is https://github.com/reignstudios/ReignSDK). Although not released on Linux yet, and not the most impressive of titles, our latest game (video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7pvCcgQiXNk) requires texture compression. Our new project requires heavy 3D modeling and modern differed rendering techniques. It's simply impractical to work around the limitations and bugs of Linux OSS drivers specifically when that's such a small marketing target to begin with.

I work almost exclusively on Linux, but I wouldn't be able to if it weren't for the closed-source blobs. Honestly though, all that's besides the point. Even if all anyone did was run games on Linux, having a closed-driver as an option would still be a good thing because at least Steam games are possible at that point (which they aren't with the OSS drivers, yet), and that would lead to a higher volume of Linux desktops out there. More consumers means more support means more development, which is exactly what your arguing having closed-source drivers prevents.

Look, I'm a eager as the next guy to have the OSS drivers catch-up to the closed-source ones, but the reality is they simply aren't heading that direction any-time soon and they never will if people don't see Linux as a graphically comparable alternative to Windows.

[D0pamine]

First you say the only way to support Open Source is to go Open-Source only, then you advocate using FOSS on Windows?

Also, you never asked which software I needed the blobs for, so your "I can only repeat again" statement is misdirected. I gave you two examples in my first response: Blender and OpenGL. Granted it wasn't clear that by 'OpenGL' I meant OpenGL development, specifically texture compression and GL3.3+ support. I'm an artist and co-developer of cross-platform indi-games/game-engine (in my spare time, engine is https://github.com/reignstudios/ReignSDK). Although not released on Linux yet, and not the most impressive of titles, our latest game (video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7pvCcgQiXNk) requires texture compression. Our new project requires heavy 3D modeling and modern differed rendering techniques. It's simply impractical to work around the limitations and bugs of Linux OSS drivers specifically when that's such a small marketing target to begin with.

I work almost exclusively on Linux, but I wouldn't be able to if it weren't for the closed-source blobs. Honestly though, all that's besides the point. Even if all anyone did was run games on Linux, having a closed-driver as an option would still be a good thing because at least Steam games are possible at that point (which they aren't with the OSS drivers, yet), and that would lead to a higher volume of Linux desktops out there. More consumers means more support means more development, which is exactly what your arguing having closed-source drivers prevents.

Look, I'm a eager as the next guy to have the OSS drivers catch-up to the closed-source ones, but the reality is they simply aren't heading that direction any-time soon and they never will if people don't see Linux as a graphically comparable alternative to Windows.

blender runs on windows!

I assume you mean S3TC texture compression? this is available via libtxc_dxtn

and what steam games? there are no steam games available on gnu/linux as yet and if they were i'm pretty sure the r600g driver could handle them no problem

infact because all the free drivers use mesa for opengl this will make life much easier for valve instead of having to work around the different interpretations of opengl that amd/nvidia come up with

and since when does blender require opengl 3.3?

everyone who uses computers on the internet uses gnu/linux - it is one of the most widely used operating systems in the world - it got to this point by being free not by half arsed open/closed development

and i can assure you now that the radeon drivers have alot less bugs than the current catalyst drivers - i know because i can do a side by side comparison

your arguments fail and you contradict yourself alot

[juxtatux]

I've been reading the posts...FOSS vs. BLOBS...and being all for GNU, commits to the kernel by vendors to support proprietary drivers look like HEX address not C. But when your source desktop accepts the BLOB there isn't a really easy way to get it out. Which must mean other programs start to point to it as the system emerges. Illustrating GNU/Cancer or at least portage thinks so. BUT... and here's the devils advocate for it. Open Sources Code for power managment...I mean seriously. If every expoilt for X generation GPU is found out. Remote access granted - root access gained. Crack the volts or clocks on the GPU...kill the fan. BOOM... sooooooo ... this is why I believe the Linux drivers are always in the backfield. Why manufactures are reluctant to assist and call Gallium reverse engineering. Fermi is full of hw errata that almost kept the chipset off the streets. The AMD / ATI acquisition couldn't be without discovering the same in older GPU reference designs. So I went with closed source...and have the GNU/CANCER, lol.

~/Jux

[D0pamine]

I've been reading the posts...FOSS vs. BLOBS...and being all for GNU, commits to the kernel by vendors to support proprietary drivers look like HEX address not C. But when your source desktop accepts the BLOB there isn't a really easy way to get it out. Which must mean other programs start to point to it as the system emerges. Illustrating GNU/Cancer or at least portage thinks so. BUT... and here's the devils advocate for it. Open Sources Code for power managment...I mean seriously. If every expoilt for X generation GPU is found out. Remote access granted - root access gained. Crack the volts or clocks on the GPU...kill the fan. BOOM... sooooooo ... this is why I believe the Linux drivers are always in the backfield. Why manufactures are reluctant to assist and call Gallium reverse engineering. Fermi is full of hw errata that almost kept the chipset off the streets. The AMD / ATI acquisition couldn't be without discovering the same in older GPU reference designs. So I went with closed source...and have the GNU/CANCER, lol.

~/Jux

you make absolutely no sense what so ever

[F i L]

blender runs on windows!

Your point? I know this, I run Blender on Linux, Windows, & Mac. I just prefer to use Linux as my default desktop environment because there are other things I do as well (such as, but not limited to, D programming) which are easier to do on Linux. Plus, I just like supporting Linux by using it and reporting bugs when I find them.

I assume you mean S3TC texture compression? this is available via libtxc_dxtn

You expect me to compile my own drivers? No thanks, I don't have the time. This is a completely unrealistic options for me or any causal user. However, the fact that Intel's latest drivers allow these features to be easily enabled (so I hear), is most likely do to pressures from Valve and Unity Game Engine. This is, and has been, my point this entire time. We need things to "just work" on Linux so the things that are morally superior (like the OSS drivers) can receive more attention due to increased consumer activity.

and what steam games? there are no steam games available on gnu/linux as yet

I said it makes them possible, please read my post more carefully.

and if they were i'm pretty sure the r600g driver could handle them no problem

Do you have any idea how many commercial games require texture compression, or how much work it would require just to make them work without that? Do you honestly believe these developers are just going to spend all that time on for a system which is the smallest sliver of their revenue pie? Even if they want to, it's simple unrealistic to expect them to make the effort. Plus, maximizing the frame rate of games is one of the biggest concerns of developers, because it's, in-turn, one of the biggest concerns of consumers.

I highly doubt games run on the OSS drivers would run at speeds anything a Windows consumer would consider acceptable frame-rates. Why run them slower anyways, when your only a simple download away from much better frame-rates?

infact because all the free drivers use mesa for opengl this will make life much easier for valve instead of having to work around the different interpretations of opengl that amd/nvidia come up with

I don't know enough about Mesa to properly comment on this, but I doubt it. The pro's don't outweigh the cons, and that's exactly why Valve and Unity3D are targeting the blobs only.

and since when does blender require opengl 3.3?

Never said it did. I said I need GL3.3+ for development.

everyone who uses computers on the internet uses gnu/linux - it is one of the most widely used operating systems in the world - it got to this point by being free not by half arsed open/closed development

This is completely different that using Linux/X11 as a desktop PC. Though I do agree that OSS is ultimately superior. I've stated that numerous times. My only point this entire time is that it's not realistic for the open-source drivers to be a requirement (or blobs-killer) today. Hopefully tomorrow isn't far away.

and i can assure you now that the radeon drivers have alot less bugs than the current catalyst drivers - i know because i can do a side by side comparison

I used to run the OSS drivers, dude, and they glitch out my system (the whole screen lags for ~quarter second around every 15-30 seconds). And that happened on every distro I installed: Ubuntu, Mint, Fedora, Suse, & Arch. So I don't trust you on this. But even if they where most stable (and I'm sure they are on a lot of hardware), I would still need the performance and OpenGL feature versions of the blobs.

your arguments fail and you contradict yourself alot

Baseless assertions aren't convincing. I noticed you didn't address the contradiction I pointed out in your statements, BTW (advocating pure-OSS then OSS-on-Windows).

[pandev92]

Fil you are a big troll, http://people.freedesktop.org/~cbrill/libtxc_dxtn/, distros can't install it because legal patents restrictions.

You don't need to create your own driver, only use the brain , and search the .deb, rpm , tar.gz(aur), nothing more.