Page 8 of 10 FirstFirst ... 678910 LastLast
Results 71 to 80 of 100

Thread: Nouveau Driver Remains Much Slower Than NVIDIA's Official Driver

  1. #71
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Vilnius, Lithuania
    Posts
    2,551

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BO$$ View Post
    If there was no open source drivers maybe AMD wouldn't have let go of the proprietary driver for my card.
    Nope. Do remember that they dropped driver support for Windows, too. Windows 8 only supports the cards through their "vesa" equivalent driver...

  2. #72
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Posts
    138

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BO$$ View Post
    Sure I can. Even better I can switch to windows and not have these problems in the first place fuck you very much! All this squabbling over open source vs proprietary gets on the nerves of both users and companies. You care more about being right than getting things done. Fuck you community!
    While you only care about things being done _for_you_ . As such, you are pretty much dead weight in any community.

  3. #73
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    551

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by GreatEmerald View Post
    Nope. Do remember that they dropped driver support for Windows, too. Windows 8 only supports the cards through their "vesa" equivalent driver...
    Nonsense, Windows 8 has the official driver from AMD bundled in for all Radeon cards, including the legacy ones. This has been the case since Windows 7.





    Only difference is that Microsoft does not bundle the Catalyst software with the driver.

  4. #74
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Posts
    138

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BO$$ View Post
    No there isn't! And you know that! Stop with the contributing bullshit as it is only a way to avoid the issue. And the issue is that they make it impossible for the proprietary drivers to work properly. They are doing it on purpose to fuck them over so maybe they'll release them as open source or give in to their demands. The problem is that they also fuck me over their fucking ideological differences that I don't care about. And no matter how much code I write for open source will change that unless I simply create my own operating system and everything. And that is not feasible.

    They can make it so even with newer X versions, the proprietary driver would work. They just don't want to.
    Sure. Evil XORG is wielding its massive hammer over heads of poor and already constrained HW manufacturers. And innocent civilian casualties are just collateral damage of such indiscriminate carpet bombing. Whatever your substance of choice, it is probably time for "cold turkey"...

  5. #75
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    551

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Brane215 View Post
    While you only care about things being done _for_you_ . As such, you are pretty much dead weight in any community.
    Any operating system that requires its users to be programmers and testers just to get their hardware workable has missed the point of what an operating system is supposed to be.

  6. #76
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    1,946

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Sonadow View Post
    Nonsense, Windows 8 has the official driver from AMD bundled in for all Radeon cards, including the legacy ones. This has been the case since Windows 7.



    Only difference is that Microsoft does not bundle the Catalyst software with the driver.

    Quote Originally Posted by BO$$ View Post
    Stop complaining. At least you have a choice. AMD dropped support for 2000/3000/4000 series and I have a 3400. So I have to use the open source radeon driver. Which has baaaad performance. It sucks so much that I cannot even have a fluid desktop let alone anything 3d game. Anything open source graphics driver sucks horribly on linux. And the more you hurl insults at either AMD or Nvidia the less proprietary support you'll get. And that hurts linux. BRING ME PROPRIETARY BLOBS!!! NOW! DON'T LISTEN TO THESE IDIOTS NVIDIA OR AMD!!!

    Quote Originally Posted by BO$$ View Post
    glxinfo | grep OpenGL:

    OpenGL vendor string: X.Org
    OpenGL renderer string: Gallium 0.4 on AMD RV620
    OpenGL version string: 2.1 Mesa 9.0
    OpenGL shading language version string: 1.30
    OpenGL extensions:

    Had none of those problems using the proprietary driver to answer your question.

    I have a laptop. Can't change anything in it except memory. If there was no open source drivers maybe AMD wouldn't have let go of the proprietary driver for my card. What do you mean that open source perform better? They are much worse than the proprietary blob. I could play nexuiz very well on 12.04 but on 12.10 I get around 20 fps.
    Bo$$ or/and Sonadow, you have two identical laptops - donate one to radeon developer or pay them. You have EOL hardware from official manufacturer standpoint. Microsoft is not doing drivers, its just packaging them, and receiving top priority due to bribes, NDAs and 99% x86 hardware preinstalls since MS-DOS.

    Also, windows is closed source. Its full of NDAs. Opensource and closed source do not exist together easily (unless its call-girl BSD, with result = proprietary).
    In order to achieve same level of integration, manufacturers should spend at least same amount of resources, which they don't do.
    It would be a lot easier for proprietary to integrate, if Linux were proprietary, but that would mean every Linux developer will have to sign NDA, which is likewise impossible, as Linux chances to survive along and in case being itself proprietary OS.
    So, no NDA possible, manufacturers do not target Linux for the same market(I am not speaking about community), they do not dump same amount of cash on development and ignore your opinion.

    Your behavior is like swearing on David for being no match to Goliaph, while silently enoying buttseks with the later.

    The open driver stack is showing 40-70% performance of the closed driver with OpenGL 3, and that only within several years of development.
    So, if you don't want to support the development (instead of crying like small babies), do whats acceptable for you. Along with consequences.

    And regarding this:
    Quote Originally Posted by Sonadow View Post
    And I also don't need to mention the hypocrisy displayed over the whole 'open-source makes everything cross-platform compatible' nonsense. Open source everything so that nobody has unfair advantages? So why are there people who are in favour of Linux-specific extensions made to key pieces of a Linux distribution stack (systemd is a very good example) that makes it completely incompatible with the BSDs? Or even the religious war that BSD is some devil which should be condemned just because Linux holds the lion's share of the alternative operating system market? By that logic the whole world, and not just AMD and Nvidia, can simply condemn Linux to death because Windows holds a 70% market share of mainstream desktop operating systems. People tout open systems and cross platform compatibility while trying to defend all actions that undermine BSD compatibility when major changes are made to the Linux software stack with claims that BSD is not relevant anymore because Linux's market share dwarves it (while conveniently forgetting that Windows crushes Linux and OS X combined in the desktop OS front). Hypocrisy at its finest, no?
    You are in no damn position to discuss the viewpoint and choices of the developers in question.
    If you are a developer - you are free to make your own.

    Lennard clearly stated that he has no intention to pull the train of legacy/compatible systems along.
    This is his way to concentrate development time to make Linux much more competitive to ... windows (yes) and apple. Was that your problem? Then who is hypocrite?

    When the technology is ripe enough, any system can port the stabilized changes back, because its opensource and nobody looses. Unlike the proprietary trash you seem to enjoy, which only works well on one OS.

    Quote Originally Posted by Sonadow View Post
    Any operating system that requires its users to be programmers and testers just to get their hardware workable has missed the point of what an operating system is supposed to be.
    Then enjoy your Nintendo Wii along with Mario.
    Last edited by crazycheese; 01-06-2013 at 09:25 PM.

  7. #77
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Posts
    138

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Sonadow View Post
    Any operating system that requires its users to be programmers and testers just to get their hardware workable has missed the point of what an operating system is supposed to be.
    While I agree with your point in general on topic of whole open source movement, wrt to drivers sometimes "guerilla way" is only right way.

  8. #78
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Third Rock from the Sun
    Posts
    6,584

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Sonadow View Post
    Any operating system that requires its users to be programmers and testers just to get their hardware workable has missed the point of what an operating system is supposed to be.
    That all really depends on the target audience for the operating system. Linux and most open source efforts are about making the developers life easier and letting other contribute to the code not about how to make the end users life easier. It's a developers OS for developers. If they ever want to change that and have mass acceptance they then have to start putting what non-developer end users want and concentrate their efforts there. Right now I don't see a lot of effort trying to change that. It remains as it always has been, developers are #1, end users at the very bottom.

  9. #79
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Posts
    138

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BO$$ View Post
    I am not necessarely saying that there is a conspiracy but the fact is that they break compatibility every month. And my question is why the hell do they make lives harder for driver manufacturers?
    Some people's life would be much easier if I could just stop living. That doesn't mean that my fundamental freedom is infringing on theirs.

    Just as manufacturers respond to market forces Xorg, Wayland etc are responging to free forces of open source. Free programs tend to appaer on places where they are needed and where conditions are favorable. Limiting one of their most fundamental principle ( freedom of change) would mean killing the project.

    Also, closed drivers show now and again that even if they can be useful solution for some purposes, they fail miserably across the board as one-size-fits-all solution.

    Since manufacturers can not predict all possible usefull roles for their product ( and even if they could , they don't care to) so they opt for least common denominator.

    Anyone outside that is basically screwed.

    This is why wee need that freedom. Even if we don't want to use particualr open source product, data and source on which is based enable us to roll our own...

  10. #80
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Third Rock from the Sun
    Posts
    6,584

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Brane215 View Post
    Limiting one of their most fundamental principle ( freedom of change) would mean killing the project.
    No it doesn't. Maintaining and ensuring ABI compatibility does not mean one has to sacrifice a project. It just means greater care and measures have to be taken to ensure backwards compatibility.

Posting Permissions

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