Normally I wouldn't post a reference to this type of article here, but since the subject is about video drivers and the severe frustration a number of people have had, I think it's appropriate. Fred http://www.driverheaven.net/~pete/article5.htm -- Paid purchaser of ALL SuSE Linux releases since 6.x
Fred A. Miller wrote:
Normally I wouldn't post a reference to this type of article here, but since the subject is about video drivers and the severe frustration a number of people have had, I think it's appropriate.
Fred
I have to say - someone who switches operating system ("I haven?t used Linux since November") purely because his graphics card isn't supported needs a rethink of priorities. /Per Jessen, Zürich
Am Samstag, 25. Februar 2006 11:13 schrieb Per Jessen:
Fred A. Miller wrote:
Normally I wouldn't post a reference to this type of article here, but since the subject is about video drivers and the severe frustration a number of people have had, I think it's appropriate.
Fred
I have to say - someone who switches operating system ("I haven?t used Linux since November") purely because his graphics card isn't supported needs a rethink of priorities.
/Per Jessen, Zürich
Agreed, and reading some of the comments on their forum is amusing. I was unlucky and "forgot" my own advice and bought an ATi based laptop last year, bad move and a move I won't repeat again! (Well, I needed a laptop quickly with good 3D performance for a gaming marathon when I was visiting a friend and the only laptops available locally in the time frame were either Intel integrated graphics or ATi.) The X700 based laptop suffers from similar problems, although at least the ATi drivers support it in 2D mode now. The OSS radeon drivers can't even drive the chipset at 800x600, so I don't even get a default desktop to install the official ATi drivers or download them. Luckily it isn't my only machine... Somebody on the forum was also defensive about Linux users not having any affect on the buying decisions of others. Personally I don't think this is true, for the hardcore gamer, they might go to web sites looking for reviews of the ultimate gaming cards, but a majority of people don't have a clue and ask their "techy" friends what to buy... After all the problems I had over the years with buggy ATi drivers under Windows and nearly non-existent support under Linux, I steer everybody away from ATi chipsets when I can, because I know that I will be the one called in when they screw up, whether it is Windows or Linux. A friend was buying a new laptop and had a shortlist of five possible solutions, after 10 seconds with the spec sheets, I had discounted 3 because they had ATi chipsets, which left one nVidia and one Intel chipset, as she only uses it for office work, the 3D needs weren't that important, so going for the nVidia over the Intel wasn't a priority, but the general spec of the nVidia machine was better than the Intel chipset. Probably the ATi had some advantages in the rest of their specs over the other two (and in graphic performance definitely over the Intel one), but the fact that they were ATi based had automatically blacklisted them... Dave -- "I got to go figure," the tenant said. "We all got to figure. There's some way to stop this. It's not like lightning or earthquakes. We've got a bad thing made by men, and by God that's something we can change." - The Grapes of Wrath, by John Steinbeck
On Saturday 25 February 2006 5:13 am, Per Jessen wrote:
I have to say - someone who switches operating system ("I haven?t used Linux since November") purely because his graphics card isn't supported needs a rethink of priorities.
Yes, why not switch his videocard instead of his OS. Switch to Nvidia which the article repeatedly states has much better Linux support, then email ATI telling them why you switched and that you will not be buying any more ATI cards until the Linux support is up to par. Bryan **************************************** Powered by Mepis Linux 3.3.1 KDE 3.3.2 KMail 1.7.2 This is a Microsoft-free computer Bryan S. Tyson bryantyson@earthlink.net ****************************************
On Saturday 25 February 2006 11:09 pm, Bryan S. Tyson wrote:
On Saturday 25 February 2006 5:13 am, Per Jessen wrote:
I have to say - someone who switches operating system ("I haven?t used Linux since November") purely because his graphics card isn't supported needs a rethink of priorities.
Yes, why not switch his videocard instead of his OS. Switch to Nvidia which the article repeatedly states has much better Linux support, then email ATI telling them why you switched and that you will not be buying any more ATI cards until the Linux support is up to par.
Yeah, I read the rant, also. I can't imagine downgrading to Windows just because of the video card. It is almost as pathetic and stupid as my co-workers who insist on having Wintendo around just to "play games." I equate that to removing all airbags and half the brakes on the car in order to drive faster. -- kai - www.perfectreign.com www.livebeans.com - the new NetBeans community
On Sunday 26 February 2006 18:06, kai wrote:
Yeah, I read the rant, also.
As did I..
I can't imagine downgrading to Windows just because of the video card. It is almost as pathetic and stupid as my co-workers who insist on having Wintendo around just to "play games."
Unfortunately, I couldn't do that. Imagine my surprise when my dualboot system locked up with a new ATI card and the XP drivers. Never had that problem before. Tried a clean install and all the little helper drivers just in case. The good news is that after doing the install of the new linux driver, the card performs wonderfully -- under linux! And I got another drive out of the deal for storage.. ;-)
I equate that to removing all airbags and half the brakes on the car in order to drive faster.
I got to put a supercharger in mine.. ;-) Mike -- Powered by SuSE 10.0 Kernel 2.6.13 KDE 3.4 Kmail 1.8 For Mondo/Mindi backup support go to http://www.mikenjane.net/~mike 6:48pm up 6 days 23:45, 3 users, load average: 1.16, 1.25, 1.26
kai wrote:
On Saturday 25 February 2006 11:09 pm, Bryan S. Tyson wrote:
On Saturday 25 February 2006 5:13 am, Per Jessen wrote:
I have to say - someone who switches operating system ("I haven?t used Linux since November") purely because his graphics card isn't supported needs a rethink of priorities.
There is a rumor floating around that the OS is meant for programs to run and not the other way around. If his priority is to have the display running at the specified resolution, so he can use it efficiently without burning his eyeballs out, I would consider that a valid reason to change.
Yes, why not switch his videocard instead of his OS. Switch to Nvidia which the article repeatedly states has much better Linux support, then email ATI telling them why you switched and that you will not be buying any more ATI cards until the Linux support is up to par.
Perfect hindsight, as it happens often. I agree, he should have made certain BEFORE buying his hardware that it will run with the desired distribution. It is after all well known that driver issues are a source of trouble when you buy the latest hardware.
I can't imagine downgrading to Windows just because of the video card. It is almost as pathetic and stupid as my co-workers who insist on having Wintendo around just to "play games."
Maybe it would help if you encounter some people who see the computer as a tool to do their work. They don't really care what OS they are running as long as they can use the programs the have to work with, store their files print them with ease. I regularly encounter users that I have to explain to how to save a file and how to find it again after they saved it.
I equate that to removing all airbags and half the brakes on the car in order to drive faster.
No, just equate it to using the known tools and having no need and no desire to learn something else. Sigh... yes, there are people like that all around us, they even present the majority of the users. Sandy -- List replies only please! Please address PMs to: news-reply2 (@) japantest (.) homelinux (.) com
Sandy Drobic wrote:
On Saturday 25 February 2006 5:13 am, Per Jessen wrote:
I have to say - someone who switches operating system ("I haven?t used Linux since November") purely because his graphics card isn't supported needs a rethink of priorities.
There is a rumor floating around that the OS is meant for programs to run and not the other way around. If his priority is to have the display running at the specified resolution, so he can use it efficiently without burning his eyeballs out, I would consider that a valid reason to change.
Yes, but I would still change the graphics card, not the OS. Much less hassle, no learning curve, no installation new/different versions of software. Especially for such a common piece of hardware. The author of the article does not live in the real world, IMHO.
I can't imagine downgrading to Windows just because of the video card. It is almost as pathetic and stupid as my co-workers who insist on having Wintendo around just to "play games."
Maybe it would help if you encounter some people who see the computer as a tool to do their work. They don't really care what OS they are running as long as they can use the programs the have to work with, store their files print them with ease.
People may not care which OS, but they do generally care a lot about which desktop. If we're talking about business users, I doubt you can talk them into changing their desktop just because of a graphics card ... not to mention the time & cost involved. /Per Jessen, Zürich -- http://www.spamchek.com/ - managed anti-spam and anti-virus solution. Let us analyse your spam- and virus-threat - up to 2 months for free.
Per Jessen wrote:
Sandy Drobic wrote:
On Saturday 25 February 2006 5:13 am, Per Jessen wrote:
I have to say - someone who switches operating system ("I haven?t used Linux since November") purely because his graphics card isn't supported needs a rethink of priorities.
There is a rumor floating around that the OS is meant for programs to run and not the other way around. If his priority is to have the display running at the specified resolution, so he can use it efficiently without burning his eyeballs out, I would consider that a valid reason to change.
Yes, but I would still change the graphics card, not the OS. Much less hassle, no learning curve, no installation new/different versions of software. Especially for such a common piece of hardware. The author of the article does not live in the real world, IMHO.
It depends on the situation. If it's just a normal computer with standard hardware then I agree. A new graphic card doesn't cost that much. Changing the OS and all the programs installed requires a lot of work and time. Though, if it's a specialized card with needed features, the choice becomes much more difficult.
I can't imagine downgrading to Windows just because of the video card. It is almost as pathetic and stupid as my co-workers who insist on having Wintendo around just to "play games."
Maybe it would help if you encounter some people who see the computer as a tool to do their work. They don't really care what OS they are running as long as they can use the programs the have to work with, store their files print them with ease.
People may not care which OS, but they do generally care a lot about which desktop. If we're talking about business users, I doubt you can talk them into changing their desktop just because of a graphics card ... not to mention the time & cost involved.
Some of my collegues didn't even notice when I changed their computer during lunch break and they suddenly worked with windows xp instead of windows 98. They care a lot more if the printer isn't working stable or word doesn't have the button for saving files at the usual place. Though I agree, working with windows is a lot different from working with linux. Sandy -- List replies only please! Please address PMs to: news-reply2 (@) japantest (.) homelinux (.) com
On Sunday 26 February 2006 09:56 am, Sandy Drobic wrote:
kai wrote:
On Saturday 25 February 2006 11:09 pm, Bryan S. Tyson wrote:
On Saturday 25 February 2006 5:13 am, Per Jessen wrote:
I have to say - someone who switches operating system ("I haven?t used Linux since November") purely because his graphics card isn't supported needs a rethink of priorities.
There is a rumor floating around that the OS is meant for programs to run and not the other way around. If his priority is to have the display running at the specified resolution, so he can use it efficiently without burning his eyeballs out, I would consider that a valid reason to change.
Completely disagree. I can see a reason to downgrade to Windows if the user MUST use something like Archibus or AutoCAD or another OS-specific application. However, the person simply griped about not being able to get the ATI driver to run in his specified mode. I recently bought a second Dell laptop with the intention of running SUSE for a friend. When I found out (after the fact) that it came with a non-standard video and WiFI (broadcom) card and a Windows-only printer, I promptly shipped it back. I then ordered another one, being more careful to pay attention to my choice of hardware. My friend is now in the posession of a slightly more-expensive laptop which runs SUSE just fine.
Yes, why not switch his videocard instead of his OS. Switch to Nvidia which the article repeatedly states has much better Linux support, then email ATI telling them why you switched and that you will not be buying any more ATI cards until the Linux support is up to par.
Perfect hindsight, as it happens often. I agree, he should have made certain BEFORE buying his hardware that it will run with the desired distribution. It is after all well known that driver issues are a source of trouble when you buy the latest hardware.
I can't imagine downgrading to Windows just because of the video card. It is almost as pathetic and stupid as my co-workers who insist on having Wintendo around just to "play games."
Maybe it would help if you encounter some people who see the computer as a tool to do their work. They don't really care what OS they are running as long as they can use the programs the have to work with, store their files print them with ease.
I am one of those people. I use computers all day long in my business and in my side companies. Yes, I could choose to drive a Yugo and put up with all the crap involved or I can drive a Chevy 2500HD which gets the job done. Guess which I choose on a daily basis? There are a few instances where I need to downgrade to Microsoft technology. For those rare instances I have Crossover Office on my laptop and desktops. In this manner, I get to run MS Project, Visio and the occasional Excel spreadsheet.
I regularly encounter users that I have to explain to how to save a file and how to find it again after they saved it.
I equate that to removing all airbags and half the brakes on the car in order to drive faster.
No, just equate it to using the known tools and having no need and no desire to learn something else. Sigh... yes, there are people like that all around us, they even present the majority of the users.
Well, that's not entirely the case. Take my mother, for example. I upgraded her last March from Win98 to SuSE 9.2 and she's been very happy with the switch. Her only major gripe is with the GIMP and the f**&ed up user interface. In fact, I finally gave up and installed her copy of Photoshop 6 on the system last week. (She really loves KMail, OpenOffice, Firefox and is learning Inkscape.) I'm right now contemplating how to upgrade her to 10.0 or to 10.1 without messing up her home directory. :P Okay, now I'm bordering on ranting. Maybe I should fire up Pan and get to Comp.OS.Linux.Advocacy. -- kai - www.perfectreign.com www.livebeans.com - the new NetBeans community
On Monday 27 February 2006 12:22 am, Darryl Gregorash wrote:
On 26/02/06 16:43, kai wrote:
<snip> Guess which I choose on a daily basis?
<snip>
Ask again when oil hits $70/bbl ;)
If I'm getting my business done, then it doesn't really matter. I'll choose the tool that works and adjust for the cost. Besides you don't want people to cram themselves like sardines into those sub-compact cars like the Camary, Accord or Malibu do you? My poor knees always are crammed up under the steering wheel. :P -- kai - www.perfectreign.com www.livebeans.com - the new NetBeans community
participants (8)
-
Bryan S. Tyson -
Darryl Gregorash -
David Wright -
Fred A. Miller -
kai -
Mike -
Per Jessen -
Sandy Drobic