Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Graphics Software AMD Linux

How To Request Better ATI Linux Support 192

An anonymous reader writes "Michael Larabel, the editor of Phoronix, has outlined some strategies for contacting ATI's customers (OEM/ODM/AIBs) to seek ATI Linux fglrx driver improvements. He opines that contacting ATI or AMD directly is the 'wrong approach.' He also states, 'I know for certain that at least one major OEM would like to see improved Linux support but is afraid that the Windows support would then be at risk.' Michael cites examples from the past where Lenovo had sought improved Linux display drivers, which resulted in several new features last year. He provides links to the feedback pages for a number of the vendors to whom ATI actually does listen."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

How To Request Better ATI Linux Support

Comments Filter:
  • by SmallFurryCreature ( 593017 ) on Wednesday March 21, 2007 @04:51AM (#18426237) Journal

    Is there an actuall graphics card out there that IS capable of doing the eyecandy stuff, it don't have to do games, that is fully opensource with absolutely no binary bits.

    I used to think matrox cards were the way to go but even they have a binary HAL bit that you need if you want the more advanced features needed for xgl and the likes.

    Anyway the matrox cards are not supported anyway, as they are listed as missing certain features that are required.

    The only lists I ever find mention ONLY nVidia and Ati cards. Yet I have seen some references that Intel was working on opensource drivers for its cards or at least hired some developers to do so.

    So, is there a graphics card out there that I can use that is simply fully opensource, no hidden tricks, that is capable enough to give me the candy?

    Because that would I think send the strongest message of all, if everyone who runs linux just buys a fully opensource card the others would be sure to take notice.

  • by Jekler ( 626699 ) on Wednesday March 21, 2007 @06:19AM (#18426609)

    Why should I have to prove to them that I want better support? They should prove to me that they are providing better support. Until then, I will only purchase Intel video.

    The Intel 950 GMA is sweet compared to any of ATI's cards with shoddy support.

  • Composite support! (Score:2, Interesting)

    by kazade84 ( 1078337 ) on Wednesday March 21, 2007 @07:17AM (#18426853)
    The only thing that really is disappointing me about the ATI proprietary drivers is the lack of composite support! Even the open source drivers have this, hell my crappy work Matrox card can run AIGLX/beryl. The open source drivers are great but don't have enough functionality (or speed) for what I wanna do, the ATI ones do, but I cant use the nice desktop eye candy I'd like. I thought when they started to do monthly releases, this would be one of the first things they'd implement... I'm still waiting.
  • Re:Buy NVidia (Score:1, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday March 21, 2007 @09:03AM (#18427499)
    If anything it has gone backwards. You used to be able to get full technical and programming documentation from Matrox for their entire range of cards upto the G400 via. a very easy to join Developer Relations program. About two years ago now they "re-organised" their site and dropped the entire DevRel program. Now you can't get the Matrox documentation from Matrox for love nor money. Just what was the point of that, I wonder?
  • by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday March 21, 2007 @09:52AM (#18428047)
    If one is only interested in a free (libre) graphic driver for Linux, one could check the the status of hardware accelerated 3D support on the Direct Rendering Infrastructure project wiki [slashdot.org].

    Here is, more or less, the lay of the land as of today:
    Intel: i810 and newer are officially supported by Intel [intellinuxgraphics.org]
    ATI: Radeon 7000 up to X850 offer 3D support through a reverse engineered driver. Generally better performing than Intel although not quite as stable.
    VIA: On-board Unichrome video has a free driver included with X. Not sure if VIA has helped with development or not but I had working 3D out-of-the-box running Ubuntu on a VIA EPIA motherboard that I purchased recently.
    Matrox: G200, G400, G450 and G550 have accelerated 3D support with X driver. Not sure if Matrox had any hand in this.
    nVIDIA: There is currently NO hardware accelerated 3D with a free driver for any nVIDIA chipset. This may change in the future due to efforts by the Nouveau [freedesktop.org] project but nVIDIA is definitely not helping the situation.

    So if you want to reward a vendor for Linux support, buy Intel. If you want higher performance and a free driver, buy ATI. If you already own nVIDIA, help the Nouveau project [freedesktop.org].
  • by walt-sjc ( 145127 ) on Wednesday March 21, 2007 @10:26AM (#18428501)
    Where did I ask for CODE? I asked for DOCS. CODE != DOCS.

    It's up to the device manufacturers to work with their vendors that they work with to ensure that documentation for subcomponents is available if needed in order to write a driver. They should make the subcomponent vendor aware that they can't use their parts unless this information is made available to third party developers. The VALUE of the part is less without documentation as it makes the hardware less compatible.

    The fact is, in days gone past we USED to be able to get all the technical docs we wanted. IBM even used to release the source code to their BIOS. I've already debunked the "trade secret" red herring in another post.
  • by the_greywolf ( 311406 ) on Wednesday March 21, 2007 @12:37PM (#18430299) Homepage

    They supported technology like AIGLX before Nvidia.
    They are quite fast enough for 3D desktop. The onboard GMA 950 can comfortably run either compiz or beryl 3d desktops with high efficiency.

    My complaint is that that is done entirely in Mesa. The GMA 9x0 is rasterization hardware - that's all. I'm not surprised GMA 9x0 drivers work so well in Linux, and, in fact, I wouldn't be at all surprised if they work better than in Windows. I'm not surprised they're open source, either.

    Consider, though, that they were able to open the source because all they had to do was rip out all of their 3D IP and let Mesa do all the legwork. Looking at it that way, it's not at all very interesting that they opened the source - after removing all the 3D code, all you've got is a really fast 2D driver - so what's there for them to hide?

    NVIDIA has said on multiple occasions that the only thing keeping them from opening their source is all of the licensed 3D code they use in the driver. Until that can be stripped out, it stays closed.

    ATi has only gone so far as to contract a developer and give him specs under NDA to develop an open source driver - for their outdated and obsolete hardware.

    I won't be happy until an actual 3D chip has open source drivers - or perhaps until the GMA (X)3000 gets put in laptops. Until that happens, I couldn't give a rat's ass that Intel opened their drivers for their worthless hardware.

He has not acquired a fortune; the fortune has acquired him. -- Bion

Working...