On Jan 14, 10:44 am, Hadron <hadronqu...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> "[H]omer" <s...@xxxxxxx> writes:
> > Verily I say unto thee, that Roy Schestowitz spake thusly:
> > Like I said in another thread, ATi is increasingly the choice for
> > gamers, and this is just one of many reasons why. They were first
> > to bat with support for Compiz (GLX_EXT_texture_from_pixmap), and
> > again the first with a Free Software initiative (nVidia is on the
> > fence with that one).
I have an ATI FireGL graphics card, and the graphics is great.
Battlezone is really fast, as with most other 3D graphics. I'm not a
big fan of games, but what I have seen, I like.
> NVidia cards are in 90% of Linux machines which use any HW acceleration
> at all. Why? Because ATIs Linux support has been total shit. And you
> know it. You're just sucking their dicks because they will open their
> source.
Both NVidia and ATI have been very supportive of Linux. Many Debian
and "pure GNU" advocates are upset that ATI and NVidia won't publish
their source code to their best accelerated drivers. I don't mind
using a module, and a custom plug-in for the X.org X11 implementation.
> Personally I'll stick with NVIdia because of their excellent support
> over the past years. And I suggest others do too.
I am glad that all of the major video chip vendors are supporting
Linux. Ironically, Video cards are becoming the best indicator of the
Linux vs Vista users. Vista users who really want Vista with all it's
"WOW" would buy machines with DirectX-10 video cards. Users who buy a
PC with the intent of installing Linux, purchase machines with OpenGL
supported.
|
|
