They have even criticized Nvidia specifically for not releasing free drivers. Nvidia responded. They have said no because, as they say, the drivers contain "intellectual property NVIDIA wishes to protect" and have further explained how they are already greatly supporting Linux and have a kernel team taking care of the non-free driver, all in all trying to make it sound like they are still offering their GNU/Linux using customers a sweet deal.
Full story »
lozz
15 years 42 weeks 3 days 21 hours ago
Nvidia's paranoia
We're not the slightest bit interested in stealing the IP off of your wretched drivers, Nvidia, we just want the expensive hardware we bought off you to work properly in our computers.
You can go on sticking your head in the sand, or you can be like HP printers. They worked with us and now they get the lion's share of our printer business.
spikeb
15 years 42 weeks 3 days 7 hours ago
Stupid
They're the only major graphics player left who isn't cooperating. screw 'em
spikeb
15 years 41 weeks 6 days 35 min ago
Update
Bought an ATI/AMD card earlier today :)
lozz
15 years 41 weeks 5 days 1 hour ago
Voting with your feet
Way to go. Stick with Linux-friendly hardware. I was going to get my new t61 with the Nvidia Quadra card then decided to stick with the much cheaper Intel graphics. I'd probably be still trying to get the Quadra card working properly if I hadn't decided I really didn't need it.
spikeb
15 years 40 weeks 2 days 23 hours ago
re:Voting with your feet
haha, so true.
boottux
15 years 39 weeks 6 days 22 hours ago
It's not all about graphics
I realize that a computer is a general purpose machine however much of the complaint about graphic drivers seems to be driven by people who are looking for maximum eye candy.
This group seems to be very vocal but are they a large proportion of Linux users ?
I'm not sure Linux will ever be state of the art and I'm not sure that is the intention of its developers. It is hardly surprising that those who create something using their own resources (whether individual or company) do so with an eye to some form of financial return. They do this knowing full well that the window of opportunity is not that large. In the tech world advances tend to become mainstream not because they are made open but because they lose the perception of being "added value". The functionality that was once only available as software becomes either incorporated into the operating system itself or in hardware.
Graphic card makers offer nothing to a general computer user. No one needs a graphic card for the web, email, a spreadsheet etc. The audience they appeal to are gamers. In years past it was the sound card maker that had this position. I remember when one would purchase a sound card because the sound capabilities that came with hardware out of the box were very limited. Many general computer users however never bought sound cards. Who cared about the fidelity of sound of a beep for a spreedsheet error ?
There used to be a ton of sound card vendors going after the auditorily sensitive market. Today, not so much. It is video that has usurped that position. Graphics card makers know that this will not last. They have no monopoly on graphics. AMD's purchase of ATI and Intel's built in graphic capability all point to what is coming.
The fact is, if you want it now, you will have to pay. If you wait, it becomes standard and eventually open.
One's purchasing decisions may hasten or delay slightly what is inevitable but each individual makes that decision based upon too many factors for a post or rant about openness to be decisive. We all rationalize to justify our behavior.
I have made my own decisions in this regard. State of the art graphics on computers is not high on my list. For gaming, I prefer a console. That is first and foremost a function of my ability to pay for two devices, a computer and a console.
As for the argument that 3d graphic acceleration will aid usability, I won't hold my breath. I think I've heard that about everything that's ever been introduced into the computing world. After all, compilers in their day did the same thing although the "user" was not what we would view as a user today. Marketing anything in the computer world today requires some form of new and improved. But no one takes a company's word for it. Skepticism is now buit in.