Duncan, mused, then expounded:
> You can of course choose to run the closed source drivers, but that
> doesn't encourage good citizenship on the part of the video card
> manufacturers, and risks system stability as well. Still, it's a choice
> many gamers choose to make. Apparently, for them, a few additional frames
> per second are worth more than their software freedom, but it's their
If it were just a few frames per second, then software freedom would win.
In many cases, it's actually being able to play the game without getting
a cup of tea between frames. Or to actually display a video image at
And, for some, being able to drive a digital flat panel at more than
1280x1024, requires the higher end cards. The VIA Unichrome won't do that.
Neither would the ATI 9250 (well, before mine overheated and died - 30 min
of gaming killed it).
While I'd prefer an Open Source driver, it's simply not doable in Gfx land,
if I want to also multi-purpose the systems. Of course I could give up
gaming and limit my DVD/TV watching to 480P. But I like gaming at 1600x1024
and, now at 1920x1200. And it is possible to run Unreal Tournament on a
ATI 9250 with Open Source drivers. But it's not possible to run UT2004
on a ATI 9250. Tried it, it wouldn't even start up.
Well, I could also keep a WinXX system around for gaming, but that is worse than
running a closed source driver.
email@example.com mailing list