1 |
Duncan, mused, then expounded: |
2 |
> |
3 |
> You can of course choose to run the closed source drivers, but that |
4 |
> doesn't encourage good citizenship on the part of the video card |
5 |
> manufacturers, and risks system stability as well. Still, it's a choice |
6 |
> many gamers choose to make. Apparently, for them, a few additional frames |
7 |
> per second are worth more than their software freedom, but it's their |
8 |
> choice. |
9 |
> |
10 |
|
11 |
If it were just a few frames per second, then software freedom would win. |
12 |
In many cases, it's actually being able to play the game without getting |
13 |
a cup of tea between frames. Or to actually display a video image at |
14 |
1920x1024. |
15 |
|
16 |
And, for some, being able to drive a digital flat panel at more than |
17 |
1280x1024, requires the higher end cards. The VIA Unichrome won't do that. |
18 |
Neither would the ATI 9250 (well, before mine overheated and died - 30 min |
19 |
of gaming killed it). |
20 |
|
21 |
While I'd prefer an Open Source driver, it's simply not doable in Gfx land, |
22 |
if I want to also multi-purpose the systems. Of course I could give up |
23 |
gaming and limit my DVD/TV watching to 480P. But I like gaming at 1600x1024 |
24 |
and, now at 1920x1200. And it is possible to run Unreal Tournament on a |
25 |
ATI 9250 with Open Source drivers. But it's not possible to run UT2004 |
26 |
on a ATI 9250. Tried it, it wouldn't even start up. |
27 |
|
28 |
Well, I could also keep a WinXX system around for gaming, but that is worse than |
29 |
running a closed source driver. |
30 |
|
31 |
Bob |
32 |
-- |
33 |
- |
34 |
-- |
35 |
gentoo-amd64@g.o mailing list |