Size?
So would that be a 32-bit or 64-bit bus? Or is he going to survive until the next big leap in size?
Just a few days after asking the Linux community to let him take a break, Linus Torvalds has said the project he kicked off 1991 can now get along without him. He was, characteristically, blunt in his recent interview with Bloomberg, saying Linux would survive his death. What he told the newswire's passenger-door-smeared …
This post has been deleted by its author
I see you're getting hit by a bus would you like help with that?
no...
I see you're getting run over would you like help with that?
no...
I see there's a tire going over your body would you like help with that?
no...
I see you're struggling to breath, would you like an ambulance
no... no wait I meant yes, YES! COME BACK CLIPPY YOU BASTARD!!!
I agree with you but it's not all bad.
On my elderly laptop the "legacy" ATI card worked great up until Ubuntu 10.04 then regressed with 12.04 and now works nicely again with 14.04. It's never going to be good for gaming but I'm not bothered about that.
Well said.
Gaming is not the be-all and end-all of the computer world. Personally I don't give a shit about Computer Gaming (GTA , FPS shootemups etc).
I do like some of the hardware that is supposedly 'gaming' just because it breaks the mould of 1366x768 , dual core CPU devices that seem to be 90% if the market these days.
Now if I could get a luggable with 64Gb RAM, 3TB of SSD, 4K screen and at least 6 cores I'd be happy.
Intel?
My experience is that Intel graphics hardware works well with Linux, and that's because Intel have been very supportive of Linux for quite a few years. Of course, Intel graphics hardware isn't the fastest, should you actually need high performance by today's definitions thereof.
NVidia are still sticking to their closed-source binary blob. When it works it works well, but when it doesn't work with your current kernel / distro / whatever, you are stuffed. Good route to upgrade hell as well. I buy these only if there's a good reason to (most often, a package demanding a CUDA-capable GPGPU to run at all or to run much faster). I sometimes wonder if they won't go open-source because when the card isn't doing your graphics, it's pillaging the internals of your PC on behalf of some three-letter agency! (yes I know ... more prosaically, they don't want to tip off whoever owns the IP that their hardware is arguably infringing).
ATI were late to the open-source party. Don't know how they are getting on, nothing I look after uses ATI.
Quite often, what's described as graphics driver problems is actually problems in Gnome / KDE / whatever (user mode code). Nothing to do with the Linux kernel or driver, but rather with the desktop project or your distro's packaging thereof.
It's open source, isn't it? I thought the idea was if you had a problem with something, you get the source code and fix it.
You're probably trolling, but I'll bite.
The source code for the video drivers for Nvidia and certain AMD (ATI) cards is not made available by the manufacturers, and therefore users of those cards are unable to "get the source code and fix it".
or are you just wanting someone else to do all the work for you, and you want to have it for free?
Linux users have just the same expectation as Windows and MAC users - manufacturers should provide support for their hardware and the software to make it work. They do it for free for Windows drivers, so why not Linux?
Linux users have just the same expectation as Windows and MAC users - manufacturers should provide support for their hardware and the software to make it work. They do it for free for Windows drivers, so why not Linux?
If the box that the graphics card comes in has a "Suitable for Linux" sticker on it next to the "Suitable for Windows" sticker, then fair point. If not, then a Linux user shouldn't be arguing that a bit of hardware isn't working with an operating system that the manufacturer has not claimed to be compatible with.
Looking at the first box I see on the shelf next to me, I see claims of Windows compatibility, but not for any other O/S
"Nor is he mellowing in his political attitudes: “I find people who think open-source is anti-capitalism to be kind of naive and slightly stupid,” he's reported to have said. Which should get another flamewar with Richard “it's GNU/Linux” Stallman going nicely."
Why would Richard Stallman take umbrage at that statement?