Linked by Thom Holwerda on Fri 11th May 2007 18:17 UTC, submitted by diegocg
Intel "The Intel 965GM Express Chipset represents the first mobile product that implements fourth generation Intel graphics architecture. Designed to support advanced rendering features in modern graphics APIs, this chipset includes support for programmable vertex, geometry, and fragment shaders. Extending Intel's commitment to work with the X.org and Mesa communities to continuously improve and enhance the drivers, support for this new chipset is provided through the X.org 2.0 Intel driver and the Mesa 6.5.3 releases. These drivers represent significant work by both Intel and the broader open source community."
Thread beginning with comment 239479
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE: OpenGL support
by diegocg on Fri 11th May 2007 20:22 UTC in reply to "OpenGL support"
diegocg
Member since:
2005-07-08

Mesa GL doesn't even come close to working properly with OpenGL games like Quake and DoomIII.

Mesa is software rendering. Why would you want Mesa. You want good drivers that avoid you using Mesa rendering.

Sorry but open source video drivers are just junk!

Most of them, but not Intel's. Intel is doing their *OWN* drivers and releasing them. They have the specs, they've the money to hire programmers....their drivers are fast, they're feature-complete, unlike other crappy opensource drivers


Nothing comes close to Nvidia's driver packages for Solaris, FreeBSD and Linux.

Are you jocking? Installing Nvidia propietary drivers is a pain in the ass. Nothing comes close to open source Intel drivers that get compiled and included along the rest of opensource drivers.

Reply Parent Score: 5

RE[2]: OpenGL support
by stephanem on Fri 11th May 2007 21:18 in reply to "RE: OpenGL support"
stephanem Member since:
2006-01-11

Are you jocking? Installing Nvidia propietary drivers is a pain in the ass. Nothing comes close to open source Intel drivers that get compiled and included along the rest of opensource drivers.


Sure they are a pain in the ass on Linux - but for that you need to blame Linus for his infinite wisdom about no stable kernel APIs.

FreeBSD and Solaris do not suffer from any such problems.

Reply Parent Score: 4

RE[3]: OpenGL support
by butters on Fri 11th May 2007 22:07 in reply to "RE[2]: OpenGL support"
butters Member since:
2005-07-08

On all of these *nix systems, the majority of the driver support lives in userspace and interacts with the driver interface in the X server, which is under a non-copyleft, non-share-alike license. The part that involves the kernel is the direct rendering code, which interacts with the DRI framework. To get around the linking problem with the Linux kernel, this part of the nVidia driver lives in userspace and talks to a GPL shim layer that they load into the kernel. If the DRI changes, they only need to update their shim.

FreeBSD and Solaris face challenges because Linux DRI is advancing beyond their capabilities, mainly due to contributions from Intel. FreeBSD and especially Solaris are mostly locked into the frameworks they have. This is the double-edged sword of stable interfaces. As nVidia works to keep their shim in sync with Linux DRI, it becomes a hassle to continue to support these other kernels.

In his "infinite wisdom," Linus decided that eventually people's patience with--and trust in--proprietary drivers will run out, making stable in-kernel interfaces a non-issue. The Linux kernel development model works great for OSS drivers, and most hardware will eventually be supported by OSS drivers. Our suffering is temporary and for a good reason.

Reply Parent Score: 5

RE[3]: OpenGL support
by codergeek42 on Fri 11th May 2007 22:13 in reply to "RE[2]: OpenGL support"
codergeek42 Member since:
2006-01-07

"Sure they are a pain in the ass on Linux - but for that you need to blame Linus for his infinite wisdom about no stable kernel APIs."

A stable in-kernel API does nothing but hinder further development in terms of new features and bugfixes. Please read Grek KH's response on this for more info, called "stable_kernel_nonsense.txt" in the kernel source's Documentation directory. (It's also available online at his site: http://www.kroah.com/log/linux/stable_api_nonsense.html )

(Sorry, I meant to vote you down but clicked the wrong button. Would someone do so for me please? ;) )

Reply Parent Score: 5

RE[2]: OpenGL support
by adamk on Sat 12th May 2007 14:25 in reply to "RE: OpenGL support"
adamk Member since:
2005-07-08

Mesa is software rendering.

Actually, it's not. Mesa, built with the linux-dri target (as is done on most/all linux distributions these days), will provide the various direct rendering 3D drivers, including those for Intel GPUs.

Adam

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[2]: OpenGL support
by parentaladvisory on Sun 13th May 2007 09:30 in reply to "RE: OpenGL support"
parentaladvisory Member since:
2006-12-18

Are you jocking? Installing Nvidia propietary drivers is a pain in the ass. Nothing comes close to open source Intel drivers that get compiled and included along the rest of opensource drivers.


How is it a pain in the ass to install them? If your distro doenst have them in their reposotory, just download them, and just run the script! make sure you have the kernel-headers installed, and its just fine!

On the other hand, I havent experienced this sucking of nvidia drivers that some says... I think they work really well. They have legacy drivers for linux, witch at least provide hardware 3d for older cards. Configuring dualhead without editing a line in xorg.conf is pretty nice, I was actually surprised it worked that good with 'nvidia-settings'.

Reply Parent Score: 1