On 03/29/2010 03:18 PM, Dan Armbrust wrote: >>> Not only is the hardware interface publicly documented, but the open source >>> drivers are also provisioned right from the hardware vendor. >>> >>> Here's the hardware support matrix. http://intellinuxgraphics.org/user.html >>> > > Now if the hardware and drivers didn't suck, things would be great. > > To clarify, they are probably fine for 2D. But for anything 3D... too > expensive, too poor of performance. Also, probably lacking when it > comes to watching high-quality videos. > Define "high-quality videos"? Really 2D is most of what I do. I run compiz in gnome, but don't need to. I don't do any 3D gaming. I watch videos and TV off the web and that's it. Mostly I write software with the machine. > I've had bad experiences with ATIs drivers (on windows and linux) That's too bad. > and > have since only bought NVidia. > > Understood. > With the NVidia driver, everything just works beautifully. I can > decode full HD, or h.264 encoded video with close to 0 CPU usage. > > Driver not "open"? eh. I don't care. I'd much rather have a closed > driver that is actually supported and takes full advantage of the > hardware, then an "open" driver that sucks. > > I'd prefer open, but right now my real problem is that the driver is broken. Here's one of many posts about the problem. http://www.nvnews.net/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=140371 -- Jon Schewe | http://mtu.net/~jpschewe If you see an attachment named signature.asc, this is my digital signature. See http://www.gnupg.org for more information.