ATI video comes out of the closet

Jose Celestino japc at co.sapo.pt
Fri Sep 7 16:50:32 UTC 2007


Words by Les Mikesell [Fri, Sep 07, 2007 at 11:32:27AM -0500]:
>  Dave Ihnat wrote:
> 
> > Both Linux and Windows work on platforms that have, literally,
> > thousands of vendors manufacturing a tremendous range of equipment,
> > most of which has to have a properly working device driver.
> 
>  Yes, and my experience over the last 5 years has been that the Windows versions are more dependable than the fedora versions.  I'm sure there are 
>  individual exceptions to that, but I just don't see fedora as a bastion of stability here - or in a position to claim that they have the only 
>  approach to drivers that can work.
> 

What? You must be trolling. More dependable? More like more predictable,
you can always predict there will be troubles.

And if your experience is from the last 5 years I bet you've had ME and
98 ubber troubles to some extend.

>
>  > Much as
> > they'd like to, Microsoft can't control all these vendors; the original
> > PC was wide open--they even published schematics and the source to the
> > BIOS--and that legacy is embedded in the attitude of the vendors today.
> > (MS's attempt to lock down the driver interface with Vista is meeting
> > with a lot of resistance.)
> 
> 
>  The Vista approach deserves to fail for the same reasons DRM does, but the driving force has to be consumer reaction.  If something is difficult to 
>  use, don't use it.
> 

What are talking about? Is it dificult to install or use Fedora? What's
the dificulty, I don't get it. Could you elaborate?

-- 
Jose Celestino
----------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.msversus.org/     ; http://techp.org/petition/show/1
http://www.vinc17.org/noswpat.en.html
----------------------------------------------------------------
"And on the trillionth day, Man created Gods." -- Thomas D. Pate




More information about the users mailing list