By: IntelUser2000 (Intel_user2000.delete@this.yahoo.ca), August 11, 2011 3:17 am
Room: Moderated Discussions
Groo (charlie@semiaccurate.com) on 8/10/11 wrote:
---------------------------
>On the windows side.....
>http://www.lostcircuits.com/mambo//index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=99&Itemid=1&limit=1&limitstart=16
>
>I don't really use windows any more, so I can't say if things have gotten much
>better since, anyone know? Has anyone tried anything other than the major benchmarks that worked?
>
Windows side improved quite a lot since the May drivers. Actually I don't think it really had any meaningful OpenGL support until that driver. That driver brought hardware T&L/VS support for OpenGL, which was surprising because it means until May, OpenGL were running on software. Amusing, but they got around to it.
>Last, back to Linux, there is no driver package available from Intel. The only
>thing I can say is, "Really?". When asked, they do a BS song and dance about open
>vs closed, and if they put out a .DEB, they would have no other choice but to close
>the drivers. I got the speech 2-3 times and my jaw hit the floor. If they believed
>their words, they should be fired for incompetence. If they didn't, they were lying again.
>
>I am not sure which one it was, but it shouldn't have happened, period. Intel has
>the resources, and they are trying to be taken seriously as a software company,
>but you can't view the IDF site with your own OS. You also can't run said OS on
>Sandy with anything put painfully slow and buggy performance. The drivers are crap,
>and have been for years.
>Sandy is a MAJOR regression on that front, and when >asked....
>see above. It shattered my small but growing confidence in Intel, and kept me from a Sandy Laptop.
>
Uhh no, I think that decision was put in stone as soon as SA started putting AMD banners everywhere at the site. And also the same time when "Charlie-proprietary" Intel info was no longer being "leaked" to Charlie. I clearly remember the Core 2 Inquirer article where you were quite giddy about it. I understand, review/speculation sites need something to write about. And without it, no $$s come in. Even Anand expressed his disappointment at one point.
>On the flip side, AMD's drivers may not be great, but they worked from pretty close
>to day 1. Sandy is now 8 months old and still doesn't have a way for a Ubuntu user
>to get working drivers without jumping through hoops that 99.9% of users can't accomplish.
>It is a simple problem to solve, but Intel won't. The difference between the two
>companies is about as much of a polar opposite as one could imagine.
>
>As I said several times in the past, Intel should be embarrassed by Sandy and graphics.
>The hardware may be fine, but the software is a joke.
>
>-Charlie
The Phoronix site also claims if you know how to work around the Linux OS, then the driver support is equal/better than the open source from AMD/Nvidia. See with Windows, I'm stuck with what I have. If I had an option to improve it, I'd go through the compiling to get it work.
Plus how many non-Netbook users are stupid enough to use Linux and not know all the gritty details anyway?
---------------------------
>On the windows side.....
>http://www.lostcircuits.com/mambo//index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=99&Itemid=1&limit=1&limitstart=16
>
>I don't really use windows any more, so I can't say if things have gotten much
>better since, anyone know? Has anyone tried anything other than the major benchmarks that worked?
>
Windows side improved quite a lot since the May drivers. Actually I don't think it really had any meaningful OpenGL support until that driver. That driver brought hardware T&L/VS support for OpenGL, which was surprising because it means until May, OpenGL were running on software. Amusing, but they got around to it.
>Last, back to Linux, there is no driver package available from Intel. The only
>thing I can say is, "Really?". When asked, they do a BS song and dance about open
>vs closed, and if they put out a .DEB, they would have no other choice but to close
>the drivers. I got the speech 2-3 times and my jaw hit the floor. If they believed
>their words, they should be fired for incompetence. If they didn't, they were lying again.
>
>I am not sure which one it was, but it shouldn't have happened, period. Intel has
>the resources, and they are trying to be taken seriously as a software company,
>but you can't view the IDF site with your own OS. You also can't run said OS on
>Sandy with anything put painfully slow and buggy performance. The drivers are crap,
>and have been for years.
>Sandy is a MAJOR regression on that front, and when >asked....
>see above. It shattered my small but growing confidence in Intel, and kept me from a Sandy Laptop.
>
Uhh no, I think that decision was put in stone as soon as SA started putting AMD banners everywhere at the site. And also the same time when "Charlie-proprietary" Intel info was no longer being "leaked" to Charlie. I clearly remember the Core 2 Inquirer article where you were quite giddy about it. I understand, review/speculation sites need something to write about. And without it, no $$s come in. Even Anand expressed his disappointment at one point.
>On the flip side, AMD's drivers may not be great, but they worked from pretty close
>to day 1. Sandy is now 8 months old and still doesn't have a way for a Ubuntu user
>to get working drivers without jumping through hoops that 99.9% of users can't accomplish.
>It is a simple problem to solve, but Intel won't. The difference between the two
>companies is about as much of a polar opposite as one could imagine.
>
>As I said several times in the past, Intel should be embarrassed by Sandy and graphics.
>The hardware may be fine, but the software is a joke.
>
>-Charlie
The Phoronix site also claims if you know how to work around the Linux OS, then the driver support is equal/better than the open source from AMD/Nvidia. See with Windows, I'm stuck with what I have. If I had an option to improve it, I'd go through the compiling to get it work.
Plus how many non-Netbook users are stupid enough to use Linux and not know all the gritty details anyway?
