| |||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
+1+1Posted Mar 2, 2008 8:43 UTC (Sun) by gvy (guest, #11981)In reply to: Reverse engineering: more than NVIDIA deserves? by tetromino Parent article: Reverse engineering: more than NVIDIA deserves?
Worse, newbie hackers tend to break basic functionality for fancy stuff no one sane really needs to get things done! Intel driver was clearly broken some half a year ago, judging on numerous frustration reports in mailing lists I follow; Driver "ati" (at least radeon part) broke for me with 6.7.x -- no it's not fun to get arbitrary 96dpi on 133dpi display at all. So before moaning and shooting with dirt it's really worth looking without those special glasses, who's actually doing better even in presence of specs for hardware which does require some expertise to drive. And that expertise seems to be slowly disappearing in xorg project with older developers getting silent...
(Log in to post comments)
+1 Posted Mar 9, 2008 16:23 UTC (Sun) by nix (subscriber, #2304) [Link] The authors of the ATI and Intel drivers are not `newbie hackers' by any definition, and breaking basic functionality in development branches while restructuring things is entirely expected.
|
|
||||||||||||