Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!


Forgot your password?
Displays Graphics Software Linux

S3 Graphics Responds About Linux Support 114

V!NCENT writes "Phoronix has an update on S3's Linux driver state: 'We are doing an internal build of the Chrome 500 Linux driver to incorporate some of the additional hardware features and upgrades (over the Chrome 400 Series GPUs). If you want to test the Linux now, the Chrome 400 Series drivers also support the Chrome 500 Series since it is a unified driver architecture.'" (This after the beef that Phoronix raised about S3's failure to deliver on promises of better Linux support for the 500 series.)
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

S3 Graphics Responds About Linux Support

Comments Filter:
  • by LordKaT ( 619540 ) on Saturday February 21, 2009 @05:09PM (#26943623) Homepage Journal

    Who the heck are these people using S3 cards nowadays? Why aren't they buying low-end (sub-$80) nvidia or ATI cards?

    You get practically the same performance (although 3D performance is far and away better on comparable nVidia/ATI cards) for the same price, the same small heatsink/fan, and better driver support.

    Is there a populous of severely brain damaged geeks out there that I don't know about? If so, are any of you female, because I've been feeling lonely lately.

  • by Jurily ( 900488 ) <jurily@gmail.COLAcom minus caffeine> on Saturday February 21, 2009 @05:39PM (#26943885)

    Who the heck are these people using S3 cards nowadays?

    Tough question... the last S3 card I've seen was a 2Mb Trio.

  • Re:Sad (Score:4, Interesting)

    by Darkness404 ( 1287218 ) on Saturday February 21, 2009 @05:46PM (#26943943)

    A company like S3 is insane for prioritizing its development time to a platform with 85% of the desktop market!

    But when you make low end products, it is best to develop for the low end market. These days, the low end market is dominated by Linux and XP. With XP having about 75% and Linux about 25%. Now, if it was so difficult for them to write a proper Linux driver, it might make sense, but if they give specs to a kernel developer (even under an NDA so long as the resulting driver was GPL'd) they wouldn't have to do a thing and they would have a high-quality driver for Linux.

    Would a business risk ~25% of its customers by not doing something that costs the company $0 along with improving its PR? I don't think most businesses would, and thats why its so sad.

  • by Zero__Kelvin ( 151819 ) on Saturday February 21, 2009 @05:47PM (#26943953) Homepage
    That is correct. And if your time does have value then Linux is clearly the better choice. So let us recap:
    1. If your time has no value, then Linux is free as in beer and a much better solution than Windows.
    2. If your time has value then Linux is not completely free as in beer but is still far, far, far less expensive, and is still the only intelligent choice between Linux and Windows.
  • by DrSkwid ( 118965 ) on Saturday February 21, 2009 @06:24PM (#26944219) Homepage Journal

    Because no-one ever had to re-install Windows.

    My time isn't free, people *pay* me quite a lot of money to maintain their Linux systems.

  • by Average ( 648 ) on Saturday February 21, 2009 @07:49PM (#26944819)

    There's the evangelism perspective.

    Look, if you're like me, and been primarily Linux-using since the a.out days (see Slashdot ID), you'll check every component and buy based on "what works great with Linux", and even "who's directly advancing open-source software, not being buttheads".

    Problem is, I, and much of the Linux community, want to be able to give an Ubuntu LiveCD to my friend Joe who just recently heard about this 'Linux thing". And have it work.

    I don't want to say "so, what kind of video chipset did eMachines put in your Walmart box", "what network", "what sound".

  • by TheRaven64 ( 641858 ) on Saturday February 21, 2009 @08:00PM (#26944889) Journal

    Who the heck are these people using S3 cards nowadays? Why aren't they buying low-end (sub-$80) nvidia or ATI cards?

    Who are these people buying graphics cards now? More than 50% of all sales of new computers have been laptops for a while, and they tend not to have their graphics chip on a removable board. Even desktops are more likely to use on-board video than anything else. And a lot of cheap machines in both segments come with onboard S3 graphics. Sure, they only have 1% of the total market share (Q4 2008 figures), but that still translates to a huge number of units.

Nondeterminism means never having to say you are wrong.