DVI output, ATI or nVidia

[Dr. Michael J. Chudobiak]

> Granted, I work at NVIDIA, so my opinions are going to be slanted
> here, but I don't see how one defines support as better in one driver
> versus the other unless you've got some written contract guarenteeing
> a particular level of support.

Open code and open discussion make for better support... that should be 
obvious on a Fedora list :-) Since just about everyone on this list will 
have no support contract with intel and no support contract with nvidia, 
  intel "wins" because it's an open driver...

I've talked with the intel driver developers on the xorg list (Keith 
Packard, for instance), who have been extremely helpful in resolving issues.

I have nothing against nvidia, but the intel driver eliminates so many 
issues related to binary drivers, making it very compelling if you have 
to support multiple computers. (For example: you don't need to sync 
driver/kernel releases, you don't need livna rpms, compiz works, you can 
get straight answers from the driver developers, the developers are real 
intel employees rather than volunteers working without access to nvidia 
technical specs...)

The only "bad" thing is that all current intel devices are integrated on 
the motherboard, and you generally need an ADD2 card to get the DVI port 
(and a LCD monitor with "DDC/DI" capability - obscure but important!) 
But if you have that... it just works!

Also - if the integrated intel chip doesn't work for you, for whatever 
reason, you can always install an ATI or nvidia expansion card.

The rendering performance won't impress hard-core gamers, but for 
everyone else it's more than adequate.

The open driver means all of my current and future computer purchases 
will require intel integrated graphics...

Intel has chosen to aggressively support linux by opening the driver 
code. nvidia hasn't. Intel wins!


- Mike