Reddit 21 bitcoin computer hardware49 comments
Beat maker software free download for pc
Username or Email Password. In other words, if you happen to know people from those parts, be sure to let them know about the difficulties the Firefox team is apparently having with X. The fact that the OpenGL implementations in current X drivers for many cards are buggy is hardly news to anyone, least of all the developers. But that was expected.
Couldn't the openGL mode be enabled on a whitelist basis? I thought the Nividia proprietary drivers were pretty good, as far as 3D is concerned you can use pretty recent games under Wine for instance? First thing we need is a good way to test. I think this is the way you can help test it: Here are some of the results: They won't just magically work for Chrome.
Then you better look back, because Firefox actually needs less. Bloat is not exactly the best term when trying to make a firefox vs chrome comparison which advantages chrome. Firefox is now nearly the mainstream web browser which consumes the least amount of memory, AFAIK, while Chrome would be near the top with its multi-process model. Being more responsive does not equate being less bloated.
That wouldn't make it less bloated. Responsiveness depends on proper use of threads and having powerful hardware underneath, not so much on how heavy software is except when you go the Adobe way and make software so heavy that your OS constantly has swap data in and out while you run it because your RAM is full. Well, there is a chance they will. Linux OpenGL implementations are not very different from what we used to?
They are a buggy, inconsistent mess but if you know the safe path across the minefield you can still produce a working product. Sometimes the obvious path is not the "proper" one. It's likely that Mozilla guys are performing some operations that don't match the semantics of underlying layers well after all it's a multiplatform program.
Such corner cases are more likely to have bugs or suffer from poor performance. This of course is not an excuse for guys producing these bugs but I can easily imagine another application doing the same things differently and managing to work these bugs around. Then just support the the most stable driver then. AMD binary driver too. So the title of this OSNews story is inaccurate. The FGLRX driver is crashier, it's blacklisted at the moment, this could change everything hopefully will change: Just launch firefox with this command you can use it in the properties of your desktop icon, too: This was the top reason for crashiness on linux.
We are looking forward to un-blacklisting drivers as soon as they get good enough, see the discussion in this bug scroll down past the first comments sent by an angry user: If the manufacturers did release proper specs for their cards maybe we could have first class drivers for Xorg.
Geez, so many fickle users out there. Most don't appreciate even a little that it was Firefox that stirred up the browser wars, when the alternatives were a sluggish Netscape and an anti-standards IE. So you're Firefox is 'sluggish'?
Sounds like you have other issues on your system too. Also don't forget Google only offered Chrome to Windows users for quite a while, leaving Linux users with a somewhat supported 'build your own' option of Chromium. Their excuse was a public statement about how it was too difficult and problematic to offer Linux or OS X versions. Yet Firefox and Opera have been popping out concurrent versions for multiple platforms for years.
OK, well Opera has been concurrent version-wise only recently, but their developers are too busy innovating unique ideas that other browsers pick up on. Also, for WebGL which is enabled on linux if your driver is whitelisted , the best way to test is to run the official WebGL conformance test suite: Click 'run tests', copy your results in a text file and attach it to this bug: If a driver can pass almost all these tests and doesn't crash running them Looking forward to enabling the whitelist once we get more data.
I hope to convince developers of GL drivers to use it to test their drivers against. Another way that the title of this story is inaccurate is that we do have hardware acceleration on linux thanks to XRender and we have had for years. So if your drivers have a good XRender implementation then your Firefox can blow the competition into orbit in 2D graphics benchmarks such as: What's blacklisted on buggy X drivers is OpenGL.
It is used for WebGL, and for accelerated compositing of the graphics layers in web pages. However, for the latter compositing , we are still working on resolving performance issues in the interaction with XRender, and that won't make it into Firefox 4, so we don't enable accelerated compositing by default regardless of the driver blacklist so if you want accelerated compositing at the risk of losing the benefit of XRender you have to go to about: I'm happily using it here, and it can double the performance in fullscreen WebGL demos.
The blame probably could be directed toward the graphics hardware manufacturers with far more accuracy and truth than the X. So you get WebGL right away. If you want accelerated compositing too at the risk of losing the benefit of XRender go to about: There are specs for Intel chips and drivers from Intel. Is this of any help? So even "innocuous" graphics driver bugs can suddenly become major security issues e. Even a plain crash is considered a DOS vulnerability when scripts can trigger it at will.
So yes, WebGL does put much stricter requirements on drivers than, say, video games or compiz. Or you could put the blame where it really lies, with Xorg. Nvidia's drivers work better because they basically replace half the Xorg stack. This state of affairs is rather retarded. If to get good performance and stability you have to replace half the underlying graphics stack, then the graphics stack must be the grand master of suck.
You would have better gpu drivers if Linus provided a stable ABI. But working with third parties has never been a goal of Linus anymore than creating a desktop OS. He also doesn't seem to care about creating a server OS that meets the needs of the market given how often the unstable abi has broken VMWare.
Because having a stable abi in a Nix is just unthinkable Where are all the benefits from the unstable abi? How has Linux leaped passed other Nix systems? No, sorry but you can't blame Xorg. It is an open source project and anyone can contribute. The quesion is why Nvidia does not contribute to Xorg instead of replacing its stack into its proprietary driver? Xorg is an extremely complex piece of software but it is also extremely capable. MS Office has more bugs than Notepad.
Xorg just need more developers and cooperation from hardware manufacturers. What if you manufacture a good card but the driver for it sucks? Your product sucks overall. Manufacturers need to put more effort into the software part on linux. They will loose customers in the long run if they don't. It's overy complex, and has too many features that have no real place in todays computing environment. I use Linux everyday, and Xorg is the weak spot in the whole OS, it's slow, it crashes not often, but Windows 7 has never crashed on the same computer, nor did Vista.
There is a reason that Red Hat and Ubuntu are looking at Wayland, and that is simplicity, reliability and speed. An environment variable requires that. Especially since I read in one of you other comments that another related feature is switchable through about: I think you hit the nail on the head.
X is extremely complex and extremely capable and so it can take an extreme amount of effort and time to have stable drivers. IMHO we should think about making X and or Wayland as simple and efficient as possible while still having relevant features. Just to clarify I am not blaming this all on X, but complexity does not help. Really it's just because we're in a rush now and an environment variable switch can be implemented in 1 line of code while an about: But that was harder to implement due to where the GLX blacklisting is implemented.
Eventually yes it'll be in about: The open drivers for both of those offer 3D as standard. The open drivers for NVidia only offer 'experimental' 3D, after much blood, sweat and tears of reverse engineering. Phoronix is quite a good place to keep up. There are some things that are not easy to be talked about. I'll try to put the results of past conversations: A binary-only driver is very bad news, and should be shunned.
That proprietary software doesn't respect users' freedom, users are not free to run the program as they wish, study the source code and change it so that the program do what they wish, and to redistribute copies with or without changes. Without these freedoms, the users can not control the software or control their computing. Also, as Rick Moen said: