On Wed, 2012-03-21 at 12:26 +0000, Peter Robinson wrote: > No, we've never said that ever! But then there are a lot of desktops > that run just fine without OpenGL. 3D really wasn't in a great state > even in x86 until Fedora 15 with a lot of drivers only doing it > partially or not at all, even now there's only really 3 well supported > sets of HW that are well supported with 3D in Fedora... ie Intel, > AMD/ATI and nVidia and even those aren't perfect yet. I don't see how > full OpenGL support should be an argument because there's still really > on a subset of x86 hardware that currently supports it. Not to be overly picky, but "only three" is a bit misleading. When you look at how the driver support actually breaks down in terms of generational similarity, you get something more like: - Intel gen2 (8xx) - Intel gen3 (915, 945, G33, Atom) - Intel gen4 (Core and Core 2) - Intel gen5+ (Core i3 and up) - Radeon R100-R200 - Radeon R300-R500 - Radeon R600-R700 - Radeon R800+ - NVIDIA pre-NV30 - NVIDIA NV30-NV40 - NVIDIA NV50 - NVIDIA NVC0+ Even if you're going by the more strict criteria of "good enough to run gnome-shell" you only cut out four of those (should only be three, tbh). And if we're going by _that_ metric, the list of other x86 hardware in the world where we could have drivers but don't yet is, as far as I know: - VIA Chrome9 - Matrox P- and M-series Which, in terms of market share, are sort of the two-dollar-bills of the world. So it's a little like saying "we only support x86 chips from Intel, AMD, and VIA". Okay, yeah, maybe that's fair, but those are actually all there is to care about. - ajax
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
-- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
