On Sun, 31 Oct 2004, Arjan van de Ven wrote: > > > I would avoid Intel graphics. Nvidia works out of the box even with the > > opensource driver... > > and except for brand new releases of FC, their binary driver work well. > > > > Intel graphics are painful. They are integrated with the BIOSes, and > > needed special hacks just to > > get some video memory earlier... and stick suck badly wrt. to getting > > proper display modes too > > > > I thought Intel was great, and Nvidia bad. Experience has taught me > > otherwise. > > I guess it all comes down to bios; I've seen a lot of cases where nvidia > didn't work; even with the binary driver (nvidia focusses on the desktop > chips not so much on the laptop ones). > > So.. whatever you buy google first to see if others could make the > laptop work..... I have not had any problems with the nVIDIA laptop chipset. What I have had problem with is the weird sizes of laptop displays. The current laptop I have uses a 1900x1200 display. It is a widescreen aspect ratio. Some of the less endowed screens have weirder aspect ratios. (One of the reasons I got the higher screen density was because it is the same as a common Apple monitor.) If you do a bit of searching, you can find all sorts of X configs for laptop displays. (That is how I got this one working.) Now if I could just get my Atheros PCMCIA wireless card working on the AMD64 kernel... -- Q: Why do programmers confuse Halloween and Christmas? A: Because OCT 31 == DEC 25.
