Hello Arelor!

** On Friday 08.10.21 - 11:08, Arelor wrote to Ogg:

[1] Not many of the distros handled the NVIDIA video very well.

Nvidia is a bitch.

If you search online you will find videos and pictures of
Linux giving Nvidia the middle finger and bellowing
"Nvidia, fuck you". Theo de Raadt has made it an official
recommendation to avoid Nvidia cards too.

I didn't know any of those issues when I started my distro
journey. But to Nvidia's credit, they *did* provide linux
drivers on their support site. I used that, and video
performance was pretty good under the /32 distros I played
with. But along my journey, some dependency was removed or
something when I was tweeking the screensaver and hibernation
on a non-Manjaro distro. I couldn't get it back to how it was
after that without resorting a full reinstall. I had invested
too much time at that point. But the video issue was resolved
with Manjaro/64 right out of the box.

For Linux, you either use the Nvidia propietary modules
(which live distributions typically don't pack) or nouveau.
Modern Nouveau is quite usable today, but if you tested it
back in the early Win 7 days, it sucked hard hard hard.

I never came across Nouveau. Thanks for the historical
reference.

I don't think I'll be playing with anymore linux distros at
this point going forward. I do have one IBM ThinkCentre P4
tower that has potential to extend beyond its current XP
installation - but thankfully, I don't think it has Nvidia
video.
--

--- OpenXP 5.0.50
* Origin: (} Pointy McPointFace (21:4/106.21)

I didn't know any of those issues when I started my distro
journey. But to Nvidia's credit, they *did* provide linux
drivers on their support site. I used that, and video

This.

I always thought it rather rude of the linux / opensource community to
thumb their noses at NVIDIA for their proprietary drivers. For a long
time NVIDIA was the only choice if you wanted good graphics on Linux.

NVIDIA didn't have to support Linux at all, yet they did, and continued
to despite the rudeness of the community. Now we have really good amdgpu drivers, and intel drivers, NVIDIA isn't so much needed, but still
remains a good choice if you use one of their supported systems (Linux, FreeBSD, Solaris).

Andrew

--
|03Andrew Pamment |08(|11apam|08)
|13Happy|10Land |14v2.0|08!|07


--- Talisman v0.25-dev (Linux/x86_64)
* Origin: HappyLand v2.0 - telnet://happylandbbs.com:11892/ (21:1/182)

Hello Nightfox!

** On Wednesday 06.10.21 - 10:28, Nightfox wrote to Ogg:

I know I'm not the one you're replying to, [...]

Hey.. no prob!

[...] but I wanted to say that although 21" would be large
for a tablet, 21" seems small for a PC to me.

I have a 21" 4:3 that I use with my DT at work. It's nice to be
able to look something up, and stand back (as I often work on
my feet) and still be able to read the screen without needing
to get up close. I don't need screen realestate to manage
multiple windows at the same time, but I can appreciate that a
much larger screen than 21" would nice for easy document view
comparison.

With my main desktop PC, I had a 23" 1080p screen for a
while, and a couple years ago I bought a 27" 4K screen.
One of the nice things about having a desktop (or laptop)
is being able to use a large screen.

I forget what my 21" screen resolution is, but my T60 14" 4:3
laptop is currently at 1400x1050 and capable of 2048x1536. The
latter would be awesome on a large 4:3 screen.

I sort of inadvertently acquired an old iMac AIO with a 16:9
24" screen. The idea was to use that as a shop display to cycle
video clips or ads. But the machine is toast (won't remain
stable until it reboots randomly or locks up on its own, and a
re-install doesn't work) :( By comparison, I can imagine that
your 27" 4K screen would be impressive, indeed.


--- OpenXP 5.0.50
* Origin: (} Pointy McPointFace (21:4/106.21)

I have a 21" 4:3 that I use with my DT at work. It's nice to be
able to look something up, and stand back (as I often work on my
feet) and still be able to read the screen without needing to get
up close. I don't need screen realestate to manage multiple
windows at the same time, but I can appreciate that a much larger

Hmm tape measure time, I'm not sure what I'm using right now size wise, 1680x1050 probably 22". I find it a rather odd size.. I rarely use more than one window, but the result is I normally use a roughly 4:3 section with the window planted right in the middle.

If I have to use more than one window for whatever reason I tend to find it doesn't actually accomodate two side by side "full size" windows very nicely.
I tend to have all sorts of weird overlap or resizing going on. In some ways
I think two smaller screens are more useful for multi window work, although
the widescreen is nice if you're looking at some kind of rendered video be it
a movie or game or whatever.

By the time I finished doing streaming at the church, they'd found a monitot that was off hand ~40" wide.. I still had a certain level of issue with this, but could make it work effectively. I noticed last time I dropped in for a look see, that the second of the same monitor was out so ~80" of realestate
for multiple windows...

Shrug, author of the 1st epistle on Monitots

Spec


*** THE READER V4.50 [freeware]
--- SuperBBS v1.17-3 (Eval)
* Origin: The future's uncertain, the end is always near. (21:3/101)

Re: Nvidia + Linux
By: apam to Ogg on Sat Oct 09 2021 01:49 pm

I didn't know any of those issues when I started my distro
journey. But to Nvidia's credit, they *did* provide linux
drivers on their support site. I used that, and video

This.

I always thought it rather rude of the linux / opensource community to
thumb their noses at NVIDIA for their proprietary drivers. For a long
time NVIDIA was the only choice if you wanted good graphics on Linux.

NVIDIA didn't have to support Linux at all, yet they did, and continued
to despite the rudeness of the community. Now we have really good amdgpu drivers, and intel drivers, NVIDIA isn't so much needed, but still
remains a good choice if you use one of their supported systems (Linux, FreeBSD, Solaris).

Andrew

--
|03Andrew Pamment |08(|11apam|08)
|13Happy|10Land |14v2.0|08!|07

The issue is that devs didn't ask Nvidia for support. They usually asked for specifications enough to get some driver patched up so those cards were usable beyond VESA quality.

If you had a supported operating system, runnign a supported version, alongside a supported Xorg version, alongside a supported gpu, then Nvidia's GPUs were workable.

If your kernel is a bit too new and the gpu a bit too old, for example, their drivers won't do and Nvidia is not helping you make it work at all.

Intel and AMD/Ati were giving devs what they needed in order to get stuff working whereas Nvidia's position was "Use out binary blob with a supported system or die." That is outright hostile, specially against systems they don't want to support (I have not seen Nvidia support for, say, NetBSD or OpenBSD, whereas GPUS from other manufacturers had fine support from the get go because they didn't piss on developers).

There is also the fact a lot of people would rather not run an unaudited binary blob in privileged kernel space. If you are like that, you don't ask the manufacturer for a driver, you ask for specs enough to build something yourself.

--
gopher://gopher.richardfalken.com/1/richardfalken
--- SBBSecho 3.14-Linux
* Origin: Palantir * palantirbbs.ddns.net * Pensacola, FL * (21:2/138)

The issue is that devs didn't ask Nvidia for support. They usually
asked for
specifications enough to get some driver patched up so those cards
were usable
beyond VESA quality.

My Grandma used to say 'beggars can't be choosers'

Nvidia said no, for whatever reason.. but went out of their way to do
what they could.

I've never had a problem with NVIDIA drivers, unless I was
using a very recent kernel where they modified the kernel interfaces, and
the OpenSource shim had to be patched to make it work.

Andrew

--
|03Andrew Pamment |08(|11apam|08)
|13Happy|10Land |14v2.0|08!|07


--- Talisman v0.25-dev (Linux/x86_64)
* Origin: HappyLand v2.0 - telnet://happylandbbs.com:11892/ (21:1/182)

Re: Nvidia + Linux
By: apam to Arelor on Sat Oct 09 2021 10:40 pm

The issue is that devs didn't ask Nvidia for support. They usually
asked for
specifications enough to get some driver patched up so those cards
were usable
beyond VESA quality.

My Grandma used to say 'beggars can't be choosers'

Nvidia said no, for whatever reason.. but went out of their way to do
what they could.

I've never had a problem with NVIDIA drivers, unless I was
using a very recent kernel where they modified the kernel interfaces, and the OpenSource shim had to be patched to make it work.

Andrew

--
|03Andrew Pamment |08(|11apam|08)
|13Happy|10Land |14v2.0|08!|07

Yeah, but the point is that Nvidia stands out because they are the ones not collaborating, whereas Intel and AMD release specs enough to get things working (and
in some cases, I think, a full open source implementation of the drivers and kernel
modules). Nvidia ends up being the red haired stepchild of the family because of that,
so it should surprise nobody that people gossips trash about them.

--
gopher://gopher.richardfalken.com/1/richardfalken
--- SBBSecho 3.14-Linux
* Origin: Palantir * palantirbbs.ddns.net * Pensacola, FL * (21:2/138)

Ogg wrote to Nightfox <=-

I have a 21" 4:3 that I use with my DT at work. It's nice to be
able to look something up, and stand back (as I often work on
my feet) and still be able to read the screen without needing
to get up close.

I have an odd setup - a 24 inch 16:9 running at 1080p and a 19" 4:3 monitor running at 1280x1024. The 4:3 monitor has been in constant use since 2007
and Will Not Die, and it makes a nice monitor for the BBS. I remote in at 1280x1024, the max res of my old BBS box, and it runs full screen alongside
my desktop display.


... Take a break
--- MultiMail/DOS v0.52
* Origin: realitycheckBBS.org -- information is power. (21:4/122)

Spectre wrote to Ogg <=-

Hmm tape measure time, I'm not sure what I'm using right now size wise, 1680x1050 probably 22". I find it a rather odd size.. I rarely use
more than one window, but the result is I normally use a roughly 4:3 section with the window planted right in the middle.

DOSBOX-X does a nice job on a 1080P display using TT fonts and font stretching/smoothing to make a 25x80 screen look nice when displayed in full screen on a widescreen monitor. I end up using DOSBOX in full-screen most of the time I do my BBS stuff.


... Take a break
--- MultiMail/DOS v0.52
* Origin: realitycheckBBS.org -- information is power. (21:4/122)

apam wrote to Ogg <=-

NVIDIA didn't have to support Linux at all, yet they did, and continued
to despite the rudeness of the community.

You can thank RMS for setting the tone.


... Take a break
--- MultiMail/DOS v0.52
* Origin: realitycheckBBS.org -- information is power. (21:4/122)

DOSBOX-X does a nice job on a 1080P display using TT fonts and font stretching/smoothing to make a 25x80 screen look nice when displayed in full screen on a widescreen monitor. I end up using DOSBOX in

Hmm I prefer mine to be about native size. So only ever using a small window for text.


*** THE READER V4.50 [freeware]
--- SuperBBS v1.17-3 (Eval)
* Origin: The future's uncertain, the end is always near. (21:3/101)

On 09 Oct 2021, poindexter FORTRAN said the following...

apam wrote to Ogg <=-

NVIDIA didn't have to support Linux at all, yet they did, and continu to despite the rudeness of the community.

You can thank RMS for setting the tone.

And then Linus after him, with his famous "Fuck you, NVIDIA", flipping bird moment....


hyjinx // Alistair Ross
Author of 'Back to the BBS' Documentary: https://bit.ly/3tRINeL (YouTube) alsgeeklab.com

--- Mystic BBS v1.12 A46 2020/08/26 (Linux/64)
* Origin: bbs.alsgeeklab.com:2323 (21:1/126)