[PLUG] Two screen presentation software

Jason R. Martin nsxfreddy at gmail.com
Sun Oct 9 00:39:12 UTC 2005


On 10/8/05, Elliott Mitchell <ehem at m5p.com> wrote:
> >From: "Jason R. Martin" <nsxfreddy at gmail.com>
> > On 10/8/05, Eric Wilhelm <scratchcomputing at gmail.com> wrote:
> > > According to XF86Config-4, the "Screen" value is mandatory for cards
> > > that can drive more than one display.  The BusID entries are because
> > > I'm using a second card for the third head.
> >
> > Yes, but the question was whether the open-source nv driver supports a
> > setup like this.  I dislike using the close-source driver, and in fact
>
> It does. It isn't so much a proprietary extension, as a proprietary
> method of configuring it. From the outside it looks and behaves just like
> Xinerama, except with better performance because the graphics engine
> handles both displays at the same time rather than having to replicate
> the drawing commands for two displays.
>
> > would avoid Nvidia (and ATI) altogether if I could, but the Intel
> > graphics that come with Centrino laptops are pitiful (and usually
> > lower resolution).  If I can ever get out of Windows today I'll
> > experiment.
>
> Unfortunately for you, you've named all three of the remaining
> non-embedded graphics chip companies. The former two are also aiming for
> the embedded market (though a much more powerful one than the traditional
> embedded market).

Indeed.  Perhaps I will have to support the Open Graphics Project when
they reach the point of having something to sell.

http://lists.duskglow.com/mailman/listinfo/open-graphics

> At least good drivers exist for the former two. The closed-source nVIDIA
> driver works extremely well. The open-source ATi driver does 2D just
> fine.

I did not say that the closed-source nvidia driver didn't work well, I
have used it.  I object to it because it requires a closed source
binary kernel module, and my personal view is that it violates the GPL
requirements of the kernel.  Others disagree with this, and perhaps we
will never reach a consensus on it, but the fact remains that I would
prefer (if possible) to support a company who provides open-source
drivers for their products.

> > > IIRC, the matrox cards are setup slightly differently, but it's been too
> > > long since I've messed with those.
> >
> > Ah, wish I could go back to Matrox.  Anybody know if they make a
> > mobile version of the Millenium cards?  I'd buy that for a dollar...
>
> To my knowledge no one has bought Matrox yet, but I wouldn't be surprised
> if it happens at some point here (or failing that they go bankrupt). Good
> luck finding a laptop with a Matrox chip, the above three own the entire
> market now. Unless someone has a stockpile of them they're selling off
> you're unlikely to find a new Matrox chip in the next couple years.

I think Matrox still has a foothold in the workstation market, since
they pretty much specialize in dual/triple-head displays with strong
2D graphics for photo/video editing.  I guess they have PCIe Parhelia
stuff now, which I didn't know about until today.  I assumed they
hadn't added anything that wasn't AGP.

Jason



More information about the PLUG mailing list