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.