nobody is suggesting that nvidia, amd, intel and any other hardware mfr should write open drivers or open up their existing code but just give documentation to allow the community to develop their own drivers this is what happens anyway through reverse engineering however you cant expect 0 day support from reverse engineered development nor can you expect it to perform as well as it might
and like i said - what software are you running that requires anything above opengl3.x ... i can only think of a couple of things that require even opengl 3.0
about the speed problems, thats also not true, the intel driver is very fast it gives you nearly the full speed this hardware is capable to produce so even again a general statement is not true in this cases.
But one thing we see on the amd side, if you are not commiting yourself to the opensource way, and use 99% of the developers to make the closed one better, yes the free one are not so good than the closed one. So just commit to it and you get a really good driver (intel).
ok they have some chipsets they did not release but thats no problem just dont buy this anti-freedom-hardware. and they will not sell it again.
It should be clear by now that if you want a laptop running Linux you are best off choosing an Intel solution.
Also I've seen no confirmation from NVidia that they are actually going to support optimus on Linux even if they could somehow use DMABUF.
If the kernel developers makes it easier to maintain proprietary drivers then we will see an increase of companies only providing proprietary drivers, and those only for architectures said vendors find 'worth their while' rather than supplying/assisting with open source drivers, leading to less open source drivers and less value for Linux as a working-everywhere-on-anything kernel.
And that is ignoring all the other problems proprietary drivers bring along, like security and stability.
Are those who for some reason have bought an optimus powered laptop on which they want to run Linux (despite NVidia going out and saying 'we have NO plans of supporting optimus on Linux') worth jeopardizing hardware vendors returning to providing proprietary blobs rather than open source drivers in-tree as it's no longer such a hassle to do so? Nah, I don't think so, and more to the point it seems that most kernel devs in question doesn't think so either.
'Optimus' is a small blip in computing history and only pertains to a computer segment in which Linux barely even registers, yet some people are trying to portray optimus as some 'make it or break it' thing for Linux, it's quite hilarious.
isnt optimus just a crappy solution to the performance hit caused by compositing ?
blah blah blah...
wake me up when Nouveau can deliver something like THIS on ULTRA settings on any 8-month-old game:
Everybody knows that the Nvidia blob for Linux shares code with the Windows blob so performance is mostly similar across the board. IF Batman was available for Linux the Nvidia blob will have generated similar results, give or take 10-20 fps here and there (that bench was done using DirectX 9 btw, not DX 11).
My point is that unless Nouveau can offer comparable framrates, it's not going to attract any user who puts performance over freedom, especially where high-end cards are concerned (they are high-end cards precisely because you WANT their superior performance). Heck, the Nouveau driver does not even need to offer performance parity; I'd bet most people will be more than satisfied if it could provide at least 60-65% of the blob's performance.
i'd wager the r600g could easily reproduce this even in wine
and no - sarcasm is what i'm good at!