Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 32

Thread: VIA Will Not Provide An OSS Chrome 9 3D Driver

  1. #11
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    574

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by mendieta View Post
    Yep, I am always voting with my wallet. My next purchase will be an ATI discrete card to celebrate the 3D Open Source drivers whenever that happens.
    I hope you understand that is not happening before 2011.

  2. #12
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Berlin, Germany
    Posts
    822

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&item=via_no_chrome9
    This current situation is similar to when the Intel Poulsbo DRM was proposed for mainlining in the Linux kernel, but that ended up being rejected on the basis of the 3D driver being closed-source and the code being undocumented. VIA's code is really not any better.
    The situation is very different from Intel Poulsbo. Intel was neither willing to provide open source code nor documentation. VIA on the other side has documentation (minus the pixel shader which is going to follow soon according to Harald Welte).

    So as soon as the documentation is complete, the DRM could probably enter the kernel.

  3. #13
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    3,046

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by chithanh View Post
    The situation is very different from Intel Poulsbo. Intel was neither willing to provide open source code nor documentation.
    Sorry, but you have that dead wrong.

    Intel was willing, but unable, to provide EITHER source or documentation for Polusbo.

    They CAN'T as it's not their GPU core like all the other GMA devices.

    It's Imagination Technologies' (It's a PowerVR SGX 5XX series core...) design- and they have yet to show signs of even considering the access of technical information for any purposes of anything other than a closed driver for ANY OS. Moreover, they're the ones that've bogged down releasing a blob driver for the flagship OS on one of the flagship SoC's for their chip. It's still...fun...trying to do 3D stuff on OMAP3 devices.

  4. #14
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    145

    Default

    as i already pointed out in another thread, intel seems to open up the pulsbo driver in q4 in 2009

  5. #15
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Berlin, Germany
    Posts
    822

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Svartalf View Post
    Sorry, but you have that dead wrong.

    Intel was willing, but unable, to provide EITHER source or documentation for Polusbo.
    Intel willingly entered into an agreement with ImgTec which forbade release of source code/docs. That amounts to the same to me. That it left their open source developers in the cold is an unfortunate side effect.

  6. #16
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    87

    Default

    Well i hope that the driver is rejected from the kernel until there's full documentation.
    I don't like the idea of an kernel driver that needs an binary blob for 3D.
    I hope VIA one day can be as helpful as ATI against the community, but i doubt it.
    Intel and ATI shows that it can be done.
    So do you think the next generation of VIA graphics will be fully open source?

  7. #17
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Poland
    Posts
    183

    Default

    Last time I criticized VIA for their (lack of) work on Chrome 9 I got answers from BruceChang and Jon Nettleton that I'm wrong and they just need some time. Yeah, sure. Once again we received nice "F you" :/

    Check out "Chrome 9" thread in these two months:
    http://wiki.openchrome.org/pipermail...hread.html#347
    http://wiki.openchrome.org/pipermail...hread.html#385

    Come on, how many ppl they need to hire to work on open source driver? I'm sure AMD provided it's not a big amount to have nice effects.

  8. #18
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    437

    Default

    VIA is always 'the piece of shit' IMO. I do everything I can to stop people from buying VIA products because it really sux. Now the worst has become even worse. How good could that be?

  9. #19
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    3,046

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Regenwald View Post
    as i already pointed out in another thread, intel seems to open up the pulsbo driver in q4 in 2009
    If that's the case, then there's been a shift in attitude by Imagination- which would be a rather pleasant surprise. It also translates into access to make FOSS drivers for the OMAP3 GPU since they're in the same series.

    But, I'm not holding my breath on it. I'll believe that one when I see it.

  10. #20
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    208

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Ex-Cyber View Post
    VIA hasn't been seriously pursuing the gamer/enthusiast market for years; they've been setting the standards for small, low-power PC systems. Intel and Nvidia are just now getting around to producing stuff that can compete with VIA in this space.
    Let me fix this for you:

    ...they've been setting the standards for small, low-power, HIGH PRICED PC systems...

    and their market evaporated almost immediately after the atom came out.

    VIA's history has been about conscienciously squandering every opportunity they ever had. This is no different.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •