Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst ... 234
Results 31 to 36 of 36

Thread: VDPAU vs. XvMC?

  1. #31
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    984

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by arbitrabbit View Post
    As I said, according to me an average user probably doesn't care about where the driver is coming from, be it AMD or the community, as long as it works.
    You are probably right that a lot of users don't care, until AMD decides to drop support for their hardware in their proprietary driver (as has happened early this year with R300-R500 cards), then they are suddenly outraged.

    I can't wait when AMD decides to nuke support for R600 cards in their proprietary driver next year, then we'll have the same ritual again. All those people who didn't care about open source in the first place suddenly start whining again, like something totally unexpected just happened.

    For me I find all this quite amusing, this is what you get when relying on closed source software.

  2. #32
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    111

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by monraaf View Post
    For me I find all this quite amusing, this is what you get when relying on closed source software.
    Yeah, because opensource drivers never drop support for older hardware... oh wait, that's bullcrap. 3D on i815 is (was) broken last time I checked and Intel ain't touching it to fix it.

  3. #33
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    1,718

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by myxal View Post
    Yeah, because opensource drivers never drop support for older hardware... oh wait, that's bullcrap. 3D on i815 is (was) broken last time I checked and Intel ain't touching it to fix it.
    since it is opensource you are free to fix it yourself.

  4. #34
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    111

    Default

    So what? If the fix was easy Intel would already integrate it. Trouble is the driver is apparently bad from an architecture standpoint (the -i810, not -intel) so fixing it involves pretty much rewriting the whole i810 driver for newer x.org architecture (or further hack to intel driver to support i8xx hardware). My chances of succeeding at that are about the same as getting unsupported hardware to work with newer fglrx or using old fglrx with new x.org. I'm left to only buying a newer card (whole system, actually) in both cases.

    The most important thing is docs and AMD already provides those for most of the stuff their cards can do. If you want docs for UVD, get the stupid legislation that allows Macrovision and MAFIAA to pound AMD for providing docs revoked. But that involves politics, and the free software community was never good with that.. :-\


    Edit: I guess what I was getting at was something like this:
    since it is opensource you are free to fix it yourself.
    Wrong. I can (theoretically) fix it because there are docs. Opensource is meaningless without good docs, vendor support, or both. For reference, see nv graphics driver, or Ralink wireless driver.
    Last edited by myxal; 10-31-2009 at 07:41 PM.

  5. #35
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Seattle
    Posts
    120

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by bridgman View Post
    At the risk of offending everyone here, I guess I should make it clear that we are *not* waiting to see what decisions come out of the discussion on Phoronix before doing any work on open or closed drivers
    Oh oh... I am so offended! Please offend me more if it a dependency for Gallium3D work or kernel power management. :-)

    I think you guys are doing a bang-up job with the AMD video driver stack. Having waded through 11 years of crap Linux video drivers, the R500 support I am now enjoying is a breath of fresh air.

    I almost wish I would not have started this thread. I only was curious which API would be supported in the future. Again, thanks for the great work you guys are doing.

  6. #36
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    144

    Default

    I, for one, have been buying ATI cards only for 3-4 years because of their good open-source support.
    First because I support the ideology, second, because closed-source packages, at some point or another, conflict with system upgrades (kernel or Xorg) and I don't want to be bothered by that.
    It is quite more important for me than having UVD or any video acceleration in GPU. I'll be happy if these come, but the lack of support is not very important for me.

Posting Permissions

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