Meaning the problem is compromising the DRM on Windows. Meaning that if it was already compromised, that problem would no longer exist.to avoid releasing anything which might compromise the DRM on other OSes.
I'm gonna be honest. It's NOT obvious. Maybe lots of stuff is going on behind the scenes, but from an end-user viewpoint it really looks like nothing is happening. When gbeauche discovers silly little bugs that would be a 1-liner to fix in the driver and nothing happens for 6 months leaving an entire generation of cards useless, I think it's fair to say that not much is happening. Or else the bureaucracy involved makes the federal government look like a well-oiled machine. I guess i had pretty much just assumed that AMD was happy with UVD support going only to embedded systems, or other paying customers, and that desktop linux users were going to be left in the cold. Are you officially saying that's not the case?Not sure about your last point. It should be pretty obvious by now that we *are* working on providing video accel support via the Catalyst driver... it just got leaked/discovered early so now you all get to watch how long development really takes instead of just being pleasantly surprised by a press release one day.
I don't know, it depends on the design of the hardware i guess. It worked for Sony, though, because the PS3 only got hacked after trying to close it down.Providing open source support for UVD in order to stop hackers from reverse-engineering it would be like a bank giving away all its money in order to make sure it didn't get robbed.