Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 47

Thread: Donations for OSS ATI driver

  1. #21
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    2,328

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by crazycheese View Post
    Not anymore. Nowadays they are either linux users, linux haters or "app X, I need, does not work on linux" type. Ask anyone what is Android or Iphone? I think around 50% of population are linux aware.
    Not even close. I can't even count the number of people who are familiar with android but have never heard of Linux. Even a fair number of people who know of Linux were surprised when I told them android was based on the Linux kernel. Google doesn't exactly go out of its way to say that android is based on Linux. I've also read a number of articles about smartphones and android in major publications like Newsweek or Business Week, and they rarely, if ever, mention any relation between Android and Linux, or even mention Linux in the article at all.

    Android is one thing, but desktop Linux is another. Many people have heard of android or perhaps Linux on embedded devices or servers, but not Linux on desktops PCs. "I thought Linux was for servers."


    Quote Originally Posted by crazycheese View Post
    I always thought that OPEN code is best to be shared across different environiments. Why wouldn't just everyone invent his own languge, protect it and use only privately, suing everyone trying to understand him? You are not inventors or scientists - you are brokers. You invent barriers for consumer money, then you try to build doors for consumer money or emulate via glass windows. And when people ask if they can help build without it - you offer them a shelter out of paper for free.
    We are in the business of making money for our shareholders. In order to do that we have to decide where to focus investment to get the best return for our money. Right now, desktop Linux is not were the money is. It would be great if it were, but it's not right now.

    As to providing a open platform, due to the laws of most countries were we sell our products, certain parts have to be closed source to protect our investments and our ability to sell into major markets. If you don't like the laws, call your congressman.

    Also, Linux doesn't encourage the sharing of source between OSes. The maintainers want the code to match the kernel coding style and will reject code that doesn't match. There are tons of open source drivers out there that use an OS abstraction layer to share the code between OSes, but they are never allowed upstream in Linux. It's not likely that our closed driver would be allowed upstream if we decided to open source without out a major rewrite. So I guess it would be a good investment to rewrite thousands of man years of source code to get it into the Linux kernel and then write a proper infrastructure to support all the advanced features available for 1-2 precent of the desktop market.

    Quote Originally Posted by crazycheese View Post
    I know microsoft uses a lot of (almost all) cash to bribe - its not something new.
    Also know that almost every linux desktop user was a windows user and switched for reason. If microsoft would behave, linux would just be a small alternate opensource kernel for windows.
    MS has done some questionable things, but I wouldn't call building a decent well documented graphics stack a bribe.

  2. #22
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Posts
    101

    Default

    Not even close. I can't even count the number of people who are familiar with android but have never heard of Linux. Even a fair number of people who know of Linux were surprised when I told them android was based on the Linux kernel. Google doesn't exactly go out of its way to say that android is based on Linux. I've also read a number of articles about smartphones and android in major publications like Newsweek or Business Week, and they rarely, if ever, mention any relation between Android and Linux, or even mention Linux in the article at all.

    Android is one thing, but desktop Linux is another. Many people have heard of android or perhaps Linux on embedded devices or servers, but not Linux on desktops PCs. "I thought Linux was for servers."
    Yes, and there are even articles talking about Android and ChromeOS moving into netbooks and competing with Linux in those spaces.

  3. #23
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    1,591

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by agd5f View Post
    MS has done some questionable things, but I wouldn't call building a decent well documented graphics stack a bribe.
    wasn't gallium supposed to -apart from making dev life easier- to sort out the graphic stack problems??

    and if not whats missing???

  4. #24
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    2,328

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by 89c51 View Post
    wasn't gallium supposed to -apart from making dev life easier- to sort out the graphic stack problems??

    and if not whats missing???
    It's a big step in the right direction. The open source stack has come a long ways in the last 2-3 years. We basically dragged it out of the 1980s to something approaching a modern desktop. As for what's missing:
    - decent presentation layer
    - decent multi-buffer support
    - decent video decode and presentation API
    - decent API documentation
    Also, it would have been nice if OpenGL had dropped the legacy fixed function stuff like DX 10 did. That's part of what makes developers like DX10.

  5. #25
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    332

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by agd5f View Post
    Also, it would have been nice if OpenGL had dropped the legacy fixed function stuff like DX 10 did. That's part of what makes developers like DX10.
    didnt they do that with opengl3?
    thought that happened already.

  6. #26
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    1,591

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by agd5f View Post
    It's a big step in the right direction. The open source stack has come a long ways in the last 2-3 years. We basically dragged it out of the 1980s to something approaching a modern desktop. As for what's missing:
    - decent presentation layer
    - decent multi-buffer support
    - decent video decode and presentation API
    - decent API documentation
    Also, it would have been nice if OpenGL had dropped the legacy fixed function stuff like DX 10 did. That's part of what makes developers like DX10.
    Pardon my ignorance and noob questions that are going to follow but i am trying to get it right. (Everytime i think i know whats going on, something pops up and i go back to zero )

    By presentation layer you mean X server?? If yes doesn't wayland solve the problem??? (it's a long way but with a bit more manpower things can speed up)
    As for video there is VDPAU and VA-API and i seem to recall that there was some work done to implement them in a G3D state tracker. So with enough devs this can be solved.

    As for multiple buffers i have no idea where that fits :noob :shame:


  7. #27
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    1,946

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by agd5f View Post
    Not even close. I can't even count the number of people who are familiar with android but have never heard of Linux.
    Its nice you informed them =)
    I can only imagine people unaware of linux are those, that also never used Internet.

    Quote Originally Posted by agd5f View Post
    Android is one thing, but desktop Linux is another. Many people have heard of android or perhaps Linux on embedded devices or servers, but not Linux on desktops PCs. "I thought Linux was for servers."
    So, what is missing to make it non-"server stereotype" os?
    Win Server is also "server" os.
    "I thought linux was for servers" is "cannot use due to software X not available in linux" thing.
    Wine cares of the situation, the remaining issue is only graphics stack.
    Only gfx stack.
    On 3D - especially AMD and Intel stacks.
    Major blockage due to gfx, 99% of people recommend nvidia for linux when it comes to 3D.
    Nvidia is working proprietary sector. There is no working opensource sector.


    Quote Originally Posted by agd5f View Post
    We are in the business of making money for our shareholders. In order to do that we have to decide where to focus investment to get the best return for our money. Right now, desktop Linux is not were the money is. It would be great if it were, but it's not right now.
    That means I must either purchase all AMD shares or make Linux desktop attractive for you by myself? :/ I know that every company exists for purpose of making money, but proprietary is not related to commercial. Unless its a leasing type company, IP-leasing, not selling products.

    Quote Originally Posted by agd5f View Post
    As to providing a open platform, due to the laws of most countries were we sell our products, certain parts have to be closed source to protect our investments and our ability to sell into major markets. If you don't like the laws, call your congressman.
    "Your" investments? Laws in my country legally allow opensource.

    Ok I understand. Sumed up - there is no interest in linux as operating system, development is currently destined to throttle by company policy.
    There is massive interest in opensource within population, but the dicision is to stay proprietary on proprietary system. You put my money into microsoft and similar closed solutions and glad to make yourself dependent from proprietary technology, like Nokia. In proprietary field nvidia is already there with support, amd opensource proofed (to me, very sadly) to be paper marketing show unreliable to build upon.

    On AMD there is fglrx, which I dont need, so the company decision is made obvious.

    Nvidia uses my money to build both windows and linux driver, acceptable, if not its blob insecure, uncorrectable nature.

    Card itself dies in ~8 years, nvidia driver is updated to ca. 10 years with almost immediate time support and full feature support exotic multi monitor setups excluded.
    If I purchase AMD I pay for windows driver. The policy is not changeable.

    I will purchase hw that advertises right now best for opensource I use. Period.

    There is NO opensource graphics company right now on the market. Not many options.

    Im proud to be educated and aware of linux. This is not hate-response or troll-response(that people enjoy to stereotypically mark) - this is respectful logical decision.

    Many thanks for all your input and time.

  8. #28
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    2,328

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Pfanne View Post
    didnt they do that with opengl3?
    thought that happened already.
    It was proposed, but the legacy fixed function stuff was kept in the end.

  9. #29
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    5,411

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by agd5f View Post
    It was proposed, but the legacy fixed function stuff was kept in the end.
    compatibility is not a weakness in generall.

    Offtopic: some people wana help why no one care about that fact?

  10. #30
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    1,946

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Qaridarium View Post
    compatibility is not a weakness in generall.

    Offtopic: some people wana help why no one care about that fact?
    I second that. A lot of people wanna help, Q. 99,99% people with AMD cards I know on mail.ru have pruchased AMD cards or laptops with AMD cards because of open drivers. Only because of open drivers. Big unanswered question if AMD really cares about linux not on workstation and about people that use linux as home/work/game PC.

    Adapting old pipeline is something I, now, understand. No card for 40$ perform with OpenGL3+ anyway, which is the only target segment anyway.

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

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