Page 19 of 20 FirstFirst ... 917181920 LastLast
Results 181 to 190 of 195

Thread: Name The Next ATI Driver Contest (2007)

  1. #181
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    PL
    Posts
    910

    Default

    7.11 - "who let the bugs out?!"

    ati does not care about our opinion that much. after all we are merely their customers. ("pay for our product and we do not care what happens next" - that's my impression of their linux attitude so far).

    if it weren't for opensource drivers i would scrap some cash for a different video card asap.

  2. #182
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    29

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by yoshi314 View Post
    7.11 - "what a hangover.... whoa! is it time for a new release already?"
    ROFTL never ending party at linux devel office

  3. #183
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    3,046

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by yoshi314 View Post
    7.11 - "who let the bugs out?!"

    ati does not care about our opinion that much. after all we are merely their customers. ("pay for our product and we do not care what happens next" - that's my impression of their linux attitude so far).

    if it weren't for opensource drivers i would scrap some cash for a different video card asap.
    Oh, they care, alright- they have to.

    Linux is the OS of cluster computing. If they don't have working drivers, you can't use their GPUs for cluster compute boost. Moreover, making THIS crowd happy is important for that same business segment- we're the ones that reccomend the hardware of that nature and the hardware everyone else buys.

    If we're not happy, then we don't reccomend their stuff in the future. If we don't reccomend, they will see lower or much lower sales.

    Now, you say, why in the Hell are we seeing the treatment we're seeing?

    Because AMD didn't know the extent of the mess ATI had made for itself and therefore for AMD- ATI butchered all but the DirectX group and the silicon design groups- either through layoffs or attrition with no replacement of the people leaving. AMD then followed this by a RIF globally because the acquisition of ATI and a few other things gave them financial indigestion and they had to appease the day traders so their stock price would stop dropping. This further reduced their manpower.

    What you're seeing is the result of a prior upper management group betting on Vista followed up by an unknowing upper management not realizing that they've got some serious problems in one of their main business segments.

    While I'm going to still poke fun at them over this debacle, I'm still willing to consider them as a viable possibility- they're seriously interacting with us at this time and they're seriously trying to fix the problems, even if the closed driver is still a big fat mess right at the moment.
    Last edited by Svartalf; 11-23-2007 at 10:36 AM.

  4. #184
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    3,046

    Default

    7.11 - The Nutshot Edition

  5. #185
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    50

    Default

    7.11:
    "Who is this 8.43 that you speak of?"
    "BUFU"(Buy Us Fuck You) edition

  6. #186
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Tehran
    Posts
    56

    Default

    I think pretty much ATI is being fucked here, we (as linux users) have put grip on them; and the market too, so some time-handling problems again because of us.
    We are making them to deliver us good stuff in minimum time, but they are acting with too much haste. Take a look at nVidia, got nearly more market than ATI, has a stable "binary, proprietary" driver and time 2 time changing one byte of code, releasing as a major release, sitting calm on a sofa, and not giving a bit of their GPU specification 2 us, and most of us think they're doing better that ATI!

    But it IS the opposite, there is much progress in ATI, but since this progress is with too much haste, their work is all fucked up.
    Most of us are willing to get binary drivers every 4 months instead of 1 month, but have it with major progresses and no bugs. This is better, both for us, and for ATI, since they can do their whatever works, with less haste and more accuracy -> which leads to our happiness, and to their more successive future.

    But I said major progress, not changing release number and say: "Hey everybody: We changed our release number system and we have released a driver with one buggy thing fixed up and having more buggy parts involved"

    This could be the way they should have acted till now, but Since they have released some of their specifications, the only thing which can please us to appreciate them, is only releasing all the specification ASAP...

    I hope someone from ATI would read these stuff i wrote here
    Last edited by klaus; 11-23-2007 at 03:37 PM.

  7. #187
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    PL
    Posts
    910

    Default

    i'd rather have ati devs follow more opensource-like model in their development (ground-up like work). fglrx/catalyst is totally ridden with bugs.

    i'd rather see ati release a basic but _stable_ 2d-only driver, and slowly expand it, month by month. but keeping it stable (and compatible with new x.org/kernel) in the first place. but that's not the way proprietary development is done - customers are just less forgiving in this case :]

    i really don't believe we'll ever see a stable and relatively bug-free fglrx/catalyst-or-whatever-the-new-name-is driver the way the development is being done now. it just seems like there is way too much bugs to fix everywhere in the driver. that's why i gave up on the driver - i just can't see it getting stable. ever.

    i'd rather use less functional but more stable opensource solution.

  8. #188
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Toronto-ish
    Posts
    7,409

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by yoshi314 View Post
    I'd rather see ati release a basic but _stable_ 2d-only driver, and slowly expand it, month by month. but keeping it stable (and compatible with new x.org/kernel) in the first place. but that's not the way proprietary development is done - customers are just less forgiving in this case :]
    Bingo... but we're doing *that* with the open source driver efforts. The opne source driver can be kept compatible with new x/kernel development, partly because it will be smaller and simpler, and partly because it will be open source so problems can be investigated quickly and easily.

  9. #189
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    PL
    Posts
    910

    Default

    does it mean you're planning to make new fglrx/catalyst driver on top of radeonhd codebase, when it matures? (not sure if the license allows that).

  10. #190
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Toronto-ish
    Posts
    7,409

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by yoshi314 View Post
    does it mean you're planning to make new fglrx/catalyst driver on top of radeonhd codebase, when it matures? (not sure if the license allows that).
    The idea is to offer a choice of drivers -- a simple, stable open source driver which can be easily tweaked to work on the newest x & kernel releases (and which can serve as a development vehicle for them), plus a more feature-rich, performance-optimized proprietary driver which will be tested and supported on specific distros.

    We probably need another Phoronix article to make the whole story clear.

Posting Permissions

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