Page 6 of 6 FirstFirst ... 456
Results 51 to 57 of 57

Thread: Radeon Gallium3D Still Long Shot From Catalyst

  1. #51
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    464

    Default

    JB, I just wanted to thank you for responding openly to my earlier query. I just had a chance to read an digest it.

    I would like to give the matter additional thought. My current opinion on the matter is that there is a free platform available that will run on 99% of commodity hardware, and nobody is currently leveraging it. Installation of this platform is so incredibly easy that it isn't even required (LiveCD/USB). If I were in AMDs position, I would put together a bare-bones distro (Kernel, X, Mesa, SDL, a steam-like-client, and the demos with the hot cg chick) and leverage it to showcase AMD's technology. The result would be that 'every' AMD powered PC becomes a console.

    I realize that this is a lot like what sony did with FreeBSD (cellOS) and GLES2 (libgcm/PSGL), the difference would be that you already have a huge installation base. Existing customers that have a positive experience on the platform continue to purchase AMD tech, customers of "the other tech and platform vendors" will look over the shoulder of your customers and say "Hey what's that? How can I get that?".

    I'll think more about what you said tonight, but as far as I can tell, a million bucks and two years could quickly turn into market domination for a tech vendor. You don't need Sony or Microsoft.

  2. #52
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    464

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by nightmarex View Post
    While GSoC is useful,unfortunately there seems to be a bunch of unfinished projects/tasks or unimplemented features happening with it.
    I believe that the same can be said of any org that funds software development. Not all pound puppies find homes. It's sad. I wonder if GSOC is statistically better or worse than other similar initiatives (and why).

    Now I'm sad about puppies. Look what you've done!

  3. #53
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    5,411

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by bridgman View Post
    - when SKUs *are* sold either with Linux or without any OS there is wild disagreement on what OS they end up with... pirated Windows, some form of Linux, or something else
    "Pirated Windows" is a side effect of bad driver support for linux.

    the people buy Linux hardware then they get doomed by the hardware company with bad drivers and then they install windows and because they hate Microsoft they pirate the windows.

    imagine the case that the people are getting perfect Linux drivers then they don't need to warz windows.

    sure Microsoft MAFIA company’s will never admit this argument as valid because they think that the people won't use Linux even if ALL is perfect.

    only MAFIA Criminals think in this way because they make sure with violence that Linux is not perfect.

    Violence=directX,win32-API,windows file server,Patent FUD like fat32-h264 codex, copyprotection and drm DVD Blueray and so one and so one.

    its the same MAFIA hurting you with bullets to make sure you "Pay" the Security "Tax"

  4. #54
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    219

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Qaridarium View Post
    sure but your argument about the kernel source size is still bullshit.

    20 years ago the kernel source was so much smaller maybe we should use a time travelling engine to go back in time to be sure the kernel source is smaller...

    this is just bullshit!

    and hey don't write code this makes the kernel source bigger ans we all know this is "bad" LOL

    Bridgman bullshit logic at work..

    every time you add code to the kernel, you increase the likely hood of bugs in the kernel.adding more bugs to a already enormous and buggy kernel, isn't the solution.

  5. #55
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    5,411

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Thatguy View Post
    every time you add code to the kernel, you increase the likely hood of bugs in the kernel.adding more bugs to a already enormous and buggy kernel, isn't the solution.
    the quality is the key the bugs per 1000 lines of code is very low for kernel code.

    because of this it would be a improvement of bug free graphic driver code.

  6. #56
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    77

    Default

    That would great for the *BSD (and other) guys, I am sure they'll be thrilled to see more previously "generic" code move to be Linux specific.

  7. #57
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    464

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by geearf View Post
    That would great for the *BSD (and other) guys, I am sure they'll be thrilled to see more previously "generic" code move to be Linux specific.
    My feeling is that they will be exactly as happy as the *Linux (and other) guys are when they see closed-source offerings derived from BSD (CellOS for the PS3 being a good example).

    Edit: A closer look at my PS3 reveals that the OS may be more Darwin-like than FreeBSD-like. My statement still stands though, despite the (possibly) bad example.
    Last edited by russofris; 03-27-2012 at 08:02 PM.

Posting Permissions

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