Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

ATI dropping support for Linux?!

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Originally posted by barbarbaron View Post
    So it makes it clear that AMD's goal with opensource support is to gain a good share in hand-held market. But we are talking about a chip that doesn't need proper power-performance optimization, just power-saving is enough, which is not ideal for desktop systems. Then they have no vision about the linux desktop market which is growing rapidly:

    http://www.w3schools.com/browsers/browsers_os.asp

    I'd say its not a logical long-term strategy. Not only regarding the consumer users but because in the near future many people who work in their home studios (not only workstation people) will be involved in opengl graphics development because of webgl and phone app development boom. And the most cost-effective platform to do that will be linux.
    Wow, that's some leap of logic here! AMD is selling embedded GPUs => they have no long term plans for desktop GPUs.

    It doesn't matter that AMD has opened the specs for their products. It doesn't matter that they are directly funding the development of open source drivers for Linux. It doesn't matter that they are rapidly improving their workstation driver.

    Close your ears, shut your eyes and I guess nothing matters any more. AMD has no plans at all and history will remember barbarbaron as the one who foretold their lack of vision.

    Seems to me that some people just like to bitch.

    Comment


    • #17
      It doesn't matter that AMD has opened the specs for their products.
      They haven't opened all of the specs. Especially the power management bit of specs (which is obviously needed for desktop systems) lack information. AMD leaves the optimization of the driver (which is as hard as implementing it) to independent developers. A process which will take considerable amount of time spent in reverse engineering the power management bits. They do that because they don't need optimization for their hand-held gfx chips. You close your eyes...

      It doesn't matter that they are directly funding the development of open source drivers for Linux.
      Not the parts they don't need for their hand-held chips (power management and optimization):

      http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?pag...item&px=Nzg2Mw

      It doesn't matter that they are rapidly improving their workstation driver.
      You believe this? AMD is terribly losing in linux workstation graphics. nVidia systems are much better with their video acceleration and proper openCL - CUDA support. AMD has only recently provided the support for opencl - stream, while nVidia had that support for a looong time:

      http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?pag...item&px=NzQzNQ

      Its only a matter of time before AMD's collapse in that market...

      Keep dreaming on for a fast and reliable desktop open source - closed source linux driver...
      Last edited by barbarbaron; 01-07-2010, 05:17 PM.

      Comment


      • #18
        Originally posted by BlackStar View Post
        Wow, that's some leap of logic here! AMD is selling embedded GPUs => they have no long term plans for desktop GPUs.

        It doesn't matter that AMD has opened the specs for their products. It doesn't matter that they are directly funding the development of open source drivers for Linux. It doesn't matter that they are rapidly improving their workstation driver.

        Close your ears, shut your eyes and I guess nothing matters any more. AMD has no plans at all and history will remember barbarbaron as the one who foretold their lack of vision.

        Seems to me that some people just like to bitch.
        i think barbarbaron only try to fake kano ;-) no kano is the real one the only one...

        only kano has the power of "if you wana working driver buy a nivida"


        nivida sounds in german like niwida -->niewieder nie wieder translate to english = never again !! LOL

        Comment


        • #19
          Originally posted by barbarbaron View Post
          They haven't opened all of the specs. Especially the power management bit of specs (which is obviously needed for desktop systems) lack information.
          Citation needed.

          Not the parts they don't need for their hand-held chips (power management and optimization). Keep dreaming on for a fast and reliable desktop open source linux driver...
          I don't have to. Hint: it's already here. My R500 is running better on radeon than it ever did on fglrx.

          Comment


          • #20
            OK, this thread is getting really wierd.

            Originally posted by barbarbaron View Post
            They do that because they don't need optimization for their hand-held gfx chips. You close your eyes...
            We sold the handheld GPU business to Qualcomm a year or so ago :

            http://www.amd.com/us-en/Corporate/V...129931,00.html

            Not sure why handheld parts are still being discussed in the context of our open source strategy.

            Originally posted by barbarbaron View Post
            They haven't opened all of the specs. Especially the power management bit of specs (which is obviously needed for desktop systems) lack information.
            I believe the "missing" power management info was pushed a few weeks ago. Now comes the hard part - writing good power management code.

            Originally posted by barbarbaron View Post
            AMD leaves the optimization of the driver (which is as hard as implementing it) to independent developers. A process which will take considerable amount of time spent in reverse engineering the power management bits.
            barbarbaron, you keep implying that we are somehow deficient in OUR implementation of open source drivers because we aren't doing *everything* ourselves. WE ARE NOT IMPLEMENTING THE OPEN SOURCE DRIVERS OURSELVES. We are working WITH the Xorg development community on the drivers, providing documentation, technical support, and developers. We *help* with getting stuff running, new features, optimization, architectural changes - everything - but we aren't *controlling* any of it.

            Our "vision" is to work with the community, not to do our own thing. I know it sounds radical, but that's what we are doing.
            Last edited by bridgman; 01-07-2010, 05:51 PM.

            Comment


            • #21
              Originally posted by Qaridarium View Post
              nivida sounds in german like niwida -->niewieder nie wieder translate to english = never again !! LOL
              When did nvidia change their name to nivida...?

              Comment


              • #22
                Originally posted by bridgman View Post
                Our "vision" is to work with the community, not to do our own thing. I know it sounds radical, but that's what we are doing.
                And that is why the sane among us love you dearly. <3

                Comment


                • #23
                  Originally posted by NeoBrain View Post
                  When did nvidia change their name to nivida...?
                  thats the German joke

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Originally posted by bridgman View Post
                    OK, this thread is getting really wierd.
                    We sold the handheld GPU business to Qualcomm a year or so ago
                    Ok, so from what I gather then (please bear with me if I'm completely out to lunch on this), AMD sold Qualcomm something that amounts to hardware implementation details for a set of GPUs that contain some striking similarities to R600 series desktop GPUs.

                    Now there are no doubt a big long list of NDA's on that data to keep Qualcomm from making a big legal mess for AMD, but these NDA's would naturally not be relevant to any of the IP that AMD has released for the R600 open source driver project...

                    How big of a stretch would it be to adapt the current R600 drivers over to one of these Qualcomm-using-AMD-IP devices?

                    In other words, wouldn't it be cool if... you could run debian/gentoo/etc. straight on hardware on a GN1 (i.e. dual boot) with a full and proper install with X, Gnome, etc. The bootloader we already know is dual-boot (main + recovery)... and then adapt the android stuff into a layer on TOP of that, i.e. Canonical's Android Execution Environment. The RIL libraries, etc. should be able to be worked in without too much trouble to provide full phone functionality.

                    Would that be the ultimate phone, or what?

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Qualcomm is not enabled for that kind of thinking.

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Originally posted by bridgman View Post
                        Our "vision" is to work with the community, not to do our own thing. I know it sounds radical, but that's what we are doing.
                        If only that kind of commitment would carry over to other parts of AMD.

                        To realise my dream of an open source friendly computer...

                        I would like AMD to introduce a new "open source platform" to "force" motherboard manufacturers to select only open source friendly chipset.

                        Ideally this new platform should use coreboot instead of BIOS. Since that probably would be an impossible request it would be enough if manufacturers where forced to include a replaceable BIOS chipset along the motherboard. Preferably along with a separate tool to flash the chip.

                        Also the platform should only incorporate open source friendly chipset for network, sound etc.

                        While I'm still dreaming, this NEW platform should never incorporate old legacy stuff like IDE, ISA, PS/2, D-SUB, AGP, PCI etc. Separate adapters might be acceptable under some circumstances.



                        Edit: Short version. I know AMD/ATI is very open source friendly, but motherboard makers are not. They need a small push in the right direction.
                        Last edited by Silverthorn; 01-08-2010, 01:23 PM.

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Originally posted by rbmorse View Post
                          Qualcomm is not enabled for that kind of thinking.
                          So?
                          What does that have to do with evaluating similarity/compatibility with existing R600 drivers?

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Originally posted by Silverthorn View Post
                            Edit: Short version. I know AMD/ATI is very open source friendly, but motherboard makers are not. They need a small push in the right direction.
                            i think we need something like apple, for opensource software.
                            a company thats trying to make hardware and software work together as good as possible. but without all the drm and patentcrap apple is trying to pull
                            Last edited by Pfanne; 01-09-2010, 05:48 AM.

                            Comment

                            Working...
                            X