Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Looking Forward To UVD On Linux?

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

  • #11
    wait, so, does this mean they finally fixed the tearing issues? Because, frankly, it doesn't matter what definition the video is if the graphics drivers tear it apart before it hits the screen.

    Comment


    • #12
      Originally posted by jeffro-tull View Post
      wait, so, does this mean they finally fixed the tearing issues? Because, frankly, it doesn't matter what definition the video is if the graphics drivers tear it apart before it hits the screen.
      Hopefully...

      Comment


      • #13
        Originally posted by jeffro-tull View Post
        wait, so, does this mean they finally fixed the tearing issues? Because, frankly, it doesn't matter what definition the video is if the graphics drivers tear it apart before it hits the screen.
        That was my first thought and the thing most important to me by far. My 2nd thought is that if there's an api that is callable from gcc (like CUDA) then some really nice general purpose number crunching could be enhanced by this. Or maybe not.

        Comment


        • #14
          Originally posted by _txf_ View Post
          Hmm .. I doubt that this acceleration architecture will be available to mythtv or mplayer etc due to drm. They are going to require their own player to guarantee a protected path, and seeing as it can't be done in the kernel for obvious reasons, then thats what will happen.

          This is going to have some oem bundled proprietary playback software, so no fun for anyone trying to use this on worthwhile apps like myth...

          maybe useful, but not as much as it could be.
          Or perhaps a specially modified version of myth/mplayer to access the protected stream securely

          Comment


          • #15
            Good point... Currently looking for well balanced choices of hardware for MythTV to include in the manual togehter with a few chapters on DVB (satellite and cable). I'm very interested in the answer on this topic.

            By the way, I don't think they need their "own" player to guarantee a protected path,there are other sollutions possible.

            Maybe bridgman can clarify this?



            Originally posted by _txf_ View Post
            Hmm .. I doubt that this acceleration architecture will be available to mythtv or mplayer etc due to drm. They are going to require their own player to guarantee a protected path, and seeing as it can't be done in the kernel for obvious reasons, then thats what will happen.

            This is going to have some oem bundled proprietary playback software, so no fun for anyone trying to use this on worthwhile apps like myth...

            maybe useful, but not as much as it could be.
            Last edited by tmpdir; 10-03-2008, 03:36 AM.

            Comment


            • #16
              Originally posted by jeffro-tull View Post
              wait, so, does this mean they finally fixed the tearing issues? Because, frankly, it doesn't matter what definition the video is if the graphics drivers tear it apart before it hits the screen.
              what makes you think this ?

              Comment


              • #17
                Originally posted by jeffro-tull View Post
                wait, so, does this mean they finally fixed the tearing issues? Because, frankly, it doesn't matter what definition the video is if the graphics drivers tear it apart before it hits the screen.
                I hope so. I own a HD4850 and atm xv means tearing, which is a pain. As a workaround, opengl has vsync, so mplayer works fine with -vo gl and -vo gl2; been watching movies like that for a while.

                Comment


                • #18
                  Originally posted by DeepDayze View Post
                  Or perhaps a specially modified version of myth/mplayer to access the protected stream securely
                  Nope, as far as I'm aware mplayer and myth are licensed under GPLv2 which states that if you distribute the software you're required to post the source code with the changes included, completely defeating the purpose of the protected path...

                  Comment

                  Working...
                  X