Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

NVIDIA 180.51 Display Driver Released

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

  • #16
    Originally posted by rohcQaH View Post
    Yeah, so will development unhindered by testing procedures. The 180.50 release somehow didn't work on 7xxx cards any more, and nobody noticed before release

    as a nvidia user I always dread upgrading the nvidia-drivers. Regressions are way too common
    That's why 180.50/51 are pre-releases. These are specifically made to catch regressions.

    Comment


    • #17
      Originally posted by deanjo View Post
      Why hasn't vdpau been adopted even though it's by far the most complete and mature solution out there?
      VDPAU has been adopted pretty well, I think. And that's not only because it's the only video acceleration API that really works, but ironically also because of NVidia's openness and help.

      Comment


      • #18
        Originally posted by greg View Post
        VDPAU has been adopted pretty well, I think. And that's not only because it's the only video acceleration API that really works, but ironically also because of NVidia's openness and help.

        As far as the applications yes, it has been very well adopted. No argument there. So why are the other graphics players still pushing their own API's and not adopting one that already is established, deployed and works?

        Code:
        /*
         * This copyright notice applies to this header file:
         *
         * Copyright (c) 2008 NVIDIA Corporation
         * 
         * Permission is hereby granted, free of charge, to any person
         * obtaining a copy of this software and associated documentation
         * files (the "Software"), to deal in the Software without
         * restriction, including without limitation the rights to use,
         * copy, modify, merge, publish, distribute, sublicense, and/or sell
         * copies of the Software, and to permit persons to whom the
         * Software is furnished to do so, subject to the following
         * conditions:
         *
         * The above copyright notice and this permission notice shall be
         * included in all copies or substantial portions of the Software.
         *
         * THE SOFTWARE IS PROVIDED "AS IS", WITHOUT WARRANTY OF ANY KIND,
         * EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO THE WARRANTIES
         * OF MERCHANTABILITY, FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE AND
         * NONINFRINGEMENT. IN NO EVENT SHALL THE AUTHORS OR COPYRIGHT
         * HOLDERS BE LIABLE FOR ANY CLAIM, DAMAGES OR OTHER LIABILITY,
         * WHETHER IN AN ACTION OF CONTRACT, TORT OR OTHERWISE, ARISING
         * FROM, OUT OF OR IN CONNECTION WITH THE SOFTWARE OR THE USE OR
         * OTHER DEALINGS IN THE SOFTWARE.
         */
        They were handed the the golden goose and still they resist.
        Last edited by deanjo; 04-19-2009, 09:03 AM.

        Comment


        • #19
          I don't really see how they're pushing it. At least they're not doing it with any real code work. va-api seems to be pretty much dead (no commits for a year now to libva) and XvBA remains nowhere to be seen.

          Besides, have you ever looked at va-api? It's much more complicated to use than VDPAU without offering any real benefits, and it's horribly documented, which means not at all.
          Last edited by greg; 04-19-2009, 09:09 AM.

          Comment


          • #20
            Originally posted by rohcQaH View Post
            Yeah, so will development unhindered by testing procedures. The 180.50 release somehow didn't work on 7xxx cards any more, and nobody noticed before release

            as a nvidia user I always dread upgrading the nvidia-drivers. Regressions are way too common
            So, you mean they released a non final driver for review and use, catch a bug because of it, and then 2 days later release another to fix the bug? THOSE BASTARDS!!!!

            Ooops, wait a minute, isn't that the whole purpose of releasing a pre-release?
            Last edited by deanjo; 04-19-2009, 09:27 AM.

            Comment


            • #21
              Hmm the 9600 gso 512mb support must be in name only. I've had one in my secondary desktop for about a month now and it's been working fine with an older driver.

              Comment


              • #22
                Originally posted by snogglethorpe View Post
                Frankly, it doesn't matter how often nvidia releases a new driver -- their stuff is closed, and thus inherently limited by the amount of manpower they can personally throw at it, and their marketing department, and ...
                Open sourcing doesn't guarantee manpower. It presents opportunities for additional manpower but it doesn't mean it will happen. Similarly a just because a project is closed doesn't automatically mean that there isn't enough manpower to produce a quality product.

                Even if Nvidia is suffering from manpower issues as you would have the world believe, they still are releasing a higher quality product.

                And if ATI's closed drivers are so manpower starved (because they're closed) and all the real progress is by the open community then there's no point in supporting their market share since it won't impact the quality of drivers available.

                Comment


                • #23
                  Originally posted by phoronix View Post
                  The NVIDIA 185.19 Beta is still the latest in the 185.xx series, but NVIDIA has provided a pre-release of the 180.51 driver.
                  Thank you for taking the time to make the Beta/Pre-Release distinction.

                  Originally posted by Jimmy
                  Open sourcing doesn't guarantee manpower. It presents opportunities for additional manpower but it doesn't mean it will happen.
                  That is one way to spin it, another way is that it just means that anyone can fix the problems when developers screw up.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Originally posted by yogi_berra View Post
                    That is one way to spin it, another way is that it just means that anyone can fix the problems when developers screw up.
                    That's not true -- especially for non-trivial stuff like GPU programming. There are very few developers intimate with that. Of course, you always have the possibility that someone will pick it up, but often enough that doesn't mean anything.

                    And while NVidia's drivers are closed-source, they have a very open development model and communication and feedback with/from the developers are great. Some parts of the driver, like nvidia-settings and VDPAU are even open source.

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Originally posted by greg View Post
                      That's not true -- especially for non-trivial stuff like GPU programming. There are very few developers intimate with that. Of course, you always have the possibility that someone will pick it up, but often enough that doesn't mean anything.
                      Since when has familiarity with codebases stopped anyone in the community from "fixing" anything?

                      And while NVidia's drivers are closed-source, they have a very open development model and communication and feedback with/from the developers are great. Some parts of the driver, like nvidia-settings and VDPAU are even open source.
                      What does that have to do with the price of tea in Russia? If you'd bothered responding to what was said and not what you think was said you'd realize that I was not talking about nvidia's drivers or any problems with them, and you'd look less pedantic.

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Originally posted by yogi_berra View Post
                        Since when has familiarity with codebases stopped anyone in the community from "fixing" anything?
                        Just look at how many non-paid contributors are working on the radeon or intel drivers. There are lots of problems with these drivers, the manpower to fix these simply isn't there, and almost nobody is stepping up to do it.

                        What does that have to do with the price of tea in Russia? If you'd bothered responding to what was said and not what you think was said you'd realize that I was not talking about nvidia's drivers or any problems with them, and you'd look less pedantic.
                        My point is that NVidia isn't "evil" like many make them out to be.

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Originally posted by greg View Post
                          Just look at how many non-paid contributors are working on the radeon or intel drivers. There are lots of problems with these drivers, the manpower to fix these simply isn't there, and almost nobody is stepping up to do it.
                          Ignoring the fact that AMD pays people to work on the open source drivers.. look here, and here. That's over a dozen commits in the last 24 hours. I think that counts as stepping up.

                          Originally posted by greg View Post
                          My point is that NVidia isn't "evil" like many make them out to be.
                          There's quite some evidence that says otherwise.

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Originally posted by krazy View Post
                            Ignoring the fact that AMD pays people to work on the open source drivers.. look here, and here. That's over a dozen commits in the last 24 hours. I think that counts as stepping up.
                            Yet my brand spanking new ATI card with either the ATI drivers or the FOSS drivers doesn't perform as well (in Linux) as my older tech NVidia card.

                            So, seriously, I hope NVidia keeps doing what they're doing. Maybe one day ATI will catch up, but for now, it doesn't seem likely.

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Originally posted by krazy View Post
                              There's quite some evidence that says otherwise.
                              That's not evidence, that's speculation and still does not justify calling them "evil".
                              Seriously, don't use wikipedia for "evidence".

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Originally posted by deanjo View Post
                                That's not evidence, that's speculation and still does not justify calling them "evil".
                                Seriously, don't use wikipedia for "evidence".
                                Agreed. When citing sources, people should make sure that the "evidence" presented by those sources are credible and solid.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X