Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

3D Optimizations and UVD... AMD_hal.so!

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

  • #61
    Originally posted by amirel View Post
    Sorry again, bridgman. I understand your position --- I guess, it coincides with AMD official position. What was my question actually about: does the AMD have any plans to get rid of this "one company" dictate? Simply speaking, can we expect brighter future or not?
    I don't think AMD can play any role here. It's up to companies like CyberLink to release Linux versions of their players.

    Comment


    • #62
      http://shop.canonical.com/product_in...73009a56c8e4df

      Comment


      • #63
        Hey, that's great. And it seems it has been offered for quite some time. So I guess the argument of not being able to legally play protected content on Linux doesn't really apply anymore?

        Comment


        • #64
          Originally posted by bridgman View Post
          Ahh, I get it. I think my initial comment might have been a bit ambiguous.

          I was not trying to say "you must accept a closed source DRM solution", just "without a legal-in-all-markets BD solution, which today implies a closed source stack, you're going to have a tough time getting OEMs to aggressively market systems with preloaded Linux -- and without OEM preloads the *visible* Linux market share is probably not going to grow as quickly as some folks would like".

          Sorry about the lack of clarity there.
          I'm sorry but I am 100% convinced that your wrong. Most distro's wont ship with a proprietary implementation preloaded. They dont come preloaded with your drivers now. What makes you think that will change once DRM is implemented?

          The faster we get an open source work around that will come preloaded, unlike your closed implementation, the better off we will all be.... The goal for everyone right now should simply be an open source solution. It's the only answer that makes sense.

          Comment


          • #65
            If it's not preloaded, install it afterwards. I don't see the problem.

            Comment


            • #66
              Originally posted by bridgman
              We also need to make sure that we don't release information (or raise the starting point for reverse-engineering which results in someone else releasing information) which would allow our DRM implementation to be cracked but not our competitors.
              Heeeeyy, would that mean you could release information that could crack everyone's DRM?

              Comment


              • #67
                Yeah, but we need to make sure we don't do that. It's the main reason supporting open source graphics development is so time consuming and expensive.

                The bigger risk is releasing info which allows *our* DRM implementation to be cracked but not those of our competitors.

                RealNC; the content protection rules for DVD are a lot less restrictive than for BluRay. The Cyberlink player that rbmorse linked to is DVD only as far as I know.
                Last edited by bridgman; 02-10-2009, 11:27 AM.

                Comment


                • #68
                  Originally posted by RealNC View Post
                  I don't think AMD can play any role here. It's up to companies like CyberLink to release Linux versions of their players.
                  And why would anybody want linux versions of those players? The video codec is already supported. The audio codec is already supported. The container format is already supported. The subtitle format is already supported. The menu format is already supported. The only thing left for an open source player to work is developing a real time decrypter to get around DRM, and that work is already progressing nicely.

                  My guess is right now we'll likely have a working open source player before the year is out.

                  Comment


                  • #69
                    Originally posted by duby229 View Post
                    And why would anybody want linux versions of those players? The video codec is already supported. The audio codec is already supported. The container format is already supported. The subtitle format is already supported. The menu format is already supported. The only thing left for an open source player to work is developing a real time decrypter to get around DRM, and that work is already progressing nicely.

                    My guess is right now we'll likely have a working open source player before the year is out.
                    The point is that this is illegal. Decrypters are not authorized by the content owners. Only authorized players enable you to legally play this content on your PC. Hence my point about CyberLink. That's how it is. When you rent or buy a DVD or BD, you agree to its license. If you don't agree, stop watching them.

                    Of course most of us ignore legal issues.

                    Comment


                    • #70
                      They are completely legal here in most of Europe. Why would anyone pay for a player when there are better open-source alternatives available.

                      Comment


                      • #71
                        and in some countries it is legal to crack copy protection to use content you paaid for. But the content mafia is doing everything to change that. Luckily politicians are cheap.

                        Comment


                        • #72
                          They used to sell only the DVD players only to OEMs not end users. It would be a nice addon to a fast booting linux environment - just accelleration is needed then. Currently those system use only vesa capable xservers. I tried to install NV binary drivers on Moblin but was unsuccessfull. The kernel module compiled but there was an issue with the X server. So for embeeded use in BD players you have to create something that really boots fast.

                          Comment


                          • #73
                            Originally posted by RealNC View Post
                            The point is that this is illegal. Decrypters are not authorized by the content owners. Only authorized players enable you to legally play this content on your PC. Hence my point about CyberLink. That's how it is. When you rent or buy a DVD or BD, you agree to its license. If you don't agree, stop watching them.

                            Of course most of us ignore legal issues.
                            The DMCA can suck on a big fat apple whole. I am firm believer in FAIR USE. According to the fair use act, it is perfectly legal. As far as I'm aware that act is still in place. Any contradictions that happen can be sorted out by the politicians. And if ATi wants to aviod that mess, all they have to do is simply dont release documentation that puts them at risk. And that would be doing me a great favor. Frankly I dont want DRM laden hardware. The less DRM laden documentation we have the better off we will all be. If we could develop a driver that was completely DRM free, that would be the ideal. And I believe that it is possible to do just that. All this making excuses about how necessary DRM is... Is well, bullshit.
                            Last edited by duby229; 02-11-2009, 05:32 PM.

                            Comment

                            Working...
                            X