Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Mixing open and closed source

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

  • It should not be impossilbe to hire em if your offering is good, or not?

    Comment


    • Sure, but we are not planning to do that kind of work in the open source driver either.

      Comment


      • Originally posted by bridgman View Post
        Originally posted by michal View Post
        I think he's underestimating us as well...but it's as much a vicious cycle as anything else. We don't have anywhere near as much 3D stuff as we ought to because the 3D support was suboptimal in many ways. And if I had better resources and I didn't have the LGP stuff to do, I'd probably be working on driver coding like I did with the UtahGLX stuff.
        I'm not saying you guys don't have the skills and the interest, just that practically speaking nobody has the time to spend on it. I know a number of devs who *could* do great work on a gaming-oriented high performance open source 3D driver but so far all of them feel that there are other, higher priorities for them to work on with the time that they do have available.
        Uhh, that wasn't me who said that, but does address what I was asking, so whatever...

        Originally posted by bridgman View Post
        ...the risk of RE'ing a Linux implementation of UVD support is one of the reasons that Linux video support tends to lag behind Windows support.
        Well that is truly pitiful, I thought REing was legal?! And hardware vendors need to remember that it's the software that sells your hardware repeatedly - unsuspecting customers may buy a piece of hardware once, but as they find the software sucks/doesn't deliver the hardware features, they won't fall for the trick again and WILL do proper research next time around, likely circumventing that vendor. But then again, since X11 driver features "only" affect the experience of *nix-using customers, we're back at the chicken-vs-egg problem of Linux desktop usage share.

        So the content mafiaa is effectively pressing hardware vendors to cripple the consumer's experience and hardware vendors don't bite - what has this world come to?..
        I realize it's WAY too late for DAAMIT (or anyone else aboard, for that matter) to back out of AACS. And, short of the GPL-ed OpenGraphics project miraculously becoming widely used on the desktop (yah, right...), I don't see a way this could be effectively opposed (well maybe if consumers turned back into customers, but that's wishful thinking).

        Comment


        • Originally posted by bridgman View Post
          So far, yes. Even initializing the UVD is a problem.

          Source would be a problem, unfortunately.

          Windows would be fairly hard to RE, and the risk of RE'ing a Linux implementation of UVD support is one of the reasons that Linux video support tends to lag behind Windows support.
          I expect we'll get (some amount of) open-source GPU accelerated h.264 through framewave on CAL. If we had that, how much would we really care about the UVD?

          Comment


          • Originally posted by myxal View Post
            Uhh, that wasn't me who said that, but does address what I was asking, so whatever...
            Yeah... I have no idea where *that* came from. I'm pretty sure I used the "reply" button

            Originally posted by myxal View Post
            Well that is truly pitiful, I thought REing was legal?!
            RE-ing is legal in some countries but not others. DMCA (and similar legislation in other countries) put limits on reverse engineering in areas where RE-eing would put copy protection technology at risk.

            Originally posted by myxal View Post
            And hardware vendors need to remember that it's the software that sells your hardware repeatedly - unsuspecting customers may buy a piece of hardware once, but as they find the software sucks/doesn't deliver the hardware features, they won't fall for the trick again and WILL do proper research next time around, likely circumventing that vendor.
            I think you would have to circumvent all of the major vendors today - none of us are offering open source support for the most modern HD decode hardware, although the OpenChrome drivers for Via seem to be closest. We are presumably all looking for ways to change this.

            The only thing different about AMD here is that we're actually willing to be open and talk to our customers about how copy-protection obligations affect our decisions -- I would hate to see Linux users punish us for that.

            Comment


            • Originally posted by surrealize View Post
              I expect we'll get (some amount of) open-source GPU accelerated h.264 through framewave on CAL. If we had that, how much would we really care about the UVD?
              DRM aside, the UVD block only provides acceleration of a small part of the video decode and rendering pipeline. With shader programs and textures we could still provide decent acceleration for video, HD or otherwise.

              Comment


              • Can you tell my why somebody would need to RE the DRM part? I don't think anybody would spend time for that because it is not needed at all to view unencrypted data - and thats basically the one and only way to watch hd content currently without using Win. When you look at LinDVD - that player is REALLY old and I don't think that there will be an update for BD in the near future. Or did you hear that somebody is working on a new closed source player for BD?

                Comment


                • Originally posted by bridgman View Post
                  I'm not saying you guys don't have the skills and the interest, just that practically speaking nobody has the time to spend on it. I know a number of devs who *could* do great work on a gaming-oriented high performance open source 3D driver but so far all of them feel that there are other, higher priorities for them to work on with the time that they do have available.
                  This would be me you're talking to- and I'd have to concur a bit with that assessment.

                  It's not that I can't work on this sort of stuff- there's other fires to fight right at the moment.

                  However...if my stack of things to do changes up a bit, I might find myself working on things like that as it kind of is needed by the game porting efforts and I honestly need to remove excuses (yes, excuses...) for people to keep using Windows in my business venture that I'm trying to start up.

                  Priorities change. To say that we won't be getting there isn't the same as "it'll be a while yet".

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by agd5f View Post
                    DRM aside, the UVD block only provides acceleration of a small part of the video decode and rendering pipeline. With shader programs and textures we could still provide decent acceleration for video, HD or otherwise.
                    Heh... Which is why I want OpenGL and GPGPU capabilities first and foremost. With the right muscle in the card, while it'll be less efficient than the purpose built blocks, it'll do well enough with shaders anyhow. The rest is just nice. It's not needed if I've got comparable answers elsewhere.

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by Kano View Post
                      Can you tell my why somebody would need to RE the DRM part? I don't think anybody would spend time for that because it is not needed at all to view unencrypted data - and thats basically the one and only way to watch hd content currently without using Win. When you look at LinDVD - that player is REALLY old and I don't think that there will be an update for BD in the near future. Or did you hear that somebody is working on a new closed source player for BD?
                      I certainly have little desire to play BD's- while they're nice, clear, and all, they're not worth the price in DRM I'm having to pay to watch them. Sure, when there's no DVD's I'll have an issue. But it's a smallish one.

                      If they want to view me as a thief. Fine. I'll just quit buying. Just like with any other business that treats me that way.

                      Comment


                      • I think the content provider position is that they don't view *you* as a thief, it's the other guy

                        Seriously, this is a chicken-and-egg situation right now. OEMs are starting to get more interested in Linux, and one of their big questions will be whether BD playback is important for their products. If the decision is "yes", then one or more player apps would probably show up fairly quickly. Without an obvious market, though, it's not worth it for the player app vendors to make a releaseable product.

                        Comment


                        • Hello all
                          Reading this thread there's one aspect I'd like to point out about HD video acceleration; maybe I'm wrong, but from this discussion it appears that the only benefitted from HD video acceleration would be blueray discs (with the obvious concerns revolving around media protection)... My point instead is: what about self product home movies? I mean, with HD video cameras lowering in price, it won't be long that a lot of people (me too) will start messing with HD video on their pc's. At that time I'll want HD acceleration from my video card, regardless of BD...

                          Bye

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by anduke View Post
                            Hello all
                            Reading this thread there's one aspect I'd like to point out about HD video acceleration; maybe I'm wrong, but from this discussion it appears that the only benefitted from HD video acceleration would be blueray discs (with the obvious concerns revolving around media protection)... My point instead is: what about self product home movies? I mean, with HD video cameras lowering in price, it won't be long that a lot of people (me too) will start messing with HD video on their pc's. At that time I'll want HD acceleration from my video card, regardless of BD...

                            Bye
                            The short answer is that the content providers don't care what you want, and they'll strongarm hardware vendors into restricting legal use by any method available to them until they've totally consolidated their control over consumers' ability to view or experience any kind of content on any kind of device, worldwide.

                            I have free tinfoil hats available for those who are interested.

                            Comment


                            • @ Porter
                              Sure, you have a point
                              But hardware vendors will need to sell (me and others) their new hardware (video cameras, HD tv's, BD-burners, etc., ATI's cards ). Today I can easily burn my marriage footage (for instance) on a dvd-r and throw it in a player; if there won't be an equivalent of SD chain also for HD video, hardware industry will choke on content providers' greediness: else who'll need some useless hardware? (me not > no new ATI video card to play accelerated HDvideo, no new HD video camera, no BD burner and so on)

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by anduke View Post
                                @ Porter
                                Sure, you have a point
                                But hardware vendors will need to sell (me and others) their new hardware (video cameras, HD tv's, BD-burners, etc., ATI's cards ). Today I can easily burn my marriage footage (for instance) on a dvd-r and throw it in a player; if there won't be an equivalent of SD chain also for HD video, hardware industry will choke on content providers' greediness: else who'll need some useless hardware? (me not > no new ATI video card to play accelerated HDvideo, no new HD video camera, no BD burner and so on)
                                The content providers don't care one iota about the hardware vendors' business models. As far as the content providers are concerned, the technology vendors only exist to create outlets for the content providers' product. They don't care whether users are prevented from using the devices they've purchased because of content-protection schemes that don't make good sense. All they care about is protecting their bottom line and controlling the traditional supply chain model.

                                It's a totally broken system, but it will continue until the hardware vendors finally wake up to the fact that they will have to stand up to the content companies and by doing so, protect the consumer. It used to be that government was in the business of protecting consumers, but that went away with the exponential growth of corporate lobby power.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X