Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

NVIDIA Talks Of Optimus Possibilities For Linux

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

  • #16
    Originally posted by agd5f View Post
    Their driver stack is different. They could either rewrite it to use the DRI, or continue to use the mechanism that they presumably share with their windows driver. Rewriting is more work for dubious benefit, so...
    I don't expect them to use the existing DRI code, but I suppose they have something that does the same job.
    Why do they can't split their code and present their own DRI driver for kernel inclusion ?
    I fail to see what can prevent them to do that.

    Comment


    • #17
      Nvidia is a big company. Why not put some money behind their offer. Just because something is licensed under GPL does not mean it is not possible to pay the licence holder for the privilege to include and use the protected code in a closed source project.

      Comment


      • #18
        Originally posted by TheBlackCat View Post
        Yes, but as best as I can tell, it isn't his code he is trying to control, it is code written by other people. He seems to be saying that since he contributed code to the Linux kernel, he is opposed to other parts of the Linux kernel he did not write being able to interact with closed-source software in this manner. Whether this is a valid position or not is another debate.
        True, but I think he should be granted that right. At the end of the day, it is our freedom he is protecting. The goal of nvidia is to make money (nothing wrong with that), but that is not the goal of Linux. If nvidia wants to make money on the Linux market, they need to understand that.

        Comment


        • #19
          Originally posted by spykes View Post
          I don't expect them to use the existing DRI code, but I suppose they have something that does the same job.
          Why do they can't split their code and present their own DRI driver for kernel inclusion ?
          I fail to see what can prevent them to do that.
          They would likely have to rewrite and sanitize large amounts of code to be accepted upstream into the kernel. Plus, if they still have a closed source 3D driver, their kernel driver is not likely to be accepted upstream. Once again, lots of work, little benefit for anyone.

          Comment


          • #20
            Originally posted by patrik View Post
            Take a second and think about what you're saying here...

            You're arguing that higher FPS in games is more important than your freedom!!! And if Alan has written code that you can use free of charge, don't you think you owe it to him to let him decide how it is to be licensed?
            Freedom not to successfully use for any real life work? I.e. freedom to work in text console?

            Linux is meant to be run on modern hardware. It looks to me Alan Cox and you have a different opinion.

            Comment


            • #21
              Originally posted by birdie View Post
              Freedom not to successfully use for any real life work? I.e. freedom to work in text console?

              Linux is meant to be run on modern hardware. It looks to me Alan Cox and you have a different opinion.
              I think you really got something wrong there...


              Originally posted by darkbasic View Post
              No, it's sad having to use proprietary drivers.
              Nvidia, enjoy re-implementing the wheel.
              word

              Comment


              • #22
                Originally posted by birdie View Post
                Freedom not to successfully use for any real life work? I.e. freedom to work in text console?
                What real work would you need to do that is not possible without a proprietary driver? What exactly forces you to work in a text console?

                [QUOTE=birdie;248192]Linux is meant to be run on modern hardware. It looks to me Alan Cox and you have a different opinion.[/code]
                But linux is not meant to run with proprietary drivers. There's a reason that they "taint" the kernel.

                Comment


                • #23
                  Originally posted by birdie View Post
                  Freedom not to successfully use for any real life work? I.e. freedom to work in text console?
                  Yes, and free to give that freedom up and install Windows if Linux is not your cup of tea.

                  Linux is meant to be run on modern hardware. It looks to me Alan Cox and you have a different opinion.
                  I can only speak for myself, but yes. Linux is not "supposed to run on modern hardware". It's supposed to run on hardware that it has support for. If the support is lacking, you should complain to the hardware manufacturer and not argue that Linux should give up the key thing that made it successful in the first place.

                  Linux makes my life easier. Should I give that up because your hardware manufacturer isn't supporting your choice of operating system?

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Originally posted by Silverwing View Post
                    Well.. I agree on that statement. I don't give a single fuck if I have to use closed source drivers. If Nvidia doesn't want to release open source drivers, so be it. They are responsible for their drivers and they are doing quite well except for the optimus functionality. Furthermore, I use Linux because it offers me freedom. Limiting me to not use close source drivers will limit my freedom. It limits me on playing games on Linux.

                    I strongly support open source software, but I don't hate closed source software because it's closed source.
                    That last bit of freedom you're asking for can be quite expensive. If we make life easier for binary blobs, the result will be more binary blobs. More binary blobs equals less freedom. So by asking for more you get less.

                    I sometimes use closed source software as well, but I try very hard not to become dependent on it. Once you're stuck... you're stuck.

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Originally posted by gururise View Post
                      For whatever reason, the management at Nvidia will not allow this. I'd hope the kernel developers realize that not every company can, or is willing to, release OSS drivers for their product. If the kernel devs are going to object on moral grounds, why not remove support for binary blobs altogether?
                      The Linux devs know you sometimes can't release OSS drivers, and that's why the option is there. If you port a driver (which is mostly the reason why you can't open source it) you can't really say it's derived from the Linux kernel because it already worked without it. Which is why the Nvidia blob is (probably) not a violation of the GPL. But that's as far as Linus (and probably most of the other devs) want to go.
                      When you're going to use special Linux kernel features, and thus make a derivative work of it, you'll have to stick to the GPL just as everyone else.

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Originally posted by Goderic View Post
                        When you're going to use special Linux kernel features, and thus make a derivative work of it, you'll have to stick to the GPL just as everyone else.
                        Indeed. And if we assume that it turns out most of the discussion here is moot. It's not about the personal taste of individuals, it's more of a legal requirement to reject this.

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Originally posted by birdie View Post
                          Freedom not to successfully use for any real life work? I.e. freedom to work in text console?
                          You are free to use Windows, MacOS, BSD, or any other operating system you like.

                          Nobody is taking anything away from you. Leave the developers to license their code however the hell they want.

                          Or write your own kernel.

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Originally posted by birdie View Post
                            Should read as:
                            Fuck Linux as a viable gaming platform. Fuck desktop Linux.
                            We are quite content with semi-working dead slow open source drivers for ATI/NVIDIA (which don't support well power saving features thus no sane laptop user should ever use them).

                            With such an attitude Linux will always have 1-1,5% market share. And don't even get me started on Stable API nonsense and lack of real backward libraries compatibility (it's just not there).
                            This isn't a Windows or Haiku forum. I think you got lost..

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Originally posted by DanL View Post
                              This isn't a Windows or Haiku forum. I think you got lost..
                              I donīt think so.

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                i hope they left nvidia in the dark. this anti open-source company should die.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X