Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

NVIDIA's VDPAU Library Updated For DRI2 Work

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

  • NVIDIA's VDPAU Library Updated For DRI2 Work

    Phoronix: NVIDIA's VDPAU Library Updated For DRI2 Work

    NVIDIA's Aaron Plattner has announced the release of libvdpau 0.4. From November of 2008 when VDPAU was introduced to September of 2009, the Video Decode and Presentation API for Unix lived within NVIDIA's binary display driver package...

    http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=NzkzNQ

  • #2
    Good stuff, even for people on non-NVidia hardware. At least someone seems to care about video acceleration on Linux.

    Comment


    • #3
      does this mean that when vdpau comes to gallium, every single piece of graphics hardware with shader processors and a gallium driver will support vdpau?

      and can vdpau be ported to arm for use on arm compatible graphics processors with a gallium driver(if/when that happens)?

      this is some exciting stuff. gallium will totally change linux forever. gallium is such a brilliant idea!

      Comment


      • #4
        I have a quesiton:
        It's great that nvidia provides an "open" video acceleration protocol. But is there a problem, that nvidia "owns" the protocol? Say open drivers implement vdpau and then nvidia changes the protocol? Or something like this?
        Thanks.

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by bugmenot View Post
          I have a quesiton:
          It's great that nvidia provides an "open" video acceleration protocol. But is there a problem, that nvidia "owns" the protocol? Say open drivers implement vdpau and then nvidia changes the protocol? Or something like this?
          Thanks.
          Read the license.

          Comment


          • #6
            License or not, yes, this is definitely a concern.
            Nvidia came up with it, nvidia can change it.
            Nvidia can make their hardware only compatible with the "newest" iteration of it that they came up with.

            Nvidia scares the crap out of me and I *strongly resist* implementing any of their suggestions into "standard". Nvidia should be forced to comply with standards, not the other way around.

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by droidhacker View Post
              License or not, yes, this is definitely a concern.
              Nvidia came up with it, nvidia can change it.
              Nvidia can make their hardware only compatible with the "newest" iteration of it that they came up with.

              Nvidia scares the crap out of me and I *strongly resist* implementing any of their suggestions into "standard". Nvidia should be forced to comply with standards, not the other way around.
              News flash, most standards are from corporations. Intel for example could do the same thing with VA-API. Like any other project out there a change in license can happen anytime. openGL for example was basically SGI's baby,openAL was Creatives, and then there are the crapload of other protocols and API's that were developed over the years such as USB, ATA, etc. In short your concerns are unjustified. Let's put it this way, if Redhat and freedesktop give it the thumbs up then your concerns are pretty much NIH fueled FUD.

              Comment


              • #8
                deanjo:
                Intel and ATI are known to be good for the open source ecosystem. nvidia gives a shit on it. From that perspective it trust Intel and AND way more than nvidia. It's not only a license question.

                Don't get me wrong: If the protocol is better than VA API, then take it. I am the last, who says "No, don't implement it, just because it's from nvidia". If it's the best, if there are no concerns regarding the license and if it's open and also no concerns regarding the problem I asked for, then take it.

                I'd also be interested in a developers view, if VDPAU is suitable for e.g. AMD or Intel cards, although VDPAU is developed (?) for nvidia cards. And which accel technology they contemplate. And why.

                Thx again.

                Comment


                • #9
                  why do so many people have problems with nvidia as a company?

                  what's bad about them other than being a little controlling and having a closed driver, have they ever done anything against free software?

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by portets43 View Post
                    why do so many people have problems with nvidia as a company?

                    what's bad about them other than being a little controlling and having a closed driver, have they ever done anything against free software?
                    Four reasons, mainly:

                    1. they pursue an aggressive lock-in strategy instead of open standards (Physx, TWIMTBP, paying developers to remove features when running on competitors' hardware - see for example Assassin's Creed)

                    2. their model numbers are intentionally misleading (continuous renames, parts with different specs sold under the same names, marketing madness). Gee, you can buy a GT360 now, which is the same as the 260, which was the same as the 9800, which was a slightly beefed up version of the 8800. Nice! Cookies for anyone who can tell what DX version and what video acceleration level each of those supports without looking it up.

                    3. because they dealt the death blow to 3dfx

                    4. because they are indifferent/hostile to the idea of open-source drivers

                    Otherwise they produce pretty good software and hardware.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by bugmenot View Post
                      deanjo:
                      Intel and ATI are known to be good for the open source ecosystem. nvidia gives a shit on it. From that perspective it trust Intel and AND way more than nvidia. It's not only a license question.
                      The mere fact that vdpau was released freely contradicts that statement, nvidia has always participated in open standards. They are a key figure in the Khronos group after all and many of their extensions get put into the official specs of openCL, openGL, etc etc. Not to mention the help they have offered back in the opensource community in the implementation with it.

                      If it's the best, if there are no concerns regarding the license and if it's open and also no concerns regarding the problem I asked for, then take it.
                      That's the thing, there are no license issues and it is by every definition open.

                      I'd also be interested in a developers view, if VDPAU is suitable for e.g. AMD or Intel cards, although VDPAU is developed (?) for nvidia cards. And which accel technology they contemplate. And why.

                      Thx again.
                      VDPAU was developed for any card, it is not a driver, it is an API, currently only nvidia and S3 GPU's support it but given proper driver support it can be used for pretty much any card. Again I have to refer back to what MostAwesomeDude posted back here:

                      http://article.gmane.org/gmane.comp....top.xorg/40358

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        i'm not convinced that nvidia is a bad company. they do support open source it seems.

                        but why would they open source their driver? i wouldn't if i were them. and i'm all for running completely open source everything.

                        if a majority of people used linux, it might be an option.
                        imagine if nvidia announced they went open source. 90+% of their users wouldn't care in ANY WAY.(windows users)

                        and in the process, they would give all their trade secrets to everyon.


                        VERY BAD MOVE


                        on another note, it seems that almost all hardware/software companies want an open source platform.
                        EA Games has said that they'd rather develop for an open source console.
                        i bet many companies would

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Thanks for the link, deanjo.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by portets43 View Post
                            if a majority of people used linux, it might be an option.
                            imagine if nvidia announced they went open source. 90+% of their users wouldn't care in ANY WAY.(windows users)

                            and in the process, they would give all their trade secrets to everyon.

                            VERY BAD MOVE
                            Yeah because it's all such a secret, total bs. :P

                            The reason is due to DRM crap that I don't want to pay for nor want on my machine any way that just complicates things and raises prices.

                            DO NOT WANT

                            I'll stick to the open source drivers when I can kthnx.

                            Comment

                            Working...
                            X