Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

To the AMD people: Money wasted.

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

  • #91
    Originally posted by popper View Post
    Err WINE have always stated "Wine is not an emulator", and in that sense they are Right, it's Not Hard to understand,
    they Wrap a given routine as found on one API and map it to another routine of anther API Nothing more, were it gets tricky OC is when one API Does Not have the same functionality and so Emulation is the order of the day For That missing Routine Nothing More, get it ?

    also. it's clear if you bother to look, that under the Hood the NT and related API are very much a clone of many of the generic Unix Posix, hence why Wine Dev's continue to progress, there's no rule to say they cant add New Posix like code and extend the Wine API to better fit the current NT and related API so wrapping it instead of emulating these missing parts etc....
    Do read: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emulator

    The technology of emulation is very different.
    It can start from mapping one function on another as in directx 5 app calling actuall directx 9 layer.
    It can extend to mapping one function with rework on corresponding function of another system.
    It can go further to mapping low level interrupt calls to operating system functions.
    It can extend to completely parsing binary-level assembler and remap it into function alls of specific operating system running on same or different hardware.

    However, wherever we call WINE an emulator or Not Emulator, it does not matter - we both know the functionality it gives and it is fine so.

    I wish Wine developers best of luck, just that they dont get in the way of getting TRUE native code. Money is sometimes bad thing.

    Comment


    • #92
      Originally posted by Svartalf View Post
      That POSIX layer is marginally adequate and requires something like Cygwin to properly do things. Most code that's written for Windows doesn't go to those edges because they're almost useless to all.
      Note i never said its a 'good' clone of Posix

      Comment


      • #93
        Originally posted by BlackStar View Post
        I love the hipocricy. On one hand he pans open-source support for 6xxx cards, on the other hand he praises driver support for nvidia which doesn't even have OSS drivers for 4x0 and 5x0 - and not even a single open-source developer.

        Yeah, right.
        Hypocricy? Where? I was comparing the functionality of the two alternatives, hence the 'it works' or 'just works' concept. Perhaps, you might try reading more closely before you decide to insult since you're not very good at it.

        Last info I received is the HD 6xxx cards don't have a functional FOSS driver whereas if you have a new Nvidia card, you will get a working card albeit closed source drivers. Btw, closed source drivers don't seem to be an option with those ATI cards either, at least not officially. But, nice try at grasping for straws.

        Comment


        • #94
          Originally posted by Mr James View Post
          What does that have to do with anything?
          If you buy Windows games to run them on Linux then you are part of the problem. Think about it for a moment.

          Nope. I'm saying nVidia is running games on linux better than ATI does. The problem is not Linux but rather the damn AMD driver - the point of this thread.
          If Ati runs native Linux applications fine but fails with Wine, then the issue probably lies with Wine rather than Ati. Simple test: how does Wine run on Intel/Radeon/Nouveau?

          I am saying that as of today's date, real gaming in Linux is achieved through wine. Plain and simple. Is it the correct thing? No. Do I like this fact? No. Should it change? Yes. But this is reality my friend.
          I have never *ever* gamed on Wine, so I'd say that you are quite mistaken. I buy commercial games with native Linux releases; I play free Linux games; I play browser games; I play games in emulators; and I have a dual-boot installation for those games that are not available on Linux.

          Of course, if by "real" you mean Windows-only titles, then man up, be a "real" gamer and install Windows. Do you see console gamers bitch that their games do not run on Windows? No, you don't, because that would be dumb. Yet you are bitching that Windows-only games don't run on Linux using a buggy emulator.

          I don't think the problem lies with Ati here.

          Comment


          • #95
            Originally posted by Panix View Post
            Hypocricy? Where? I was comparing the functionality of the two alternatives, hence the 'it works' or 'just works' concept. Perhaps, you might try reading more closely before you decide to insult since you're not very good at it.

            Last info I received is the HD 6xxx cards don't have a functional FOSS driver whereas if you have a new Nvidia card, you will get a working card albeit closed source drivers.
            And that's your hipocricy right there. Nvidia cards don't have a FOSS driver either, yet you somehow hold that against Ati - and not Nvidia.

            Btw, closed source drivers don't seem to be an option with those ATI cards either, at least not officially.
            Seems like someone is grasping at straws here - and that ain't me.

            Comment


            • #96
              Originally posted by Mr James View Post
              What does that have to do with anything?

              Nope. I'm saying nVidia is running games on linux better than ATI does. The problem is not Linux but rather the damn AMD driver - the point of this thread.

              I am saying that as of today's date, real gaming in Linux is achieved through wine. Plain and simple. Is it the correct thing? No. Do I like this fact? No. Should it change? Yes. But this is reality my friend.
              The problem with some of these thought processes by fellows such as Blackstar and pingufunybeat is this constant straight-line thinking.

              One can't make a point and support a system yet still be critical of it.

              I support the OSS driver concept but I still can call a spade a spade. If I feel the support/resources/money seems low for what you get, then why can't one criticize that? Is AMD not a big company?

              If Windows is the majority market consumer OS and Nvidia choose to have compatibility, why can't ATI? The Wine devs use Nvidia hardware but not ATI so much? Why is that? Are these OSS fanatics going to deny that ATI/AMD chooses to have full support for Windows? No, they will overlook that and cover their eyes... *no, I choose to not look!*

              Talk about hypocrisy!

              Would Linux be better off without ntfs-3g? Maybe they should scrap that and outlaw use of it? It's bad and contrary to the strict rules and concepts of the open source community! C'mon, give me a break!

              Comment


              • #97
                Originally posted by BlackStar View Post
                And that's your hipocricy right there. Nvidia cards don't have a FOSS driver either, yet you somehow hold that against Ati - and not Nvidia.

                Seems like someone is grasping at straws here - and that ain't me.
                No, I hate Nvidia for that. I wouldn't even look at getting a Nvidia card if ATI's drivers were more functional. It seems there would be problems no matter what card or which driver.

                The entire consensus seems to be for Nvidia, is it is closed but will generally work. You are against practicality but don't judge me if I go with it. That's not fair.

                My beef with ATI is the low resources given to it by AMD while claiming to have 'good' support. Four developers for the FOSS driver and then there's applause because they might hire one more? Congrats.

                They are getting closer to the binary Nvidia blob with their own binary blob. Good. But, the gap with Windows is still wide and large. Support is not same day release like it is with Nvidia and I am talking about the binary.

                Just because I am desiring more resources given doesn't mean I support no open source options or Nvidia's policy. I am more than annoyed with the Optimus situation so that if I buy a laptop, I will not pick any Nvidia solution.

                If I complete the build of my 2nd machine, I will buy an ATI card so that I can test it. Kano is right in that respect, it's way better to conduct tests with another machine. Especially if it's two 'different' cards.

                Anyway, I have said my two cents and don't want to argue anymore. I know there's a good mix of perspectives here so I'll let them continue.

                Comment


                • #98
                  If Windows is the majority market consumer OS and Nvidia choose to have compatibility, why can't ATI?
                  How do you define compatibility? Because Nvidia is not the panacea you make it seem. I could start listing my Nvidia gripes but that wouldn't be constructive.

                  Suffice to say that Wine is the least of their problems (both for Nvidia *and* Ati).

                  The Wine devs use Nvidia hardware but not ATI so much? Why is that?
                  Because Ati's 3d drivers used to be pretty bad in the past, so Wine developers flocked to Nvidia. Ati has improved tremendously these past three years but Wine remains Nvidia-centric.

                  Comment


                  • #99
                    "Blackstar:Suffice to say that Wine is the least of their problems (both for Nvidia *and* Ati)."

                    so wait a few weeks and go buy a New SandyBridge and get a free Encode/Decode HD Engine with that new and improved internal Gfx chip and free OSS Driver code for your laptop or new desktop, perhaps get a dual/Quad PCiE slot Motherboard too so you can keep trying your other Gfx Cards without pulling them each time too

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by Panix View Post
                      No, I hate Nvidia for that. I wouldn't even look at getting a Nvidia card if ATI's drivers were more functional. It seems there would be problems no matter what card or which driver.

                      The entire consensus seems to be for Nvidia, is it is closed but will generally work. You are against practicality but don't judge me if I go with it. That's not fair.
                      I don't judge you for that but for comparing apples with oranges. If you compared Radeon with Nouveau, you'd see that the former is in a much better shape than the latter. Between fglrx and nvidia, nvidia wins but it's still *very* buggy (much more than the equivalent Windows driver in fact).

                      It just happens that Nvidia's bugs are in less annoying places than Ati's: suspend/resume failures, constant multi-monitor problems, security issues. But hey, Wine works so who cares?

                      My beef with ATI is the low resources given to it by AMD while claiming to have 'good' support. Four developers for the FOSS driver and then there's applause because they might hire one more? Congrats.
                      Ati does not develop the OSS drivers themselves. They never did, they never said they will do, they don't actually *need* to do this. All they said is that they will release specs for the community to peruse at its leisure.

                      The fact that they are hiring people is indeed a big deal.

                      They are getting closer to the binary Nvidia blob with their own binary blob. Good. But, the gap with Windows is still wide and large. Support is not same day release like it is with Nvidia and I am talking about the binary.
                      Have you ever compared Nvidia's Windows and Linux drivers? There is a huge quality gap in favor of Windows.

                      Yet you only hold this against Ati.

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X