Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 11

Thread: What Happened To XGI Graphics?

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    13,475

    Default What Happened To XGI Graphics?

    Phoronix: What Happened To XGI Graphics?

    XGI Technology is still in business, but what has happened to them? We once saw hope in them for providing discrete graphics processors to take on the NVIDIA and ATI duopoly, but they have since discontinued their Volari 8 series. While they're no longer producing these desktop chips, they remain an active player in the server and embedded graphics industry -- accompanied by their open-source driver.

    http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=9835

  2. #2
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Nurnberg.
    Posts
    302

    Cool Oh yeah, do name those developers.

    Nice how you left out the work of one key developer in this whole thread.

    The sort of developer who didn't make sure he was in the spotlight all the time and also didn't get paid for any such development.

    He left a year and a half ago, after more than half a decade of high X dedication.
    He worked on modesetting, a driver subsystem no-one before 2006 ever bothered to care about (especially not those people who are verbose about it now, as they were the opposite then), and his driver supported features that really were years ahead of his time there.
    He was the first to provide actual EXA support in his code, beating others by a month or so.
    He put the code XGI released in 2005 right there were it belonged.

    Yet apparently, that person is to be ignored completely, now that people finally started to care about X.

    I'm reasonably certain that this is exactly one of the reasons why such a valuable and highly clued developer throws in the towel.

    Do some digging.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    3,046

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by libv View Post
    Nice how you left out the work of one key developer in this whole thread.
    Okay, considering that I couldn't find a lot about this supposedly key developer (I'm not questioning you, it's just that...) I couldn't find out who he was with a pretty intensive Google search based on the hints you dropped... If you wanted him to get recognition, you did him a disservice by doing things the way you did- he's going to stay unknown that way.

    Nice of you to do that for him.

    Nobody mentions my work in the EARLY OpenGL acceleration support for Linux.

    Nobody mentions my groundbreaking work in Embedded Linux systems.

    Do you see ME whining about it or throwing in the towel?

    Yet apparently, that person is to be ignored completely, now that people finally started to care about X.
    Could it be that he kept such a low profile in things, by the way he tried to stay out of the limelight, that he may be a complete unknown? Here's a hint- sanctimonious acrimony about this person being "ignored" without naming the person and telling people who he/she was is no different than ignoring them. All it does is keep them an unknown.

    I'm reasonably certain that this is exactly one of the reasons why such a valuable and highly clued developer throws in the towel.
    That'd be your supposition at this point. Unless you've got it from this person that this is what caused it, or they say it publicly, I am going to hold what you've posted as being nothing else. I strongly suspect if they didn't want to be in the limelight, they're not caring as much about being acknowledged as you're claiming- if you want to get recognition, etc. you DON'T stay out of the limelight. My guess would be other concerns in life in general that took them off the work in question- that'd be my reason with me throwing in the towel years ago with the DRI project stuff I'd started. Time concerns took over and I just had higher priority work to do.

    Do some digging.
    I did. I came up with a few guesses as to whom you might be talking about- but nothing concrete. You might want to ditch the chip on your shoulder and name the person. Your rant would have had a vastly different impact on at least myself had you done that.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Nurnberg.
    Posts
    302

    Default

    You weren't able to come up with Thomas Winischhofer?

    It's not as if his name is not plastered all over the sis driver.

    Did you even try looking. You know, like, for example, typing in "xgi xorg driver" in google. Or looking at the top of some files in that driver: http://gitweb.freedesktop.org/?p=xor...ob;h=78b76b810

    Cute.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    3,046

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by libv View Post
    You weren't able to come up with Thomas Winischhofer?

    It's not as if his name is not plastered all over the sis driver.

    Did you even try looking. You know, like, for example, typing in "xgi xorg driver" in google. Or looking at the top of some files in that driver: http://gitweb.freedesktop.org/?p=xor...ob;h=78b76b810

    Cute.

    The only "cute" thing would be your acrimony- ditch the chip on your shoulder and you might get more people to buy into the issue you're trying to bring up. As for this whole discussion, I'm dropping it- I don't want to get banned by Michael for causing a batch of trouble.

  6. #6

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Svartalf View Post
    As for this whole discussion, I'm dropping it- I don't want to get banned by Michael for causing a batch of trouble.
    You don't really need to worry about being banned...

    As far as why Thomas Winischhofer wasn't mentioned, the article wasn't to discredit him in any way or anything of that nature. Ian Romanick was mentioned due to the current and future work he is doing with the XGI driver. I had talked with Ian for this article as he is the main developer on it right now. It's like asking a former president or prime minister their plans for the country's future with the straight facts... If it was just to gain insight that would be a different story, but for this article it is mainly focusing on what to expect from the driver today and in the future when speaking with Ian.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    3

    Default

    I had some of Winischhofer code, Infact i reversed engineer most of it.. I didnt have to much to do with the kernal drivers, i tended to work and mod the Win drivers.

    Anyway is it possible for me to put a link here for the 3D Reg descriptions of both XG40 and XG42 GPUs?http://download.yousendit.com/B0F08C8A76D6FDD7
    PDF
    http://download.yousendit.com/94448D7C37924ABD

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    3

    Default

    Why was my post deleted???

    As a one time modder of XGI drivers i felt this subject to be good news. Here are the full 3D reg descriptions (Open sorce)http://download.yousendit.com/94448D7C37924ABD
    http://download.yousendit.com/9A8D927058E92171

  9. #9

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by convict View Post
    Why was my post deleted???
    It wasn't deleted, just in a moderation queue where if you have less than five posts and you put a link in a message, it needs to go through the spam filter first.

  10. #10

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by libv View Post
    You weren't able to come up with Thomas Winischhofer?

    It's not as if his name is not plastered all over the sis driver.

    Did you even try looking. You know, like, for example, typing in "xgi xorg driver" in google. Or looking at the top of some files in that driver: http://gitweb.freedesktop.org/?p=xor...ob;h=78b76b810

    Cute.
    The article is about newer XGI card, namely 8xxx series. If you read the announcement from Thomas Winischhofer:

    http://www.winischhofer.eu/sisforum/viewtopic.php?t=145

    Folks,

    XGI recently announced the new 8300. And others will follow.

    Before my mailbox is flooded by people asking when we can expect support for these new chips in the sis driver let me state:

    IT WILL NOT HAPPEN.

    According to XGI, these chips are a completely new design. They are different to previous XGI chips. So there is no point in bloating the sis driver furtherly.

    XGI stated that they will provide an X.org driver for these chips themselves.
    So, he is not the key developer, and I doubt he involve in this driver development.

    Thomas will always be the hero for all the support of SiS cards. Without him, there will be a lot of useless SiS cards and many of my old laptop won't work (to my expectation). Back in the days where SiS was frequently used in low cost laptops, his contribution would earn him the right to be nominated for godhood (if such nomination exist).
    Last edited by lenrek; 01-04-2008 at 06:47 AM.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •