Open ATI R600/700 3D Graphics For Christmas?

[duby229]

If AMD pisses off Microsoft then that means that Microsoft won't allow them to playback certain media files in high-quality mode on their OS.

This means that OEMs won't purchase AMD hardware to run their hardware. This means that OEMs that do ship AMD hardware won't be able to obtain the proper codecs and licenses necessary to support all that media.

This means that nobody can purchase AMD video hardware anymore and AMD will be completely and totally screwed over.

All I'm trying to say is that --ANYBODY-- could win that lawsuit. Especially AMD given there technical superiority. There just simply is no damn way that DRM could be enforced in that manner. AMD could counter sue, claiming monopolistic practices, and win on a superiority argument.

You have to understand that if Windows had a much smaller market share, say 50%, they wouldnt be capable of leveraging Windows against the graphics companies in that way. They'd lose the ability to compete against other OS's with customers that purchase AMD products. Being that they have the vast majority of the market share they can use that market advantage against other industries --EXACTLY-- the way you just described.

Thats called a monopoly.

In monopoly cases you have to argu superiority. MS can claim, that they have a better product due to the restrictions they've placed on Windows. They can say that as long as you meet the restrictions, you can play back restrictied content at full speed an quality and it will provide a superior experience. AMD would have to argue that there products (minus the restrictions) would provide a superior experience.


I think the only way AMD can effectively argue superiority is to embrace the open source community and help us to work around these DRM restrictions openly. Once AMD has the abilty to play back restricted content without implementing DRM, at full speed and quality, they could easily win that arguemnt.

It's just a matter of whether or not they have the balls to stand up and fight against there oppressors.

[cjr2k3]

-working WINE games

With FGLRX I have no problem with any Wine games.

But like I said. You all embrace open source and blah blah blah... but still paying to have a binary blob.

I know that I'll probably have a FGLRX driver because of full 3D performance. (with or without problems, I don't care, as I said, I'm willing to take that path) But I have chose to support a company that provides a open source for loads of people that want that.

My opinion is that people with High End ATI cards will stick to FGLRX (they bought the card for the performance) and almost everyone with lower - mid end cards will go for open source drivers.

[mityukov]

- much less rendering glitches
- faster updates at least for new GPUs
- much more reliable
- working WINE games.
- faster support for new kernels and Xorg

Is it _current_ situation, or "in general"?

Last days, I saw many complaints about NVidia, after Ubuntu Intrepid release (it's featuring X.Org 7.4) as well as I saw really good comments on Catalyst 8.11's state..

[val-gaav]

in general ... The situation is changing though and yes fglrx is getting better with each release ...

about wine games and ATI :

http://www.phoronix.com/forums/showthread.php?t=10104

a bit more ontopic :
Is there some Christmas gift planned for r100-r500 users too? working dri2 or gem perhaps ?

[rbmorse]

You guys think the DRM situation is bad now, wait a couple of months. Henry Waxman (D-hollywood) is taking over the House Commerce Committee from John Dingle (D-Detroit).

We're all about to see just what all that money the entertainment industry gave to Democrats in the last couple of elections is going to buy.

[Ex-Cyber]

You guys think the DRM situation is bad now, wait a couple of months. Henry Waxman (D-hollywood) is taking over the House Commerce Committee from John Dingle (D-Detroit).

We're all about to see just what all that money the entertainment industry gave to Democrats in the last couple of elections is going to buy.

Both parties shill for the entertainment industry and impose DRM; the only difference is that the Democrats tend to be louder about it. 99 senators voted for DMCA; zero voted against it.

[smorovic]

I don't think we will have that problem, however -- there are enough *other* big challenges in the X world than just reverse-engineering our secret video bits

Yes, and by releasing info, you most likely reduce the risk that hackers who previously did RE on ATI cards will continue developing tools or stumble on a "wrong" piece of information (as they are probably most capable of all people for doing it).

Also, currently it's simpler to disassemble and read keys from software BD players (which Hollywood will have to allow for some time), so I don't think anyone even cares to hack hardware players yet.

[drag]

All I'm trying to say is that --ANYBODY-- could win that lawsuit. Especially AMD given there technical superiority. There just simply is no damn way that DRM could be enforced in that manner. AMD could counter sue, claiming monopolistic practices, and win on a superiority argument.

Maybe. Is it worth risking a multi-million dollar corporation who thousands of people's livelihoods depend on.. retirement, health, kid's schooling, housing, etc etc to find out if you can convince a judge to agree with you for the sake of releasing documentation for a OS that makes up a tiny minority of your market?

The risks are high, it's going to cost you hundreds of thousands (if not millions of dollars) in lost market share and legal costs IF YOU WIN, and the potential benefits are very small.

You have to understand that if Windows had a much smaller market share, say 50%, they wouldnt be capable of leveraging Windows against the graphics companies in that way. They'd lose the ability to compete against other OS's with customers that purchase AMD products. Being that they have the vast majority of the market share they can use that market advantage against other industries --EXACTLY-- the way you just described.

Well sure. If people demanded to have media supported in Linux in large enough numbers then Microsoft and the DRM-related legal games would be immaterial.

However, this is not the reality that we are currently operating off of. It's not up to AMD/ATI to determine the success or defeat of the Linux desktop and it isn't something that they are going to want to bank on.

They are already doing a decent job and risking pissing off Microsoft. I don't see how we can ask for more. It's up to hackers to nullify the effects of DRM so that Linux users can enjoy content on par with their Windows using counterparts.

(I always thought that the percentage of users using non-MS OSes was closer to 20% or so before it would eliminate most of the market effects of Microsoft's desktop domination.)

[duby229]

Maybe. Is it worth risking a multi-million dollar corporation who thousands of people's livelihoods depend on.. retirement, health, kid's schooling, housing, etc etc to find out if you can convince a judge to agree with you for the sake of releasing documentation for a OS that makes up a tiny minority of your market?

Eliminating DRM isnt going to help me alone, or the linux market alone. It benefits everyone --especially-- AMD.

Imagine a world where you could play back any content you want on any player you want using any hardware you want. The challenge that the content industry needs to face (instead of fighting) is how do you distribute content effectively enough to make it efficient on such a wide array of configurations. The cool thing is that several models exist today....

[drag]

Well DRM is essentially dying right now.

Look at what happened with BlueRay and HD-DVD DRM stuff:

The DRM folks had all the cooperation of everybody from the hardware on up. They had special new disk format, assistance from Microsoft, and the government laws that allowed them to dictate hardware and software design for all compatible products. Practically uncrackable encryption, years of preparation, secure paths from the player through the computer hardware and into the display.

How many millions and millions of dollars did they spend on it the design and implementation? Everything was on their side.

It dramatically increased the cost of players, dramatically increased the processing power required to play back media...

Think about it.. cooperation of HD monitor makers, video card makers, motherboard makers, dvd drive makers, OS makers, etc etc.

A gigantic multi-industry. billion-dollar conspiracy, backed by USA government law, designed for the sole purpose of restricting and controlling the actions of the average person. etc etc..

How long did it last? How long did it take for the DRM to be thoroughly hacked as soon as the first 'consumer' devices and media hit the market?

Two WEEKS? One WEEK?

ITS LIKE A JOKE!!! It would be hilarious if it wasn't for the fact that even though DRM is entirely worthless people still act like it is still viable. That shows you the level of self-delusion that these corporate bastards have about the world around them. It's just a sick f-ing joke.

This is the dark side of the corporate culture in the USA. I am a big fan of business (go capitalism ra-ra) but when it's bad it gets REALLY bad.

And remember that none of this would be possible without the government assistance through the DMCA. If it wasn't for that then every electronic store in the country would be full of equipment to nullify any DRM. It would be big business to crack copyright protections.

-----------------------

Seriously; history is on our side here. What point in history was ever the attempt of the 'rulers' of a empire been able to surpress knowledge?

It seems kind a frivolous at first to be worried about people trying to stop 'digital piracy', but the effect that corporations trying to control how software and hardware is designed for the sake of preserving DRM and the effect it's having on the internet and personal computers is insidious.

Remember that PCs and the Internet is the printing press of the 21st century. Completely dismantling all limitations on communication between people all around the world...

-----------------------------------

Oh and remember that for every song, every movie....

You only need to get one unencrypted copy leaked out on the internet then that can be copied thousands, millions, billions of times without a single bit misplaced or switched. Such is the unique nature of digital media.

Think about it. Only ONE copy needs to be leaked. Out of the billions of people, hundreds of thousands of pieces of media, software, and hardware floating around... Only one copy is needed by the pirates. That's it. Once you have one copy then "game over" the pirates have won.

Then the entire DRM scheme is rendered completely and totally worthless. With ONE copy of the media there is no need to ever crack that piece of media ever again.

At that point whether or not somebody wants to pay to the watch the movie or listen to the song is purely voluntary. At that point all DRM does is punish paying customers. If they break the law and download a free copy then they get a superior copy. You pay more to get less if your a customer! How does that make sense for the media industry?

DRM is DOA.