Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Ubuntu Has Another Special ATI Catalyst Driver?

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

  • phoronix
    started a topic Ubuntu Has Another Special ATI Catalyst Driver?

    Ubuntu Has Another Special ATI Catalyst Driver?

    Phoronix: Ubuntu Has Another Special ATI Catalyst Driver?

    The past three releases of Ubuntu Linux have included unreleased ATI Catalyst drivers. It started with Ubuntu 8.10, which got an early-access driver as the official Catalyst Linux driver that was available to the public at the time had not supported X Server 1.5...

    http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=Nzk1MQ

  • indus
    replied
    Originally posted by mendieta View Post
    Yes, I wasn't aware, but bridgman (from AMD) later on clarified that (sad) fact to me. With the ongoing success of open source, though, things are going more and more open in the industry, so I can only hope this will not be the case in the future. Not for basic things like acceleration/encoding technologies.

    The rest of your post is just bashing me and/or Linux with unfounded and outdated remarks, so I'll keep this short
    Sorry about that, but i wasnt trying to bash you.But unless someone counters what i said, i stick to my point.

    Leave a comment:


  • indus
    replied
    Originally posted by albatorsk View Post
    That sounds great! When do you think that driver will be released?
    mmm, in 10 years?

    Leave a comment:


  • mendieta
    replied
    Originally posted by indus View Post
    Are you aware there are some applications/games which will never run properly with the open source drivers? You probably miss the point that there are many applications that have proprietary technologies which will be difficult to implement in open source drivers due to IP issues.
    Yes, I wasn't aware, but bridgman (from AMD) later on clarified that (sad) fact to me. With the ongoing success of open source, though, things are going more and more open in the industry, so I can only hope this will not be the case in the future. Not for basic things like acceleration/encoding technologies.

    The rest of your post is just bashing me and/or Linux with unfounded and outdated remarks, so I'll keep this short

    Leave a comment:


  • albatorsk
    replied
    Originally posted by indus View Post
    Luckily,you are not the only customer AMD has ,so hopefully they will always have a driver which supports all features on their hardware and lets users enjoy the very reason these cards were made.
    That sounds great! When do you think that driver will be released?

    Leave a comment:


  • indus
    replied
    Originally posted by mendieta View Post
    All I want is a roadmap stating when they'll switch into dropping fglrx and supporting the Open Source stack full steam. It is pretty solid in my Kubuntu Lucid test partition, but obviously a lot of speed ups and functionality need to still be coded in!

    Are you aware there are some applications/games which will never run properly with the open source drivers? You probably miss the point that there are many applications that have proprietary technologies which will be difficult to implement in open source drivers due to IP issues.For example,quake 4 uses s3tc texture compression,the license to which is owned by s3 technologies.There is a bad hack which will try to run the game with the open drivers,but it doesnt work that well.It only runs with a third party library which according to the radeon devs is buggy.

    Luckily,you are not the only customer AMD has ,so hopefully they will always have a driver which supports all features on their hardware and lets users enjoy the very reason these cards were made.

    For the reason stated above, both drivers will exist always.But in any case,i dont see the point of having 3d in any of the drivers ,Radeon or proprietary,other than wobbling windows on the desktop what else do linux users do anyway?No cutting edge games,no 3D CAD, no nothing really.No wonder,both drivers suck at 3D.Nvidia is a strange exception to the rule,probably have good 3d support for stuff like Pro/E which runs on Linux workstations with Nvidia cards.

    Leave a comment:


  • smitty3268
    replied
    Remember that Mesa still doesn't have the licenses to implement several patented OpenGL 3 technologies. So for that reason alone, the binary drivers are going to be superior for people who really need to use advanced features. I'm guessing blu-ray players would require a binary driver as well, although you can't get those on linux anyway.

    Leave a comment:


  • bridgman
    replied
    Workstation users are generally quite 3D-intensive, and require (rather than desire) the same level of performance and functionality as Windows. This is where proprietary drivers shine, by allowing the implementation of APIs (OpenGL in this case) which are common across proprietary and free OSes to be shared without IP concerns.

    I'm not aware of anyone who "needs" binary-only support, just that they need a level of functionality and performance which (for economic reasons) can not be separately implemented for each OS and which (for IP reasons, mostly related to DRM) can not practically be provided in open source form.

    Obviously the OpenGL portion of the stack does not have much in the way of DRM-related IP, however the OpenGL portion of the stack relies heavily on lower level code which is shared between 2D, 3D and video on other OSes.

    There is no reason in principle why open source drivers could not match or exceed the performance of proprietary drivers, it's just a question of manpower - which in turn is a function of market share and perceived business opportunity.

    Leave a comment:


  • mendieta
    replied
    Originally posted by bridgman View Post
    Not unless we decide to abandon the workstation market, which seems very unlikely.
    If you don't mind educating me a bit: what's different for workstations? NDA's at the hardware level or the customers need somehow for binary only support?

    Ultimately, I am a desktop user, and I am wondering if, long term, Open Source drivers will give the same level of performance as the binary ones (but with more stability). My hunch is that there is no reason why this should not be the case, but I am not a graphics guru at all.

    Thanks for the answer! And for the good work, I am sticking to ATI for my graphics needs because it's open.

    Leave a comment:


  • mirv
    replied
    AMD will not drop fglrx support.
    The plan (as far as I understand) is to have the open source drivers alongside the proprietary.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X