Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

To the AMD people: Money wasted.

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

  • #41
    The list of features that any hardware driver should provide in order to be usable, priority sorted:
    - stability (as in absence of bugs and crashes)
    - hardware support
    - opensource; or updated software support
    - (3D) performance
    - power management
    - (3D) features
    - easiness to install (out of the box thing)
    - non-direct features(video acceleration etc)

    The amount of advancement here reflects >the company policy< towards linux.

    Watching the whole AMD driver situation, there seem to two options:
    - leaving fglrx workstation and advancing opensource to match consumer needs. Results in advantage against Nvidia.
    - advancing fglrx workstation driver and leaving opensource to match only basic funtionality. Nvidia way. With AMD they seem to have edecided to follow this way as well, which will result in Nvidia=AMD+4 years progress. Results in equal situation against Nvidia, but only in 4 years.

    Also, calling a requirement to mess with things whole day in order to get them working or issue free is not "windows way".

    You are basically saying linux is designed to suck, to be complicated, to require heavy manual interaction to work at all. If its not, it is not linux and you are a windows user. So it must be 5% desktop share is for geeks and other masochistic people. Only windows boons say so.

    Mr James is correct.

    In the end, you either buy a card and expect your money to go in the direction you support.
    Or you buy unsupported hardware and search other ways to make it work(hobby programmers, finding money together to hire people to write the driver, coding yourself).

    99 from 100 linux people will choose 1st path, especially if the driver is open to allow 2nd path compliment the 1st.

    Comment


    • #42
      Originally posted by crazycheese View Post
      there seem to two options:
      - leaving fglrx workstation and advancing opensource to match consumer needs. Results in advantage against Nvidia.
      - advancing fglrx workstation driver and leaving opensource to match only basic funtionality. Nvidia way. With AMD they seem to have edecided to follow this way as well, which will result in Nvidia=AMD+4 years progress. Results in equal situation against Nvidia, but only in 4 years.
      Not exactly. Leaving fglrx and the workstation market puts us at a huge *disadvantage* in that market. Our approach is what you would call option #3, which is continuing to advance *both* drivers.

      Comment


      • #43
        The majority of users here I guess are Arch users. They pride themselves on simplicity - simple is the way to go. That having an rc.conf is sooo much better, clearer and transparent than debian's init. That debian is way to frustrating to tweak. Then they tell you how you are a noob or a "typical 'windoz' user" because you do not want to spend the rest of your natural life tweaking with ever experimental mesa and xf86-video-ati upgrades and xorg.conf settings. Go figure...

        BTW, while I'm speaking of Debian, I love it how everybody nowadays tell you Debian is a rusty old distro that takes forever to release. Exactly what has happened in since Lenny was released in terms of hardware support? Development. Nothing finished. Here we are about to release Squeeze and still FOSS drivers are experimental and unstable. Those people smart enough to stick with Debian stable saved themselves all the hassle.

        Comment


        • #44
          Originally posted by bridgman View Post
          Not exactly. Leaving fglrx and the workstation market puts us at a huge *disadvantage* in that market. Our approach is what you would call option #3, which is continuing to advance *both* drivers.
          AMD serving two masters? Jack of all trades master of none? Sounds about right.

          BTW Mr Bridgman, if you got the feeling that I was being disrespectful to you (other members got that idea) I am sorry - not my intention.

          Comment


          • #45
            Originally posted by bridgman View Post
            Not exactly. Leaving fglrx and the workstation market puts us at a huge *disadvantage* in that market. Our approach is what you would call option #3, which is continuing to advance *both* drivers.
            Why not approach #1, where workstation continues to focus on workstation and opensource focuses on consumer segment? 3000$ cards are for people with specific needs and demands, and in current situation I see pathway #2 - pushing proprietary fglrx in consumer area.

            In the end (2-3 years) fglrx(catalyst) will be equal to nvidia blob. Opensource with 3-4 developers will be VESA superset.
            3 years pass you gain no advantage to nvidia, nvidia moves further.
            If I have 500$ in my pocket, I cannot invest into a card that will perform as VESA superset. Which puts large cross on opensource strategy.

            If amd fears know-how leaks via opensource, they should provide know-how in gpl cover and support fsf in suing any company that puts it into proprietary.

            Regarding possible "Linux Mint > Ubuntu" case, if Ubuntu REALLY wanted it, it could create everything that Mint adds; so Mint would not even exist as there would be no reason.

            Comment


            • #46
              I'd like UVD and OpenGL4 with top performance too, but you have a very strange definition of a "VESA superset".

              AMD/ATi open source drivers are possibly the best and most featured FOSS drivers out there, period, at least up to r500. Intel drivers used to be good, but I hear they are slipping.

              Can you name a better / more full-featured FOSS driver than r300g? r600g still needs time. It's not the perfect solution, but at least AMD did a lot to push it in the right direction, including documentation and lots of code.

              Comment


              • #47
                Originally posted by Mr James View Post
                AMD serving two masters? Jack of all trades master of none? Sounds about right.

                BTW Mr Bridgman, if you got the feeling that I was being disrespectful to you (other members got that idea) I am sorry - not my intention.
                It is normal reaction to pay money(or time), expect something for it and then get ripped-off feeling. AMD is not "ripp-off", but "lacking", yet supporting opensource approach.

                Do not ever try to buy Kodak printer for linux for example. Their sales agent has insured me 5250 works under Linux. I bought two. Zero support, only some unreleated guy implement basic PPD file. Mail support responded with no support. Next day I returned them back, now Kodak has two opened printers and rage of the store itself for false information (the store worker was not ignorant, listened up and recommended HP).

                I think companies should respect the will of consumers and follow, however the modern marketing policy is to make you believe they know you better than you. Why? Because they do not need to spend money on knowing your tastes and your direction of thinking. It is much more simple to have brainwashed zombie than a thinking individual. Sadly but true, modern marketing is not about market reseach, but about market (consumer) control. "Only works with", "premium", "exclusive", "most people use that", "certified" etc etc.

                Comment


                • #48
                  Originally posted by pingufunkybeat View Post
                  I'd like UVD and OpenGL4 with top performance too, but you have a very strange definition of a "VESA superset".

                  AMD/ATi open source drivers are possibly the best and most featured FOSS drivers out there, period, at least up to r500. Intel drivers used to be good, but I hear they are slipping.

                  Can you name a better / more full-featured FOSS driver than r300g? r600g still needs time. It's not the perfect solution, but at least AMD did a lot to push it in the right direction, including documentation and lots of code.
                  I still have the very first Radeon card - the 3x2 geforce enemy

                  r600g and the rest do not need time, they need people. If you are for opensource or for amd on linux platform, the company should really have tools to know and understand your decision, and not develop drivers in the backyard.

                  The time advances, new features and calls appear. You have r600g full support in 5 years, but in 5 years 3 new generations roll out, new technology advances.

                  Its like getting propeller airplane ready in 2020 only by 3 engineers.
                  Im talking company policy seeing opensource as "second hand" solution.

                  That put, I seriously think, abadoning opensource, but leaving the documentation for just-for-fun engineers in free time, and fully focusing on working closed source driver is better than 2x 80% / 25% finished drivers. "Do one thing, but do it good" is linux.

                  Comment


                  • #49
                    Originally posted by crazycheese View Post
                    Why not approach #1, where workstation continues to focus on workstation and opensource focuses on consumer segment? 3000$ cards are for people with specific needs and demands, and in current situation I see pathway #2 - pushing proprietary fglrx in consumer area.
                    Sorry, I read your #1 as "dropping fglrx". If you meant pursuing a two-driver approach for #1 then I agree in principle.

                    The problem is that "consumer" covers a very wide range of usage scenarios, and some of those scenarios value workstation-like attributes more highly than the things a typical consumer or enterprise client user would value.

                    Our approach is to support both driver paths and work towards having enough overlap in capabilities that we don't have a "hole in the middle". Consumer and enterprise client users will tend towards the open driver, workstation and gaming users will tend towards the Catalyst driver, but I don't think saying *this* driver is for consumer, *that* driver is for workstation covers all the scenarios sufficiently.

                    Note that comments about "only N open source developers" are missing the whole point of open source drivers -- that progress is *not* limited to what AMD developers can do. The open source driver dev community is a lot larger than just our people.

                    Comment


                    • #50
                      Originally posted by mirv View Post
                      how the bloody hell can that be the responsibility of AMD's linux driver team?
                      because in reality most people need this because they wana run the windows apps/games on linux.

                      and you are wrong amd is fixing wine bugs and wine-opengL bugs but its really hard to catch the bug and makes clear what is the problem of the bug.

                      exampel i report amd bugs in the past and crossover fix that they fix it because amd pay for the support.

                      and no they don't fix it because of my 30? payed to crossover.

                      i really know it amd pay's wine guys for that kind of bugs.
                      Phantom circuit Sequence Reducer Dyslexia

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X