NVIDIA Publishes Code For X Synchronization Fences

[droidhacker]

And do they need Coreboot for that as well?

AMD isn't responsible for coreboot.

[pingufunkybeat]

I cannot even come close to comprehending THIS insane view on drivers. Just because the video driver is closed we are better off running Windows? What drug are you on?

He didn't say that you're better off running Windows, he said that you might as well be running Windows or OSX.

The nvidia video driver is FAR bigger than the rest of the Linux kernel, so for what it's worth, you are running a mostly open userspace on top of a mostly closed kernel and a half-closed graphics system.

And you can do that with MS Windows as well.

As a user, I can greatly benefit from using Linux over Windows/OSX for -countless- reasons other than the simple fact that it is an open system. Your way of phrasing this suggests otherwise.

Start posting about function rather than pure philosophy, at least your extremist views will have a sliver of reason to them that way.

Pretty much everything you can do on Linux, you can also do on Windows, and in the case of video games and graphics-intensive tasks, you can often do it better under Windows.

That's talking about function.

What you ignore is that many people run Linux BECAUSE of the philosophy, not because it's faster or cooler than Windows or OSX. People want a free operating system.

Why on Earth is this extremist? Nobody is stopping you from running closed source if you want to. Why do you insist on preventing "extremists" from running Free software? Look, there are dozens of totally closed operating systems with closed drivers and most of them are extremely functional and performant. Use them if you want, or use your binary drivers + Wine, or whatever solution you want.

But let people demand to have at least one way to run a Free system. People want a free system. That's why there is Firefox and GCC and Linux and MySQL and XFree86 (pay attention to the Free part) and OpenOffice and KDE and Gnome and GIMP and Apache and all the other things that make Linux cool.

We're not going to apologise for demanding a Free and open driver FFS. You have a dozen ways to run your closed stuff, let the people at least have one option of running a free one.

Anyone who has been around the Linux scene for 6-7 years and isn't waving an ATI fanboy flag can tell you. The only reason ATI opened up was because of their terrible track record with Linux driver releases.

I don't need somebody who has been around the scene to tell me, when I have an AMD representative openly stating that AMD customers were demanding open drivers and that there was a strong current within AMD who demanded open drivers.

And anyone who has been around the scene should know that the Linux scene has always demanded open drivers. That Linus hates closed drivers, that X devs hate closed drivers, and that companies such as RedHat and SUSE hate closed drivers and that this is one of the reasons why they spend money to develop free ones.

The fact that you are surprised that people want free drivers on Linux is difficult to comprehend.

[droidhacker]

Anyone who has been around the Linux scene for 6-7 years and isn't waving an ATI fanboy flag can tell you. The only reason ATI opened up was because of their terrible track record with Linux driver releases.

Though it is definitely true that 6-7 years ago, ATI was something you needed to avoid like the plague -- in fact, I purchased a few nvidia laptops (which were VERY hard to find) specifically in order to avoid ATI hardware. However, I grew to very much REGRET that choice since the nvidia parts have been nothing but a major headache and an ATI laptop I had from the same era is now fully operational out of the box.

In what ways, on games that are running the Quake2 or *gasp* Quake3 engine? ATI OSS drivers aren't even on the NVIDIA blob's horizon, you just think so because they can run Compiz and support multimonitor and can achieve similar framerates on 15 year old game engines.

"Some proofs of this"? Last time I checked my card works everywhere ATI's doesn't on Linux, including many instances on Wine and applications which use recent OpenGL technology.

You're mixing things up here in a really ugly mess and not thinking about the relationships between things. If you base your good/bad categorization on how something works with ***WINE*** and ***WINDOWS GAMES***, then you are seriously confused. WINE is as it is *BECAUSE* 6-7 years ago, NVIDIA was the ONLY OPTION, so with a huge nasty hack like WINE ***IS***, there have developed a ton of DEPENDENCIES on NVIDIA, and since NVIDIA was the ONLY OPTION, not only on NVIDIA **FEATURES**, but also on NVIDIA ***DEFECTS***. Yep. WINE depends on NVIDIA ***DEFECTS***.

So why don't you forget all about your WINE and your WINDOWS GAMES and compare the drivers based on reality -- NATIVE software. I think that you will find that your distinctions are nowhere near as obvious when you do this.

Also FYI: Not everybody cares about GAMES. In fact, VIDEO GAMES appeal mostly to CHILDREN and people who have NO LIFE. Try finding the MOTIVATION to play video games when you have a FULL TIME JOB, a GIRLFRIEND/WIFE, and a MORTGAGE. When your time is constrained like that, you'll probably find that video games become a VERY minor consideration -- you will instead probably want things to ***JUST WORK*** so that you can be PRODUCTIVE.

in zero aspects. Get your facts right and stop dreaming.

Isn't it nice to be able to put in your distro's install disk, click the "next" button a few times, and have everything ***JUST WORK***? Right... you have nvidia, so you don't know how nice this is.

[mugginz]

He didn't say that you're better off running Windows, he said that you might as well be running Windows or OSX.

Either way he's wrong.

The nvidia video driver is FAR bigger than the rest of the Linux kernel, so for what it's worth, you are running a mostly open userspace on top of a mostly closed kernel and a half-closed graphics system.

You have a very strange perspective.

Pretty much everything you can do on Linux, you can also do on Windows, and in the case of video games and graphics-intensive tasks, you can often do it better under Windows.

That's talking about function.

There are differences between the platforms. For various reasons some prefer Windows and some prefer Linux. If one area of Linux can be boosted to suit the purposes for a user than what's so bad about that.

What you ignore is that many people run Linux BECAUSE of the philosophy, not because it's faster or cooler than Windows or OSX. People want a free operating system.

And it's still a free operating system while running the nVidia blob. Free as in speech. At any time the blob becomes unsatisfactory to someone running Linux for any reason they can simply uninstall it and be left with the same install. Then if they choose, they can install another vendors card with it's open driver. If you uninstall the nVidia driver on Windows it doesn't automatically transform your operating system into Linux.

Why on Earth is this extremist? Nobody is stopping you from running closed source if you want to. Why do you insist on preventing "extremists" from running Free software? Look, there are dozens of totally closed operating systems with closed drivers and most of them are extremely functional and performant. Use them if you want, or use your binary drivers + Wine, or whatever solution you want.

It's not extremist to want FLOSS drivers, but it is extremist to call anyone preferring the functionality of the closed drivers anti Linux or anti FLOSS.

But let people demand to have at least one way to run a Free system. People want a free system. That's why there is Firefox and GCC and Linux and MySQL and XFree86 (pay attention to the Free part) and OpenOffice and KDE and Gnome and GIMP and Apache and all the other things that make Linux cool.

And who is demanding that the open drivers should be removed or development of them halted?

You know that you can have the open drivers and still use the closed ones as well don't you? On the other hand you've got people who are satisfied with the open drivers casting aspersions on those who wish to run the closed drivers.

We're not going to apologise for demanding a Free and open driver FFS. You have a dozen ways to run your closed stuff, let the people at least have one option of running a free one.

And here we have it up in lights. You suggest that the people who like the closed drivers are demanding the removal of the open ones? Talk about the pot calling the kettle black. You'll find that the freedom to run either is what is being argued for by those running closed drivers. You know freedom, that stuff that Linux is built on.

I don't need somebody who has been around the scene to tell me, when I have an AMD representative openly stating that AMD customers were demanding open drivers and that there was a strong current within AMD who demanded open drivers.

Of course people are demanding open drivers. Talk about strawmen. Again I ask, which closed driver using people are arguing that the open drivers should be discontinued?

And anyone who has been around the scene should know that the Linux scene has always demanded open drivers. That Linus hates closed drivers, that X devs hate closed drivers, and that companies such as RedHat and SUSE hate closed drivers and that this is one of the reasons why they spend money to develop free ones.

The fact that you are surprised that people want free drivers on Linux is difficult to comprehend.

With you raising so many strawmen it's lucky there's no lighters around here.

[mugginz]

Also FYI: Not everybody cares about GAMES. In fact, VIDEO GAMES appeal mostly to CHILDREN and people who have NO LIFE. Try finding the MOTIVATION to play video games when you have a FULL TIME JOB, a GIRLFRIEND/WIFE, and a MORTGAGE. When your time is constrained like that, you'll probably find that video games become a VERY minor consideration -- you will instead probably want things to ***JUST WORK*** so that you can be PRODUCTIVE.

I see you don't get tired of judging people without any basis whatsoever.

I think you might benefit from having another look at the demographics for those who play computer games.

[pingufunkybeat]

I've told you already that I have no problem with you running closed drivers if that is what you want.

I have a problem with making Linux completely dependent on closed drivers. And this is still an issue with Nvidia hardware today and yes, some people are asking for ATi to stop developing open source drivers and only develop the binary ones. Read around the forum, there was plenty of it.

You have a very strange perspective.

Do I?

You have a 13MB blob injected into a kernel several MB in size. Without this blob, your $200 is a glorified framebuffer (though at least 2d acceleration has been cracked by the nouveau team).

Anyone who thinks that this is the way things should be does indeed have a rather anti-FLOSS stance. Ridiculing people who choose the open solution is a very anti-FLOSS stance.

If one area of Linux can be boosted to suit the purposes for a user than what's so bad about that.

Release the specs and you can "boost" it all you want.

[pingufunkybeat]

$200 card

screw the edit fascism.

[mugginz]

I've told you already that I have no problem with you running closed drivers if that is what you want.

I have a problem with making Linux completely dependent on closed drivers. And this is still an issue with Nvidia hardware today and yes, some people are asking for ATi to stop developing open source drivers and only develop the binary ones. Read around the forum, there was plenty of it.

But how does the availability of the closed drivers make Linux completely dependant on them?

Also, if you have no problem with the closed drivers then what are you arguing about?

Also, some are asking ATI to put their people who are working on the open drivers to instead work on their closed ones in order to quickly get fglrx into a suitable state but they're not asking everyone in the community to stop the open drivers.

You have a 13MB blob injected into a kernel several MB in size. Without this blob, your $200 is a glorified framebuffer (though at least 2d acceleration has been cracked by the nouveau team).

Anyone who thinks that this is the way things should be does indeed have a rather anti-FLOSS stance. Ridiculing people who choose the open solution is a very anti-FLOSS stance.

But you are wrong. I do not have an anti FLOSS stance but I need the closed drivers. Wanting the open drives to be equivalent to the closed ones doesn't magically make it so. So what do you suggest someone do that is using Linux and needs the performance of a card with the closed drivers? Do you suggest that instead of using Linux with a closed driver they instead drop Linux all together and move to Microsoft Windows? See, you can't have it both ways. You can't expect people who need the most performance to simply redefine their requirements in that way. You can ask them to, but you can't expect them to.

Release the specs and you can "boost" it all you want.

Or don't and you can still boost it all you want.

[yogi_berra]

Isn't it nice to be able to put in your distro's install disk, click the "next" button a few times, and have everything ***JUST WORK***? Right... you have nvidia, so you don't know how nice this is.

So the blackscreen I get when I do this with multiple distros on my laptop with a radeon mobility chip fits in to this how?

Just works, my ass...

[MaestroMaus]

So the blackscreen I get when I do this with multiple distros on my laptop with a radeon mobility chip fits in to this how?

Just works, my ass...

Yeah that is because they mean "should just work".

I won't participate in the erhm discussion but bitching about OS drivers in such an early fase is cruel.