Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Linus Torvalds Calls NVIDIA The Worst Company Ever

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

  • crazycheese
    replied
    Originally posted by benjamin545 View Post
    its funny how in about 2-3 years public oppinion of nvidiaa has turned from "best hardware vendor support" (i dont think anyone really thought it was the best since it was proprietary, but the graphics driver is a very noticible and important componant of the desktop and therefore stuck to the front of your mind rather than say a wifi driver) to "omg they SUUUUCK burn them with a chemical fire"
    .....
    we now have more options, and we are lucky we do because open source devs now have control over what hardware will be suppported and what driver capabilities we will have. a lot of work went into our current linux gpu support and it has come from both the open source and closed source sides. just a few years ago everyone would praise nvidia because of their wonderful linux support and now people have huge rants and raves about them even though they still provide the best opengl support for linux. you can get up on stage and say "fuck you nvidia" but you are not really helping the situation, i really doubt that will fix anything, what incentives do they as a company have to change their current policy's? its still just as easy for them to continue their current binary support, and their is no major advantage for supporting the opensource driver.
    Good one!

    (char limit)

    Leave a comment:


  • TobiSGD
    replied
    Originally posted by grantek View Post
    Can anyone comment about how big/invasive the Nvidia graphics driver is to the rest of the stack? Last time I used an Nvidia card (about 4 years ago) the Nvidia blob replaced a large amount of Mesa/X and the rest of the system, which is why eg. RandR support took so long to be implemented.

    If it's still being maintained that way then Nvidia definitely is being hostile to Linux development, it's taking the "we can't support a tainted kernel" argument and extending it to say "you're not actually running Linux any more once you install the Nvidia blob" - all for a graphics/parallel compute device
    It is still the same. AMD does this also, but actually this is not really a problem. If you install the driver it makes backup copies of the original files and it writes them back when you de-install it (at least the Catalyst does this, not sure about Nvidia). I had at some time problems with that because of a major X.Org upgrade on Slackware -current, but this was easily resolved with re-installing X.Org, easy to do on Slackware, not sure about distros with automatic dependency resolving.

    I find it not really that invasive that they replace some few libraries with versions that are optimized for the drivers, as long as they write them back when you de-install the drivers.

    Leave a comment:


  • johnc
    replied
    It amazes me that Windows and OS X are able to make these proprietary drivers work without a hitch.

    The way people talk here, it's simply an impossibly horrible way of doing things.

    Leave a comment:


  • grantek
    replied
    Can anyone comment about how big/invasive the Nvidia graphics driver is to the rest of the stack? Last time I used an Nvidia card (about 4 years ago) the Nvidia blob replaced a large amount of Mesa/X and the rest of the system, which is why eg. RandR support took so long to be implemented.

    If it's still being maintained that way then Nvidia definitely is being hostile to Linux development, it's taking the "we can't support a tainted kernel" argument and extending it to say "you're not actually running Linux any more once you install the Nvidia blob" - all for a graphics/parallel compute device

    Leave a comment:


  • smitty3268
    replied
    Originally posted by allquixotic View Post
    They basically have the professional workstation (extreme top-end aka expensive) and the enthusiast/gamer boxes. It's a toss-up on the cheap end; you often end up seeing Radeon there because of the good cost/performance ratio. But on laptops and, increasingly, OEM desktops, you're right, it's Intel.
    Correct, but that's a very different market than the "mainstream desktop" that johnc claimed it was essential for.

    Leave a comment:


  • allquixotic
    replied
    Originally posted by smitty3268 View Post
    I'm not sure why'd you say that, considering that the vast majority of desktops just run with Intel graphics. Nvidia doesn't have much of anything to do with that. What do they have, 20% market share?
    They basically have the professional workstation (extreme top-end aka expensive) and the enthusiast/gamer boxes. It's a toss-up on the cheap end; you often end up seeing Radeon there because of the good cost/performance ratio. But on laptops and, increasingly, OEM desktops, you're right, it's Intel.

    Leave a comment:


  • allquixotic
    replied
    Originally posted by asdx
    I disagree, and I think you are failing to realize how binary blobs affect our system in a negative way and the negative consequences they have in our system.

    Linux not having a stable driver ABI is not a Linux shortcoming but an advantage that prevents and protects us from corporations exploiting Linux with inferior blobs like the nvidia one.

    I for one am glad that Linus Torvalds humiliated NVIDIA this way in public, they deserve it for not playing well with others.

    I think they have 2 choices: They either adapt and play well with us or they go, fuck themselves and die in bankrupcy. We are going to break their blob beyond repair.

    Freedom or death.
    It's even simpler than that. Linux is coming everywhere whether you like it or not, and the companies that don't adapt to the new business model are going to lose out even with the old capitalistic system. It's simple: when Dell or System76 or whoever has to choose what hardware to ship on their OEM Linux boxes (which are coming eventually), they're going to choose the hardware with the best graphics drivers. If you don't have KMS or Wayland or Optimus or current-enough drivers to run on recent kernels or proper mode-switching support, you are going to get passed up. The same applies to Android, but replace KMS/Wayland/Optimus with whatever the latest craze is on ARM SoC graphics. Power saving? Open source drivers so that manufacturers can fix bugs themselves? Support for the latest OpenGL ES? Clearly there are more factors in selecting a well-working chip with a well-working driver than sheer performance.

    Nvidia doesn't need Linus Torvalds to tell them fuck you. They are fucking themselves just plenty on their own. Linus was just trying to wake them up so that maybe in the coming revolution they might survive, but if they don't, nobody -- absolutely nobody -- is going to miss them.

    Leave a comment:


  • smitty3268
    replied
    Originally posted by johnc View Post
    Of course, without NVIDIA's current efforts, Linux as a mainstream desktop is an absolute non-starter.
    I'm not sure why'd you say that, considering that the vast majority of desktops just run with Intel graphics. Nvidia doesn't have much of anything to do with that. What do they have, 20% market share?

    Leave a comment:


  • soupbowl
    replied
    Originally posted by RealNC View Post
    No company has a reason to "care for Linux." What a company should care for is customer support.

    Corporate is a capitalist entity, not a charity. It's a business. I leave "care for Linux" to non-profit organizations, not to AMD or NVidia. They don't "care" for Linux or Windows or any other OS. They provide working drivers for Windows, Linux, FreeBSD and other systems not because they care for the well being of those systems, but for their customers being able to buy their hardware and use it on those platforms.

    IMO, NVidia could reply in kind with "fuck you, Linus, for trying to upset our business model." If they want to have a closed-source model, it's their damn right. This isn't North Korea where you can force others to follow your own philosophies. If Linux can't accommodate such models (no driver ABI), it's a Linux shortcoming, not an NVidia one.
    I totally agree.

    Leave a comment:


  • D0pamine
    replied
    Originally posted by johnc View Post
    Looks like a Steve Ballmer moment to be honest. Slightly embarrassing, to say the least.

    Earlier in the talk somebody asked him why Linux had never taken off on the desktop. He completely misses the answer of course. The "open-source-only" religious fanatics had dominated the Linux community for 15+ years and pretty much relegated it to nothing more than a cheap alternative to other UNIX-like OSes (i.e., for the server / workstation markets). Even Google had to go heavy on non-GPL licenses to make Android successful.

    Of course, without NVIDIA's current efforts, Linux as a mainstream desktop is an absolute non-starter.
    Funny that , it took off on my desktop back in 99 .... you can always spot us religious fanatics as we refer to what you refer to as "Linux" as "GNU/Linux".
    Don't equate popularity with quality either most software is forced down peoples throats - android is popular because it comes on your new shiny telephone. Note the salesman never offers a blank phone or even a custom rom option...

    Nvidia has never really played ball with the community I remember the forceware-fiasco and the dreaded blob - of which you nor the maintainers of your distro have control of... security issue?? nvidia has to fix it... not the community which ofcourse leaves large chunks of the community under the control of a singular entity namely nvidia...

    i agree - go fsck yourselves nvidia

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X