Originally posted by Naib
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
NVIDIA 304.37 Linux Driver Brings 41 Official Changes
Collapse
X
-
-
why are people so mad at what nvidia is doing to *their* drivers for *their* customer who *choose* to use *their* drivers...
If you don't like nvidia, don't buy nvidia simple as that. That is why I havn't owned a piece of sony equipment for over 10years...
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by ninez View PostAs far as i know (although i could be wrong, and bridgeman can correct me) AMD's blob isn't using dmabuf, either.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by pingufunkybeat View PostThey can offer exactly the same thing Intel and AMD offer. They simply refuse to do it.
Originally posted by pingufunkybeat View Post'Oh, and Intel and AMD contribute to the kernel, Nvidia doesn't. But they have special requests.
Originally posted by Nvidia'...We are a very active participant in the ARM Linux kernel. For the latest 3.4 ARM kernel – the next-gen kernel to be used on future Linux, Android, and Chrome distributions – Nvidia ranks second in terms of total lines changed and fourth in terms of number of changesets for all employers or organisations.'
And personally, I don't care if Intel and AMD contribute more, because at the end of the day - they could've contributed 10x the amount that Nvidia has ~ yet Nvidia's drivers slaughter both of those companies linux drivers, and their hardware slaughters ANYTHING Intel is putting out. AMD makes comparable hardware, it's just too bad, their blob is always falling behind.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by RealNC View PostNot wanting Optimus on Linux could make sense if you consider that many of the more vocal opponents of NVidia using dmabuf, are actually Intel employees. Like Alan Cox, probably the most vocal of them who are against this.
So we are in a situation where the employers of a competitor company decide what you can and can't offer for a platform. Another company known to do these things is Microsoft.
Oh, and Intel and AMD contribute to the kernel, Nvidia doesn't. But they have special requests.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by bridgman View PostAFAIK the most common embedded driver model is a GPL-compatible open source kernel driver plus binary userspace.
Apparently, i am not paying attention, tonight ~ thank you for the correction, Bridgman.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by ninez View PostWe don't have to imagine that. If this is in fact the case (that nvidia can't use DMABUF - which i think it is). Nvidia and no other closed-source drivers/blobs can use it ---> embedded devices tend to be using closed-source blobs.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by ninez View PostWe don't have to imagine that. If this is in fact the case (that nvidia can't use DMABUF - which i think it is). Nvidia and no other closed-source drivers/blobs can use it ---> embedded devices tend to be using closed-source blobs.
Originally posted by RealNC View PostNot wanting Optimus on Linux could make sense if you consider that many of the more vocal opponents of NVidia using dmabuf, are actually Intel employees. Like Alan Cox, probably the most vocal of them who are against this.
So we are in a situation where the employers of a competitor company decide what you can and can't offer for a platform. Another company known to do these things is Microsoft.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by russofris View Postirony? Linux isn't putting ridiculous contraints on users... Nvidia is. Puts head on desk and cries for those that don't "get it".
Linux is refusing to offer needed services to the hardware vendor. In other words, Linux says:
"Our licensing model failed; it prevents driver writers to offer good proprietary support. So fuck you NVidia."
Yeah, makes a lot of sense.
Leave a comment:
Leave a comment: