Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

NVIDIA Drops Their Open-Source Driver, Refers Users To VESA

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

  • #81
    I don't know if I'm coming off as too anti-nVidia here, it might be the fanboys rubbing me the wrong way.

    I just hate having to justify myself as some sort of leper just because I'd like to know what's in my computer and what's running on top of it. After 10 years of running OSS software (almost) exclusively, I've learnt to appreciate it. I think that ATi and Intel are doing the right thing here, and I think that nVidia is doing the wrong thing.

    They probably have their reasons for doing it this way. They are not doing it just to piss off the Linux crowd. That's OK, but I still find it unfortunate, and I moved away from them as a result.

    Comment


    • #82
      Originally posted by pingufunkybeat View Post
      After 10 years of running OSS software (almost) exclusively, I've learnt to appreciate it. I think that ATi and Intel are doing the right thing here, and I think that nVidia is doing the wrong thing.
      It's quite likely that my next card will also be one from ATI.

      My problem is I need the binary-blob for it as well.

      Comment


      • #83
        Originally posted by hubick View Post
        I have been running Linux on my desktop for 17 years now, because I want a free software desktop created by the people for the people. If I was willing to be beholden to corporations telling me what I can do (like upgrade to X.org or Kernel version whatever), through use of their proprietary software, drivers, plugins, or codecs, I would have just switched to Apple years ago, and been much happier for it. It saddens me greatly how few people running GNU/Linux have any ideology behind their choice.
        I don't think the idealists have reduced in numbers, I just think a lot more pragmatists have joined the ranks, making the idealists a smaller percentage overall.

        Comment


        • #84
          Even a pragmatist will see the advantages a free software has.
          A blob might work sooner because the enterprise behind it pumped some work into it. But I have seen also the opposite. Binary that were a horror (I have enough DOS & Windows experience to tell this).
          Once that enterprise decides to discontinue support (for whatever reasons) for a certain product or the whole blob itself then you're alone.
          Same is if there are security holes, bugs or other mishaps in the blob. You are dependent on their hopefully good mood to fix it. Or not. Then you're again alone.
          If you want to use that software on a different OS or a different hardware arch (or both) then: you're alone as always.

          With free software you have at least the chance that things will change. Code it for yourself if you can or hire somebody to do it. Or hope there is enough interest in the community so a solution will be found.
          Errors can be discussed in public, there is a public review and everybody is welcome to improve and fix things.

          I don't say the free OS community is free of errors and mistakes. Personal pride, coding errors, all that can happen. But this is mostly the same in a closed sources enterprise. You just don't see it that open.


          Investing in something that will maybe only be usable for a mere 2 or 3 years before it will be abandoned is not a good investion for me. And no, I do not buy new components every now and then. Imagine you have an enterprise with 500 office computers and you would have to exchange hardware and software every three years because somebody who sold you the hardware/op.system chose to have it so. Not very cost efficient and reliable.
          But with specs and a free driver you can still get things to run. I think that IS not just some ideological benefit, it is fine for the pragmatist as well!
          Stop TCPA, stupid software patents and corrupt politicians!

          Comment


          • #85
            i'm suspecting that nvidia is worried that support for modern gpus would require a serious modification to the driver, or might expose some sensitive internals, even with such a basic implementation.

            i mean, supporting the basic nv driver doesn't require that much effort, nvidia has other reasons, or they are extremely short on programmers.

            Comment


            • #86
              But I doubt they're that short on manpower/coders. Of course if you have some business guy on top of an enterprise they might just decide for lowest cost, regardless of quality.

              On the internal/IP worries: Do they really have such a lot of stuff to lose? And the patent violations should be mutual.
              Stop TCPA, stupid software patents and corrupt politicians!

              Comment


              • #87
                Originally posted by Adarion View Post
                On the internal/IP worries: Do they really have such a lot of stuff to lose? And the patent violations should be mutual.
                Patents may be held by holding companies or research institutions (look at who publishes SIGGRRAPH papers; most of them aren't at GPU companies...) that have no interest in cross-licensing. Also, since GPUs are having more and more of their functionality defined by software, GPU vendors arguably run the risk of tripping over software patents that weren't necessarily obtained with graphics applications in mind. The overall degree of risk is not obvious, so different people can come to different conclusions.

                Comment


                • #88
                  Originally posted by yoshi314 View Post
                  i mean, supporting the basic nv driver doesn't require that much effort, nvidia has other reasons, or they are extremely short on programmers.
                  Is there any point to keep supporting nv driver while there's more advanced nouveau? Btw. nv was terrible

                  Comment


                  • #89
                    Originally posted by Adarion View Post
                    Imagine you have an enterprise with 500 office computers and you would have to exchange hardware and software every three years because somebody who sold you the hardware/op.system chose to have it so. Not very cost efficient and reliable.
                    But with specs and a free driver you can still get things to run. I think that IS not just some ideological benefit, it is fine for the pragmatist as well!
                    That is probably why AMD/ATI decided to open-up like intel has been doing for some time. These are companies that want to be "friends" with the enterprise market, not like nvidia who seems to mostly target the consumer/enthusiast market. I believe in the end open-source will rule the world, but not until we are all old geezers.

                    Comment


                    • #90
                      Originally posted by deanjo View Post
                      I've got quite a few blobs in use every day on my linux desktop. VMWare, Maya, Nero, Pro/E wildfire, Shake, commercial games (NWN still rocks), etc.
                      I've gotta ask- what made you decide to buy Nero? I wasn't aware it had any features that the open-source burners didn't have.

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X