No announcement yet.

NVIDIA Talks Of Optimus Possibilities For Linux

  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #51
    Does anyone have a real values for cpu?s/apu?s/gpu?s sold via retail channels versus sold via oem channels.
    I?m surprised anyone buys prebuild pc?s these days. 500,000? Cmmon!?
    No one purchases smartphones parts and assembles it at home - this is true. But prebuilt PC?!
    We need real stats to decide and not carry wild guesses.

    I always thought companies just provide parts, with discounts at higher rate, but never ever touch what OS is installed on their components. Especially for CPU. If you use windows, freedos or hackintosh - it still works with MB and CPU.

    With 3d graphics hardware being only exception - the only factor on its sales being speed@techology level on specific platform.

    Here, amount of software developed plays major factor, as for that software consumer would need hardware with corresponding driver support.
    More software sales - more hardware sales.
    Mr. Bridgeman, you always reside to chicken-egg problem. But I do think you have used Gentoo and know of circular dependencies problem. Then you must know to to solve it - install one of the circular dependent components, with minimal features. Like pushing opensource driver together with some titles over at desura/unigine/humble indie bundle. Get some statistics - no one ever does business without some statistics. And you have it ressolved. Or again something is wrong?

    Again: OS does not play ANY role in this game-hardware bundle, unless ... software uses technology that is strictly bound to one OS, then it will mean for every sold software copy would need one OS copy.
    Like directx. This is why microsoft destroyed opengl.
    Because for each opengl game - user can buy mac, linux or even bsd instead - ANY os that has DRIVER with OPENGL.
    For every directx game - user MUST buy windows.

    And each time hardware manufacturer values DirectX over OpenGL for drivers, he (manufacturer) is supporting this lock-in. He is well aware of this.
    Whats the catch here for manufacturer? No catch. Except - bribe.

    This is how microsoft ever existed since its appearance. They don?t need to innovate - they need to make you dependant.

    Any crossplatform or open standard, especially if it is free libre, imposes danger on microsoft sales. They are USELESS DRUG LORDS.
    But we don?t necessary resist drugs.. unless we are FORCED to comply, because we have no choice.. we loose freedom! Im not talking about Richard Stallman, Im talking about real basic freedom.
    We are talking about operating system - the base for all things.

    Right now Bill Gates is lobbying genetically modified corn for Africa, that cannot reproduce on its own. Sounds familiar? How valuable in your life is food? Compare it to how valuable underlying OS for application is.

    But the key here is hardware+driver. Without hardware - no software development is possible. Not vice versa.
    For example, ID wants to develop next title for PCI-E accelerated ARM architecture. There is none. They cannot develop.
    Now google and apple created hardware platforms - with no software, and software started flowing in. Hardware is the key.

    But, when Intel decided to push IA64, the hardware was ready. But no one adopted it. Why? What is difference here between Intel and Google/Apple?
    Easy - Google has build upon open platform. Apple has started build from open platform too, but converted it into own type.
    They were in control of OS. Intel was not. Microsoft decided to say no, and Intel can kiss dirt.
    With each decision to support microsoft-only technology, AMD hammers another nail into their own slavery.

    Can AMD actually start to carry own decisions? To create market on their own? To take control on own destiny? That is what I highly doubt will happen.

    Cyrix had the balls to position themself apart and carry own decisions, but AMD has been purchasing licenses and accepting compromises since its existence. Wikipedia knows that.

    Unlike Nvidia. Nvidia easily experiments with new technology. They have best OpenGL implementation and have balls to carry it further. But they keep it all private, too private. So private - one does not know what is worse: dependence via directx over microsoft; or dependence via opengl over nvidia state-of-art implementation.

    AMD? Sleeping under microsoft. And then comes surprise with AMD opensource policy - it is like unwanted child, sleeping homeless, eating pieces off the table. Does AMD have actually ever ANY plan?

    Or we are supposed to buy them production factories, gather votes and send flowers, until they decide to *try*. Of course, if uncle ?Softie allows them to go play out. This all sounds a bit girlish.
    Common - I will buy your card, will go to your site - literally exploding from microsoft / directx content(I have already explained why), I will find the heavily hidden survey, I will read my card OEM SN and mark my card as "purchased for linux opensource driver". No, this is TOO HARD TO IMPLEMENT! The unwanted child *should not* get presents, even from the street! His mother must collect it all and give it to uncle! As before agreed.

    Why Im saying this?.. I?ve been proud to purchase R100, the Radeon when they (ATI) were the FIRST company with enough DETERMINATION to step against Nvidia?s Geforce!
    When AMD had enough DETERMINATION to push own SLOT A ATHLON with 1:1 cache clock! They BOTH survived only because they have done it.

    But right now they are in relation, times have changed, nvidia and intel are only ones who still carry own bold independant decisions - they always were.

    Intel, in the case this ends up hopeless, can you please create multicore GPU hardware? Unlike Nvidia you guys seem not to dump opensource; would you please explore the possiblities to strengthen the hardware part?

    / signed, paying linux consumer


    • #52
      Originally posted by bridgman View Post
      The most effective way to influence AMD would probably be to influence the OEMs who buy our parts - either buy more Linux preload systems from them or get the message across that while you are buying Windows systems your intent is to run with Linux and your satisfaction with the product will be driven by your Linux experience. That latter part of the message does not seem to be getting through at all today.
      For most people, the only way to get that message through is telling their local shop, hoping that that shop relays it to the wholesale company or the chain headquarters they get their hardware from, hoping that the wholesale company/chain relays it to the importing company, hoping that the importer relays it to the company in China where they buy their hardware, and then hoping that that company relays the info to AMD.

      I "hope" you understand that's not exactly a reliable way to route such information?


      • #53
        Originally posted by agd5f View Post
        They would likely have to rewrite and sanitize large amounts of code to be accepted upstream into the kernel. Plus, if they still have a closed source 3D driver, their kernel driver is not likely to be accepted upstream. Once again, lots of work, little benefit for anyone.
        You don't need an open source OpenGL driver (which is userspace code) to have an open source KMS driver in the kernel; several such drivers are in the linux kernel already, or will be there soon. Of course that would mean nvidia has to support KMS, etc. And the kernelspace part of graphics drivers is (or should be) relatively small, so the rewrites should be doable.

        Also, once Nvidia uses the "standard" kernel & X infrastructures, it will be easier for them to actually influence how those APIs look like... (Why would the kernel & X/desktop developers trust a company that doesn't/didn't want to colaborate with them for almost a decade on this topic?)
        Last edited by JanC; 28 January 2012, 06:30 PM.


        • #54
          You're shooting the messenger, dude.

          What I don't understand is that you can be so unhappy with market perception of Linux's importance but totally incapable of thinking about how *other* people (not me) see things long enough to maybe do something about it.

          Blaming me for what I see other people doing and saying is not a great start, but I guess it's fun and that is more important.
          Last edited by bridgman; 28 January 2012, 10:08 PM.
          Test signature


          • #55
            Originally posted by Qaridarium
            i for my self i build my PC by myself and now i know amd only support "OEM" LOL!!! you NEVER count my BUY!

            i spend much more money on the SAME PC than other people buying OEM cheap CRAP!

            AMD must be stupid!
            Hey, this is great. If I ever need something trivialized and taken out of context now I know who to call.

            Q, you really should know better than to post garbage like this. We've PM'ed enough that you know there are a lot of other metrics we look at w.r.t. Linux share and spend. THe original question was "what can influence AMD"... and the weak link in the chain IMO is that we don't get as much "pull" from OEM customers as I would expect based on what I hear from the people who buy their products, and that the pull we do get is entirely for Linux preloads and not systems sold with other OSes but used with Linux.

            That makes it seem like the area that most needs attention if you want to see change.
            Last edited by bridgman; 28 January 2012, 10:09 PM.
            Test signature


            • #56
              Originally posted by bridgman View Post
              influence the OEMs who buy our parts - either buy more Linux preload systems from them
              It's doesn't possible to buy OEM hardware (both of workstation or laptops) with openSUSE (Gnome 3) or Kubuntu. So it doesn't possible to change situation this way, right?

              Originally posted by bridgman View Post
              or get the message across that while you are buying Windows systems your intent is to run with Linux and your satisfaction with the product will be driven by your Linux experience.
              Tech. support of OEM/ODM answer about "unsupported OS" and just doesn't listen everything else. Even if we buy laptop with SUSE Enterprise Linux (by HP) tech. support doesn't listen requests about for example Ubuntu. This is the fact.

              Originally posted by bridgman View Post
              The good news is that Android might be able to supply those numbers, if we can dance over the fact that the graphics environment (and hence driver requirement) is somewhat different between Android and traditional distros. There are some common areas (eg power management) which can probably be helped though...
              It doesn't change situation for peoples with Gnome 3 or Kubuntu at all. Also there is already bad example with Android - Android drivers for nVidia Tegra at least work, but Linux driver still in poor state. Same with Imagination Technologies driver for PowerVR SGX 535 - Android support doesn't make situation any better for Intel GMA500 owners.
              So I doesn't think this way will work too in AMD case.

              I just wonder - how hard for AMD Linux Team part, who working on FGLRX, add support of KDE on Ubuntu? (To make Kubuntu supported) Or Gnome 3 on openSUSE? It all about fixing bugs in OpenGL anyway, right?

              About situation around XvBA - no any HighProfile@5 support on Linux (directly via XBMC or via VA-API compatible player). Windows driver have this feature for many years. AMD tech. support employees even doesn't know how to use XvBA on and can not reproduce bug properly - they open video in Totem, think "oh, hardware acceleration is works" (yeah, without installation of libva and xvba packages and GStreamer tuning) and close the ticket with "Resolved" or "Solution provided" status (I need to provide ticket number or you believe my words? ). Even if this ticket about supported distribution (Ubuntu, openSUSE with KDE, etc.) they doesn't provide proper tech. support anyway. Why customers need to teach AMD support about using AMD proprietary driver features in Linux? Is there is no one Linux user in GPU support team at all?

              May you please also look into this post?


              • #57
                Originally posted by Qaridarium
                this is just a joke? i buy many Freedos systems for linux for my customers.
                No, this is not the joke. BSA really do that. By the way if you install LibreOffice they count you like a Microsoft Office pirate copy user too.


                • #58
                  Originally posted by Qaridarium
                  (i know this was ironic because then you never write here on Phoronix again because of your fucking windows only modem)
                  Try buying a modem that isn't Windows-only that can work with rural phone lines. I tried 5 different modems and only one of them can hold a connection for more than a couple of minutes.

                  Anyways, I bought a cell modem which can work with Linux. It gets really expensive if I use it much, but at least it's enough to bring down git repos.

                  Now I just need to get my other PC back from my brother-in-law.
                  Last edited by bridgman; 28 January 2012, 11:30 PM.
                  Test signature


                  • #59
                    Actually you're proving me right. I tried one of those... worked better than most but still couldn't handle my phone line. Worked fine in Toronto though...
                    Test signature


                    • #60
                      You know, when I started posting here I was interacting with hundreds of different users. Now it just seems to be you and one or two others.

                      Probably time for a change.
                      Test signature