NVIDIA Talks Of Optimus Possibilities For Linux

[bridgman]

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.

[JanC]

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?)

[JanC]

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?

[crazycheese]

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

[Kano]

It is easy to count pirated XP system, they are ie6 users, look at

http://www.ie6countdown.com/

they disabled updates Nice place for worms and other funny things *g*

[bridgman]

Would it help if I got one with Freedos?

Last I heard was that Freedos systems were generally being counted as "pirate Windows" (perversely, so were Linux preloads back when the price of a Linux preload was lower than a Windows preload) so guessing it wouldn't help.

The sucky thing is that you need pretty large numbers to influence perception. 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...

[Ansla]

First of all, like somebody said before, OEM systems usually contain very weird choices of hardware components so it's very unlikely I will ever buy an OEM desktop. That only leaves OEM laptops, not that don't contain weird choices of hardware components, but it's harder to assemble one from parts . Now, when I buy a laptop I'm interested in a truly portable device, that excludes all regular sized laptops (15" and bigger) as they are simply to bulky. And all small laptops with AMD APU, at least those sold in my country, have either Windows or Freedos preinstalled. Would it help if I got one with Freedos? Or would it be better to get one with Linux and Intel CPU?

Actually the question was if we bought a PC with Linux preinstalled, not about AMD PCs, so yes, I bought about 3-4 years ago an EeePC with Linux preinstalled.

[bridgman]

just answer the question: why is amd.com a 100% Microsoft windows commercial ? why amd does not sell linux notebooks on amd.com? why is amd not sell linux desktop pcs on amd.com? why there are no amd linux commercials at all? and only amd windows commercials?

I suspect the list of PCs on the site is based on input from our larger customers, and AFAIK they haven't had much success selling Linux preload systems. Has anyone on here actually bought a PC preloaded with Linux from a major OEM ?

[bridgman]

Let me quote Farhad S, AMD Global Customer Care employ:Ticket number 8200418370, message from June 30, 2011.

??? Farhad didn't say "workstation only", he said "workstation and OEM", which includes a lot of non-workstation configurations.

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.

Remember how big and low-margin the PC market is. A few thousand earnest users aren't likely to make a difference; you need to think about dangling 500,000 potential customers in front of one person to get their attention.

[enrico.tagliavini]

I used to argue the same way you do but after 15 years of Linux on my desktop I've seen the consequences. You would most likely already have Optimus support if the driver had been open. Tossing nvidia a bone here because they are late to the party will not make things any better in the future.



Stopped by manufacturers, not by Linux. Only having binary drivers for Linux is also a stopper for Linux on the desktop. Either way you loose.

...

Binary drivers are fine as long as they don't have bugs and are updated at the same time the software they interact with change. I don't see any of those drivers around? If you load a binary driver your whole kernel gets tainted, and as a consequence you cannot contribute back to the kernel in form of bug reports. Without bug reports the bugs will not get fixed. If Linux is full of bugs, it will not succeed on the desktop, mobile or server platform. I understand your reasoning but in this case the nvidia way of serving their customers is counter productive for the rest of the Linux community. Use the proprietary nvidia driver if you must, but at least don't tell that to nvidia


They have been doing the right thing for years, but from a user perspective it's not always that obvious.

I can't say you are wrong. In fact your point is more than good. Intel is the "good guy" in this game, intel FOSS driver is almost on par with the windows one. Unluck for us AMD doesn't put the same effort on the FOSS radeon driver (and here i mean they should hire more devs to work on radeon, given that with just 4 devs and the community we have a quite nice driver, but still far from the binary one). I doubt NVIDIA will change its mind about FOSS drivers.... I wonder if the best way to make them change is to contrast them (not a way i like, but NVIDIA customers which wants linux support might do some pressure on NVIDIA this way), or try to collaborate and hope they can see the light. Can't say really. But surely i will always avoid NVIDIA for now as i done in the past 10 years.