VIA's Open Linux Graphics Driver Has Been Defenestrated

[phoronix]

Phoronix: VIA's Open Linux Graphics Driver Has Been Defenestrated

For those that were hoping that VIA Technologies would pull through in providing their open-source graphics driver support like they had promised with kernel mode-setting, a Gallium3D driver, and being Linux friendly, kiss those thoughts goodbye as they've been basically thrown out the window. Sadly, it's not happening. I had a very productive conversation with VIA's Stewart Haston, who is their international marketing specialist, and their Linux outlook is extremely dark...

http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=ODk4Nw

[oliw]

Well that simplifies future purchasing decisions: Avoid VIA completely.

[nnnn]

Better Linux support without allocating any additional resources?
Release documentation. Proper documentation. I don't think it would pose any financial losses if they would provide developer docs not under NDAs but e.g. under the GPL. Just saying.
Also, question to VIA: What is the reason behind not releasing source code for the S3 graphics driver? If any source is being released it will most likely be hammerd in shape by the community.

[Shining Arcanine]

Why not ask him to open source their Windows driver? Third parties could then write a Linux driver based on it.

[GogglesGuy]

Well that simplifies future purchasing decisions: Avoid VIA completely.

When buying any hardware for Linux, it's always wise to match advertised hardware capability and supported driver features.

[fernandoc1]

That's why VIA is one of the worst chip makers that I ever seen.
They think that Microsoft will last forever. However they are wrong.
Microsoft will abandon X86 architecture gradually and VIA's investment in X86 will be compromised.
VIA will soon regret of letting Linux as a secondary operating system.

[Kazade]

The short-sightedness of some companies is baffling...

1. Support Linux (with open specs and drivers)
2. Increase potential uses for your chipsets
3. Profit!

How hard is it?

[xir_]

Better Linux support without allocating any additional resources?
Release documentation. Proper documentation. I don't think it would pose any financial losses if they would provide developer docs not under NDAs but e.g. under the GPL. Just saying.
Also, question to VIA: What is the reason behind not releasing source code for the S3 graphics driver? If any source is being released it will most likely be hammerd in shape by the community.

I agree, this is by far the most practice thing they could do. They are so far behind the competition that there is little risk.

[mendieta]

That's why VIA is one of the worst chip makers that I ever seen.
They think that Microsoft will last forever. However they are wrong.
Microsoft will abandon X86 architecture gradually and VIA's investment in X86 will be compromised.
VIA will soon regret of letting Linux as a secondary operating system.

Yes, this is idiotic (the decision, not the people who made it). VIA has a lot invested in embedded systems, so they should actually drool for Linux support. And frankly, as pointed out by nnnn, they could at least release documentation. Not because "it is good for the world", but because it makes business sense. Oh well.

[mendieta]

Well that simplifies future purchasing decisions: Avoid VIA completely.

Yes, FOXCONN is another one to avoid (they screwed Linux in their BIOSES intentionally, I contacted for support for that and they had NO IDEA what they are doing (and had lots of trouble just communicating). Oh well.