Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Apple To Be Parting Ways With Imagination Graphics

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

  • #21
    Good luck suing Apple. They own the courts.

    Comment


    • #22
      Originally posted by johnc View Post
      Good luck suing Apple. They own the courts.
      They should really make the question: "Have you owned an iphone in the last 3 years?" part of the jury screening process if it isn't already.

      Comment


      • #23
        Originally posted by juno View Post
        Wow, so they can finally enforce their "WebMetal" and never mention Vulkan or OpenGL again.
        Not really. Just because the underlying hardware supports Vulkan or OpenGL it does not mean that Apple have to expose it.
        Apple could keep on using PowerVR without ever mentioning Vulkan or OpenGL again.

        Comment


        • #24
          Originally posted by uid313 View Post

          Not really. Just because the underlying hardware supports Vulkan or OpenGL it does not mean that Apple have to expose it.
          Apple could keep on using PowerVR without ever mentioning Vulkan or OpenGL again.
          This just hit me, but if they plan on using just one API, building silicon that doesn't support other APIs should reduce the costs a lot. And it won't hurt the power consumption either.

          Comment


          • #25
            Originally posted by johnc View Post
            Good luck suing Apple. They own the courts.
            Apple owns the courts... yeah right. So Creative Technologies hasn't won a lawsuit against Apple? That was all fake news???

            Comment


            • #26
              Originally posted by uid313 View Post
              Not really. Just because the underlying hardware supports Vulkan or OpenGL it does not mean that Apple have to expose it.
              Apple could keep on using PowerVR without ever mentioning Vulkan or OpenGL again.
              Sure, that's what they are and have been doing for a while. Also on MacOS

              Comment


              • #27
                Originally posted by bug77 View Post

                This just hit me, but if they plan on using just one API, building silicon that doesn't support other APIs should reduce the costs a lot. And it won't hurt the power consumption either.
                I might be wrong here, but I think maybe if the underlying silicon support the functionality then it can be implemented using either API.
                So I think probably all silicon that supports DiretX 12 can probably have a Vulkan device driver written for it.
                So if a silicon only supports Metal, then probably Vulkan and DirectX still could be supported. But I don't really know.

                Comment


                • #28
                  Originally posted by juno View Post

                  Sure, that's what they are and have been doing for a while. Also on MacOS
                  Yeah, so I don't think Apple abandoning PowerVR in favor of creating their own GPU has anything to do with Apple wanting to get rid of OpenGL and Vulkan.

                  Comment


                  • #29
                    Originally posted by uid313 View Post

                    I might be wrong here, but I think maybe if the underlying silicon support the functionality then it can be implemented using either API.
                    So I think probably all silicon that supports DiretX 12 can probably have a Vulkan device driver written for it.
                    So if a silicon only supports Metal, then probably Vulkan and DirectX still could be supported. But I don't really know.
                    Well, you're not wrong. I doubt each API has a separate hardware implementations, but different APIs will have specific functions/extensions using dedicated silicon. Even a 10% die reduction is a great thing to have. And then, when you know only one API will run on top, specific tweaks can be applied.

                    Comment


                    • #30
                      Clearly Imagination is making a statement that Apple has been poaching their talent and therefore should be put on notice that any internally developed graphics engine should have a healthy dose of skepticism with regards to IP.

                      On Apple's side, they are saying that "we have been paying you royalties for a product our engineers are providing you more IP on then we get in return" so they are going their own way. This is not unusual since they are poaching Imagination's talent.

                      Since Apple has been moving more and more to internal integration and shifting away from their reliance on external IP sources, this isn't surprising.

                      But Apple will have serious uphill battle in graphics IP. Intel ran into the same issues trying to develop their own technology and was forced to cross license.



                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X