Raptor Engineering Helping To Improve POWER Support In Wine, Eyes Hangover

[Vistaus]

It depends on your definition of "fine". According to Intel's documentation the firmwares enable more features/performance and power saving technologies.

It's probably a less severe version of the nouveau nVidia driver situation - it will "work" but without reclocking so you get terrible performance, for example.

My definition of "fine" is "great performance" and "good battery life" and "very stable". And those all apply. But I will try the tips from the Arch Wiki article to see if things improve even more.

[edwaleni]

Considering what known "bad guys" do (Microsoft, Oracle, Intel, AMD following Intel's footsteps), IBM does sure look good though.

Those "bad ole days" of IBM arrogance is pretty much behind us now. There are still a few groups who feel pretty good about themselves but they are a minority from my perspective.

But the company overall has turned over so much and so often in the last 25 years that many of those "old Blue" employees have retired or died.

I am excited about the OpenPOWER initiative because IBM sees the open-source light. With such weakness and micro-segmentation of ARM these days, a strong ISA is needed to counter x86.

[Djhg2000]

See Michael's write up on the Libre Graphics effort using RISC-V and Vulkan.

https://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?pa...-RISC-V-Vulkan

Looks more like a proof of concept to me. Let's face it, $250k is peanuts compared to what either of the three major PC players are spending on R&D.

[edwaleni]

As for all that historical narrative on IBM blunders, and baffoonery, of course a lot of strategic mistakes were made as the micro market took off. Geez, so did Digital (Rainbow), so did Apple (Lisa), so did NCR, and so on and so on.

IBM ESD in Boca Raton (where the PC and PC-XT were developed) is a classic textbook example of what happens when corporate knowledge & skill comes together with little interference.

The baffoonery started when long time IBM clients wanted micro platforms with the similar types of predictability and supportability as the System 36xx/46xx/System 34 they use. IBM ESD was then folded back in under new executives who only knew "old Blue" ways. That is when the hubris started.

If ESD had been left to its own devices, they would have worked with Compaq and a few others to develop open platform standards, but after the AT, ESD got their wings clipped. That is what got us MCA, EISA, VL-Bus and some others. It wasn't until the PCI standards came along, the segmentation stopped. IBM's cost plus model of micro pricing made them uncompetitive in the public marketplace on purpose. They wanted the enterprise, not consumer.

I supported IBM PS/2's and Compact Deskpro's in their prime. They were excellent platforms for a purpose and could do things many people weren't' aware of that we take for granted today. They were platforms for their time, but what they meant then has no bearing on the needs of today.

As for OS/2 on POWER, it was not any kind of financial drain on IBM at all. It wasn't even strategic. Ellen Hancock spent way more pushing ATM25 as a token ring replacement than IBM did on OS/2 POWER. OS/2 for POWER actually came up in a customer focus session initially and it was taken back as a POC. IBM approached me to see if we had an interest in merging the POWER 615 with OS/2 to run Windows applications using the WoW (Windows on Windows) capability. Our answer (as well as other large corporates) was no. The train had left the station and they couldn't go back.

IBM just couldn't provide the level of engineering and support with the margins x86 micros were demanding. That is why they sold it all off to Lenovo.

As for patent trolling by IBM, I don't buy it. (As an example) The coding scheme for your music compact disc was developed by IBM back in 1956. The Sony-Philips consortium had no problems negotiating a royalty agreement with IBM to use it.

I haven't heard of anything in recent times where they are cracking peoples nuts over some IP.