--- Kendall Bennett [EMAIL PROTECTED] a
écrit : David Dawes [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Frankly, your own rants against XFree86 and some
of its volunteers
recently are no different than this. It sure left
a bad taste in
our mouths. There is a sickening propensity
towards hostile and
David Dawes [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
When exactly have I 'ranted' against XFree86 and some of it's volunteers?
I felt personally attacked beyond what might be considered
reasonable by you in some of the forum discussions in April this
year.
Because I stated my opinion that everyone
On Sun, Jul 20, 2003 at 02:22:10AM -0400, Mike A. Harris wrote:
I have no problem for them to go proprietary, but i would very much like
a powerpc version of said drivers. Since both of them also release
drivers for MacOSX, i guess this would not be very expensive to just
rebuild powerpc
On Sun, Jul 20, 2003 at 05:12:00AM -0400, Mike A. Harris wrote:
On Sat, 19 Jul 2003, Daniel Stone wrote:
Not very many, and their competitirs would then have access to all their IP, so
could out-do them in the next generation of cards.
I doubt that it would involve hardware as much as it
On Wed, Jul 23, 2003 at 04:42:31PM -0700, Kendall Bennett wrote:
Jon Leech [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'll back that up. Besides which, after a few years of being bitched
at (and in one case involving a friend who's a senior software engineer at
a commodity graphics vendor, physically
David Dawes [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Frankly, your own rants against XFree86 and some of its volunteers
recently are no different than this. It sure left a bad taste in our
mouths. There is a sickening propensity towards hostile and intimidating
behaviour from several quarters, and it
David Dawes [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Frankly, your own rants against XFree86 and some of its volunteers
recently are no different than this. It sure left a bad taste in
our mouths. There is a sickening propensity towards hostile and
intimidating behaviour from several quarters, and it
On Tue, Jul 22, 2003 at 06:56:58PM -0700, Mark Vojkovich wrote:
| The interest, at least as far as the press is concerned, seems to
| be almost totally in the chipset performance. nForce2 is available
| without internal graphics. If I recall correctly, nForce3 (I believe
| there were some
On Sun, Jul 20, 2003 at 03:10:14AM -0400, Mike A. Harris wrote:
...
Anyone in my position who has to deal with these types of support
questions or customer/user feedback, will very likely know
exactly where I am coming from, and will strongly back up my
statement that it is often better to
Jon Leech [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'll back that up. Besides which, after a few years of being bitched
at (and in one case involving a friend who's a senior software engineer at
a commodity graphics vendor, physically threatened) because their company
wasn't doing enough for Linux/OSS, I
(Sorry for the delayed reply -- I've been travelling.)
On Sun, Jul 20, 2003 at 04:15:51PM -0700, Mark Vojkovich wrote:
| On Sun, 20 Jul 2003, Allen Akin wrote:
|... It may be that there *aren't* any million-dollar
| per-employee revenue opportunities available in the market.
On Sun, 20 Jul 2003, Mike A. Harris wrote:
On Sat, 19 Jul 2003, Fred Heitkamp wrote:
If the server market is the biggest (and for Linux it is) then
only 2D support if that is required. I'd bet even the big
film studios don't use Linux to view the final rendering. They
probably use a Mac
On Sun, 20 Jul 2003, Sven Luther wrote:
Date: Sun, 20 Jul 2003 14:58:56 +0200
From: Sven Luther [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Subject: Re: Rant (was Re: ATI Drivers.)
I've responded to Sven off list, simply because
On Sun, 20 Jul 2003, Richard A. Hecker wrote:
I encounter this all the time. If someone asks me Why does your
product version x.y not support foo? and I delete their mail,
they are none the wiser. They are unlikely to flame me, or to
even know if I got it.
I will add my own Rant here.
On Mon, Jul 21, 2003 at 08:04:56AM -0400, Mike A. Harris wrote:
On Sun, 20 Jul 2003, Richard A. Hecker wrote:
I will add my own Rant here. Ignoring email from Joe Public who
bought his 'Puter from Walmart' might work, but I feel 'Dissed'
when a person insults my intelligence with this
Win:
I agree with the spirit of your statement, but I don't want the government
involved in any part of what I do for a living or a hobby.
I agree that M$'s size is a problem now, but I am certain that they will
not be dominant forever. Large companies do fail, and they do get smaller.
JC
Sven Luther [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Why do these companies not open source their complete drivers?
Because they have intellectual property in their drivers that
As if their concurent where not capable of reverse engineering the
drivers.
And if they did and they got caught, their
On Fri, 18 Jul 2003, Fred Heitkamp wrote:
I appreciate all the work various folks have done to move Linux
along. I have used Linux since about kernel 0.99. Now for me
at least Linux has become my daily OS. (I used to use OS/2
daily and Linux as my secondary OS.) Many Thanks to All!
I also
On Fri, 18 Jul 2003, Dan wrote:
We get what the lawyers say we can have basically, and we should
be glad to get that, especially if the alternative is nothing.
From an end-user's point of view, this argument doesn't cut it.
It doesn't have to cut it. If a product does not do what you do
not
On 18 Jul 2003, William Suetholz wrote:
The binary ones, or the open source ones? Either way, your
question isn't very clear. What's the deal doesn't mean a lot.
I am not aware of any open source drivers directly available from ATI.
That is because ATI contributes their open source code
On Fri, 18 Jul 2003, Tim Roberts wrote:
On the other hand.. If more people who didn't want to have to run
another OS to access features that are not well supported because of
lack of knowledge on how to support them would comment/complain
(oh alright -BITCH-) maybe the hardware vendors would
On Fri, 18 Jul 2003, Mark Vojkovich wrote:
No, ATI makes money when IBM orders 2 million Rage chips for their next
generation laptop. If IBM made the deal conditional on ATI providing high-
quality, high-functionality XFree86 drivers, you can bet they would trip over
their shoelaces in
On Sat, 19 Jul 2003, Fred Heitkamp wrote:
For consumer desktop that's true. There is one potential business
case in the professional desktop market. SGI's, HP's and Sun's old
workstation customers have been moving over to Linux. All the film
studios are using Linux, for instance. The
On Sat, 19 Jul 2003, Daniel Stone wrote:
No, there you are exagerating. I hardly doubt that they would go broke
or whatever if they released open source drivers. If anything, they
would sell more boards.
Not very many, and their competitirs would then have access to all their IP, so
could
On Fri, 2003-07-18 at 14:30, Dan wrote:
Sure Quake works, and xscreensaver and the xmms plugins. Cool. But a
majority of the games I have don't work: Tribes 2 ( crashes on startup
), Unreal Tournament 2003 ( previously required S3 Texture Compression,
now has far too many rendering bugs
On Sun, Jul 20, 2003 at 03:10:14AM -0400, Mike A. Harris wrote:
...snip...
More likely than not it is a case of it's better to not say
anything at all, than to try and be honest and explain your
position and then have people attack you endlessly with more
ferocity than they'd have done
On Sun, 20 Jul 2003, Mike A. Harris wrote:
On Sat, 19 Jul 2003, Daniel Stone wrote:
No, there you are exagerating. I hardly doubt that they would go broke
or whatever if they released open source drivers. If anything, they
would sell more boards.
Not very many, and their competitirs
On Fri, Jul 18, 2003 at 06:09:44PM -0700, Mark Vojkovich wrote:
|
|As for the viability of a particular market, here's an example.
| Yahoo's business section lists NVIDIA as having 1513 employees and
| revenue over the last year was $1731 Million. This is revenue of
| over $1 Million per
On Sun, 20 Jul 2003, Allen Akin wrote:
On Fri, Jul 18, 2003 at 06:09:44PM -0700, Mark Vojkovich wrote:
|
|As for the viability of a particular market, here's an example.
| Yahoo's business section lists NVIDIA as having 1513 employees and
| revenue over the last year was $1731 Million.
Sorry I interrupt but I wonder why the government does not see (want to see)
that Microsoft in effect is completely blocking the market. Because of its
market size no development into anything new can be performed if it does not
run on windows and since that market is very large, companies do
On Fri, Jul 18, 2003 at 12:25:16PM +0200, Sven Luther wrote:
No, there you are exagerating. I hardly doubt that they would go broke
or whatever if they released open source drivers. If anything, they
would sell more boards.
Not very many, and their competitirs would then have access to all
On Fri, 18 Jul 2003, Mark Vojkovich wrote:
On Fri, 18 Jul 2003, Tim Roberts wrote:
On 18 Jul 2003 20:16:35 -0500, William Suetholz wrote:
In business terms, the Linux market is not relevant. Sad but true.
For consumer desktop that's true. There is one potential business
case in the
Am Sam, 2003-07-19 um 17.52 schrieb Fred Heitkamp:
On Fri, 18 Jul 2003, Mark Vojkovich wrote:
On Fri, 18 Jul 2003, Tim Roberts wrote:
On 18 Jul 2003 20:16:35 -0500, William Suetholz wrote:
In business terms, the Linux market is not relevant. Sad but true.
For consumer desktop that's
On Sat, Jul 19, 2003 at 11:52:47AM -0400, Fred Heitkamp wrote:
If the server market is the biggest (and for Linux it is) then
only 2D support if that is required. I'd bet even the big
film studios don't use Linux to view the final rendering. They
probably use a Mac (Apple OS of some kind)
On 19 Jul, Havoc Pennington wrote:
On Sat, Jul 19, 2003 at 11:52:47AM -0400, Fred Heitkamp wrote:
If the server market is the biggest (and for Linux it is) then
only 2D support if that is required. I'd bet even the big
film studios don't use Linux to view the final rendering. They
probably
On Sat, 19 Jul 2003, Fred Heitkamp wrote:
On Fri, 18 Jul 2003, Mark Vojkovich wrote:
On Fri, 18 Jul 2003, Tim Roberts wrote:
On 18 Jul 2003 20:16:35 -0500, William Suetholz wrote:
In business terms, the Linux market is not relevant. Sad but true.
For consumer desktop that's
On Fri, 18 Jul 2003, Mark Vojkovich wrote:
For consumer desktop that's true. There is one potential business
case in the professional desktop market. SGI's, HP's and Sun's old
workstation customers have been moving over to Linux.
Thats no market secret to anyone at all. You just
On Sun, 20 Jul 2003, Alexander Stohr wrote:
On Fri, 18 Jul 2003, Mark Vojkovich wrote:
From: Fred Heitkamp [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
If the server market is the biggest (and for Linux it is) then
only 2D support if that is required. I'd bet even the big
film studios don't use Linux
From: William Suetholz [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Mr. Harris, yes I am one of Those people who want a device to work
in my chosen operating system,
/me wants Commodore 64 - BASIC BIOS 2.0 support, call it my favorite!
Cool machine, boots in 2 seconds to a fully useable prompt.
It must be an
On 17 Jul 2003, William Suetholz wrote:
When are the various different patches out there for ATI cards going
to be integrated into XFree86 and DRI? I know of at least two different
projects that are modifying these drivers.
I'm not sure what specific patches you're refering to, but
if
On Fri, Jul 18, 2003 at 05:57:50AM -0400, Mike A. Harris wrote:
What's the deal with ATI's drivers?
The binary ones, or the open source ones? Either way, your
question isn't very clear. What's the deal doesn't mean a lot.
I think you are exagerating, it was perfectly clear what he did
On Fri, 18 Jul 2003, Sven Luther wrote:
Why do these companies not open source their complete drivers?
Because they have intellectual property in their drivers that
As if their concurent where not capable of reverse engineering the
^
competition
somehow English chose
On Fri, Jul 18, 2003 at 12:44:46PM +0200, Peter Firefly Lund wrote:
On Fri, 18 Jul 2003, Sven Luther wrote:
Why do these companies not open source their complete drivers?
Because they have intellectual property in their drivers that
As if their concurent where not capable of reverse
On Fri, 18 Jul 2003 12:25:16 +0200, Sven Luther wrote:
Maybe they could have the whole X driver and kernel module in open
source, and only keep the opengl library as proprietary stuff. I more or
less doubt they have any IP involved in these part, at least some really
meaningfull stuff.
Hello,
Thank you all on the list for your responses.. It has been
interesting.
Mr. Harris, yes I am one of Those people who want a device to work
in my chosen operating system, and have been frustrated that while
things have gotten a bit better than they were in 1998, the OS and users
that
On Fri, Jul 18, 2003 at 06:09:44PM -0700, Mark Vojkovich wrote:
Ironically, the Linux desktop community doesn't target the
only potential business case there is. It's often at odds with
it. Workstation users like a platform that doesn't change and anything
that risks damaging OpenGL
TR Unfortunately, interesting and meaningful are NOT among the
TR criteria used by the US Patent and Trademark Office in awarding
TR patents.
The European Parliament intends to discuss in September Arlene
McCarthy's bill that aims to put European patent law in step with its
American counterpart.
47 matches
Mail list logo
