On 8/13/06, Lourens Veen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Sunday 13 August 2006 13:31, Rogelio Serrano wrote:
>
> There is really no change at all. At least as far as current ATI
> development is concerned. ATI can start developing a less encumbered
> board in the far future though. Did the IP owners of the technology
> ATI is using changed their minds?
What about the theory that the ATI driver writers are working off of
prototype hardware, hardware design documents, and emails from the
hardware guys, that is, that there _is_ no documentation to be made
public.
Now, AMD creates x86 processors, and the x86 instruction set changes
once every couple of years when some new instructions are added.
Graphics cards are evolving much more quickly. I wonder if AMD will be
willing to spend the resources to publish a new set of documentation
for three products every 6-8 months, to serve a platform that is a
niche market for 3D (obviously a chicken-and-egg problem).
Why not just give away reference drivers?
There goes the niche market argument again. If they give access it
will not be a niche market anymore after some time. If they dont give
access drivers will suck and the market remains a niche market.
ATI is just not going to be lead in open source graphics development.
Neither does NVidia nor Intel. They can catch up later if at all.
I think i just have to make do with plain old framebuffer for now.
There are still a lot of gui stuff that can be done with fbdev
specially if its not WIMP.
--
things i hate about my linux pc:
1. it takes more than a second to boot up
2. keeps asking about filenames and directories
3. does not remember what i was working on yesterday
4. does not remember all the changes i have ever made
5.cannot figure out necessary settings by itself
_______________________________________________
Open-graphics mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.duskglow.com/mailman/listinfo/open-graphics
List service provided by Duskglow Consulting, LLC (www.duskglow.com)
