Jose Hevia wrote: > > Of course, most companies that set out, a priori, to be fabless and > > license IP for profit tend to fail disastrously. But we're not trying > > to sustain a company on this. Indeed, the profit margin would have to > > be painfully small in order to be the least bit competitive anyhow. > > Our objective is to put a completely open GPU design out on the > > market, and that isn't necessarily profitable. > > I disagree on that. You were three technical people with a lot of > technical engineering knowledge that tried to make a company and did > not success.
Jose, do you know what "fabless and license IP for profit" means? Tim was not talking about his own company. > The concept of "GPU" was created by Nvidia, you don't need to > compete with Nvidia, they are too strong to compete with them > in their own terms. > > Go for something that they will never do but benefits the community > ans start small so people can support you. People want to support you > but you need to provide with an excuse. E.g it is very hard for me to > spend money on a card that just display text graphics but I could > support a module that automatically splits a 3d model in layers and > makes a path for the 3d printer without a computer. This is a fun product idea. It can be done using the OGD1! //Peter _______________________________________________ Open-graphics mailing list [email protected] http://lists.duskglow.com/mailman/listinfo/open-graphics List service provided by Duskglow Consulting, LLC (www.duskglow.com)
