Hey,
ATI has not been very cooperative with letting the documentation out,
but they may be now, it took them a month to get the documentation to
me, and by then School had started :-( There is a cvs branch for mach64
almost a year old which I have used with limited succes (some gl demos
I'm using the kernel module from 2.4.10. Everything else is from the
Slackware 8.0 release. XFree86 4.1.0 and a Radeon AIW graphics card.
- Original Message -
From: Michel Dänzer [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Sunday, September 30, 2001 10:24 AM
Subject: Re: [Dri-devel]
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [Dri-devel] Radeon 8500, what's the plan?
Date: Tue, 2 Oct 2001 17:19:53 -0400 (EDT)
Well, we (GATOS) do have the docs, under similar NDA. I believe PI/VA was
more doc-rich ;) But (looking in them) they
On Wed, 3 Oct 2001, David Johnson wrote:
There is some seriously proprietary stuff with idct that for legal
reasons ATI wouldn't want to expose.
That is one of the most ridiculous statements I have heard. Substitute
some equivalent terms in there:
There is some seriously proprietary stuff
** well, let's see how many flames I can generate with this.. **
I'll see if I can generate more.
One point that I think has been missed is that while Open Source in
general (and Linux, in particular) improves a lot user and developer
experience, the binaries get even less value than in
Jeffrey W. Baker wrote:
On Wed, 3 Oct 2001, David Johnson wrote:
There is some seriously proprietary stuff with idct that for legal
reasons ATI wouldn't want to expose.
That is one of the most ridiculous statements I have heard. Substitute
some equivalent terms in there:
There is
From: Gareth Hughes [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Jeffrey W. Baker [EMAIL PROTECTED]
CC: David Johnson [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [Dri-devel] Radeon 8500, what's the plan?
Date: Tue, 02 Oct 2001 18:02:16 -0700
Jeffrey W. Baker wrote:
On Wed, 3 Oct 2001, David Johnson wrote:
On Wed, Oct 03, 2001 at 01:17:03AM +, David Johnson wrote:
Actually I think SiS offers an idct solution as well but beyond protecting
intellectual property there are potential legal issues with exposing how ATI
decodes copy righted, copy protected DVD.
I don't understand what this fuss
On Wed, Oct 03, 2001 at 12:57:55AM +, David Johnson wrote:
|... I think a major problem for Linux is forward and
| backward compatibility issues and compatibility issues between
| distributions. ...
There are (at least) two issues here: Binary compatibility for
On Wed, Oct 03, 2001 at 12:57:55AM +, David Johnson wrote:
Take a look at NVIDIA's linux driver website.
http://www.nvidia.com/view.asp?PAGE=linux Is that confusing to a
non-technical user or what? Is the average user going to know the
difference between Redhat 7.1 SMP Kernel vs
On Wed, 3 Oct 2001, Damien Miller wrote:
On Tue, 2 Oct 2001 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
With linux, it will say something along the lines of works with Redhat
6.2. (take a look at many CAD packages, for example - they are _not_ very
graphics intensive). Games are even trickier. I have
On Tue, 2 Oct 2001, Gareth Hughes wrote:
Jeffrey W. Baker wrote:
On Wed, 3 Oct 2001, David Johnson wrote:
There is some seriously proprietary stuff with idct that for legal
reasons ATI wouldn't want to expose.
That is one of the most ridiculous statements I have heard.
Loki didn't get low level (i.e. register level) idct docs. They got an
idct
library with docs on how to use that library. I don't think PI/VA got
them
either. There is some seriously proprietary stuff with idct that for
legal
reasons ATI wouldn't want to expose.
Would you know
Or it could be that the iDCT core was not developed by ATI, but by someone
else, and ATI just licensed it. This could explain why they are so
adamant about not releasing the docs. As for TV-out they might be afraid
that releasing the specs could be consired equivalent to providing
Macrovision
Around 3 o'clock on Oct 3, Peter Surda wrote:
I don't understand what this fuss about hardware accelerated idct is. In which
situation you actually get use of it? When I play DVDs on my Duron 650 I get
over 50% free CPU time with a software-only dvd decoder (vlc), the card only
does yuv-rgb
On Tue, 2 Oct 2001 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On the other hand, perhaps, I should give a try to writing a game engine
myself.
I know of at least one open-source (LGPL) engine in development: Crystal
Space (http://crystal.linuxgames.com). It's a very ambitious project
which aims to be a
From: Peter Surda [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Wed, 3 Oct 2001 03:19:04 +0200
I thought this conversation was about Loki releasing Linux versions
of current generation games.
I thought the conversation was about why and which games and cards to buy?
The thread I responded to was
On Tue, 2 Oct 2001, David S. Miller wrote:
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Tue, 2 Oct 2001 17:39:25 -0400 (EDT)
I would say that with Linux, the proper business model should be not
release binary game, but provide artwork for an existing engine.
I.e. have Open Source
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Tue, 2 Oct 2001 17:39:25 -0400 (EDT)
I would say that with Linux, the proper business model should be not
release binary game, but provide artwork for an existing engine.
I.e. have Open Source game engine (bet it Q3 like or Civilization like)
19 matches
Mail list logo
