Linux driver support...

[iago]

In response to Warrior and MyndFyre (who both have obnoxiously long signatures.. coincidence?):

Well ok, just to Mynd: WINE wasn't created because Microsoft gives documentation.  And WINE also doesn't undermind Microsoft or make them lose money, and nobody has yet gotten WINE mixed up with Windows (as far as I know).  Also, I thought of another example:  how often have you looked for a linksys driver and accidentally found tulip (the open-source driver for Linksys)? 

And to Warrior: nobody is asking companies to write them special drivers, which is what it sounds like.  Nobody is even asking them to release source code for current drivers (it would be nice, but that's fine).  They need only release a schematic of the interface, or make it possible for somebody to access the schematic.  Although Linux is opensource, there are a lot of very capable Linux developers who would sign an NDA and write a closed-source Linux driver for propriatary hardware.  The hardware companies would benefit greatly by doing so, and most Linux users would use it regardless of the license.  The hardware company gets free labour, and the Linux users get a free driver.  What's the problem?

[Warrior]

And to Warrior: nobody is asking companies to write them special drivers, which is what it sounds like.  Nobody is even asking them to release source code for current drivers (it would be nice, but that's fine).  They need only release a schematic of the interface, or make it possible for somebody to access the schematic.  Although Linux is opensource, there are a lot of very capable Linux developers who would sign an NDA and write a closed-source Linux driver for propriatary hardware.  The hardware companies would benefit greatly by doing so, and most Linux users would use it regardless of the license.  The hardware company gets free labour, and the Linux users get a free driver.  What's the problem?

You're right, that would work and I doubt nVidia or ATi would have a problem provided they sign an NDA and are willing to pay the same price the others have paid. I'm basing my post from the majority of issues I've seen is people shunning propriatary drivers and demanding open source drivers.

 I'm all for you guys having video drivers, hell it evens the playing field. I know I was making a generalization before but this is surely not the way to go. If and only if they approach this in a non demanding way and show ATi and nVidia that they benefit then it works.

I'm sorry but I'm just really against people who believe GPL is the only way for Open source to be and that's the attitude of most people I've talked with. You can spread open source if you want, hell it's a damned good idea if enough people like it but using GPL as a tactic to do so is just stupid. It started off as a good idea but now it's a load of bull.

Back on topic howerver, is reverse engineering (even by Clean Room Design) possible?
I mean if the developers can atleast get a feel for what instructions and ports to write to and access 3D functions it would be better than nothing. With that they could build onto it and improve it over time. Perhaps this may even concern ATi due to quality issues and make them release a more stable propriatary driver?

From the information I've personally read (2D Radeon drivers, VMWare 2D/3D Drivers, etc..) if you have 2D acceleration you're already atleast in the playing field of 3D Accel and it's only a matter of some unknown registers and portwriting.

[Newby]

I think it's pretty selfish of Linux users to demand drivers when other companies (Microsoft) are willingly paying money and signing an NDA for the drivers. They don't comply with YOU, you comply with THEM.

I don't comply with fucking shit. I stop buying high-end products from companies that refuse to cooperate with the release of good open-source drivers (or at the very least, schematics so people can develop the drivers) and move to ones that have some cooperation.

Just an FYI, the last statement you said in my quote only works for Microsoft, who could literally not sell another product from this day on and STILL afford to pay their employees until they died. Companies ala ATi should comply with their users, because nVidia complies better than they do with Linux and my next card is guaranteed to be an nVidia card. ATi just lost any future purchases I would have made.

[Warrior]

I think it's pretty selfish of Linux users to demand drivers when other companies (Microsoft) are willingly paying money and signing an NDA for the drivers. They don't comply with YOU, you comply with THEM.

I don't comply with fucking shit. I stop buying high-end products from companies that refuse to cooperate with the release of good open-source drivers (or at the very least, schematics so people can develop the drivers) and move to ones that have some cooperation.

Just an FYI, the last statement you said in my quote only works for Microsoft, who could literally not sell another product from this day on and STILL afford to pay their employees until they died. Companies ala ATi should comply with their users, because nVidia complies better than they do with Linux and my next card is guaranteed to be an nVidia card. ATi just lost any future purchases I would have made.

Sorry but that's not going to make them care, I can see them caring if Linux had like 20% marketshare.

[Newby]

Sorry but that's not going to make them care, I can see them caring if Linux had like 20% marketshare.

When suddenly nVidia gets that many more customers and ATi loses the number of customers they gain, they might get a clue.

And hey, even if they don't notice, it shows how much we mean to them.

[Warrior]

Sorry but that's not going to make them care, I can see them caring if Linux had like 20% marketshare.

When suddenly nVidia gets that many more customers and ATi loses the number of customers they gain, they might get a clue.

And hey, even if they don't notice, it shows how much we mean to them.

When that happens then yea, they probably will.

And yes, unfortunately companies value money over customers.

[iago]

You're right, that would work and I doubt nVidia or ATi would have a problem provided they sign an NDA and are willing to pay the same price the others have paid. I'm basing my post from the majority of issues I've seen is people shunning propriatary drivers and demanding open source drivers.

 I'm all for you guys having video drivers, hell it evens the playing field. I know I was making a generalization before but this is surely not the way to go. If and only if they approach this in a non demanding way and show ATi and nVidia that they benefit then it works.

I'm sorry but I'm just really against people who believe GPL is the only way for Open source to be and that's the attitude of most people I've talked with. You can spread open source if you want, hell it's a damned good idea if enough people like it but using GPL as a tactic to do so is just stupid. It started off as a good idea but now it's a load of bull.

Back on topic howerver, is reverse engineering (even by Clean Room Design) possible?
I mean if the developers can atleast get a feel for what instructions and ports to write to and access 3D functions it would be better than nothing. With that they could build onto it and improve it over time. Perhaps this may even concern ATi due to quality issues and make them release a more stable propriatary driver?

From the information I've personally read (2D Radeon drivers, VMWare 2D/3D Drivers, etc..) if you have 2D acceleration you're already atleast in the playing field of 3D Accel and it's only a matter of some unknown registers and portwriting.

I would prefer that the developer didn't have to pay for the driver specs, just sign the NDA.  The reason is, Linux developers often don't make much money for their development, and allowing a developer for a free OS access to the specs won't harm anything. 

In any case, you're right that we aren't likely going to see a GPL'ed driver with blessings from the company.  It would be nice, but I don't expect it.  I do support GNU and GPL, and think that they are great systems.  They create a inter-friendly pocket of applications that work well and are helpful to people.  There are problems, yes, but I still support the principal.  I'm also aware that it's impossible for the whole world go to GPL, even if the FSF would like that.  Again, it would be nice, but it's not realistic. 

[Warrior]

You're right, that would work and I doubt nVidia or ATi would have a problem provided they sign an NDA and are willing to pay the same price the others have paid. I'm basing my post from the majority of issues I've seen is people shunning propriatary drivers and demanding open source drivers.

 I'm all for you guys having video drivers, hell it evens the playing field. I know I was making a generalization before but this is surely not the way to go. If and only if they approach this in a non demanding way and show ATi and nVidia that they benefit then it works.

I'm sorry but I'm just really against people who believe GPL is the only way for Open source to be and that's the attitude of most people I've talked with. You can spread open source if you want, hell it's a damned good idea if enough people like it but using GPL as a tactic to do so is just stupid. It started off as a good idea but now it's a load of bull.

Back on topic howerver, is reverse engineering (even by Clean Room Design) possible?
I mean if the developers can atleast get a feel for what instructions and ports to write to and access 3D functions it would be better than nothing. With that they could build onto it and improve it over time. Perhaps this may even concern ATi due to quality issues and make them release a more stable propriatary driver?

From the information I've personally read (2D Radeon drivers, VMWare 2D/3D Drivers, etc..) if you have 2D acceleration you're already atleast in the playing field of 3D Accel and it's only a matter of some unknown registers and portwriting.

I would prefer that the developer didn't have to pay for the driver specs, just sign the NDA.  The reason is, Linux developers often don't make much money for their development, and allowing a developer for a free OS access to the specs won't harm anything. 

In any case, you're right that we aren't likely going to see a GPL'ed driver with blessings from the company.  It would be nice, but I don't expect it.  I do support GNU and GPL, and think that they are great systems.  They create a inter-friendly pocket of applications that work well and are helpful to people.  There are problems, yes, but I still support the principal.  I'm also aware that it's impossible for the whole world go to GPL, even if the FSF would like that.  Again, it would be nice, but it's not realistic. 

Well maybe them paying is too much, I don't know a lot about ATi's stipulations but last I heard it was like  $5,000 per spec under NDA and if they had interest in you. It was a semi unreliable source so I don't know.

[iago]

I could understand charging a commercial company like Microsoft or Apple, since they're trying to make money.  But you'd hope that they'd allow volunteers to do it for free, provided they signed the NDA and didn't ask for any help.