Slashdot Mirror
VIA Releases FOSS Graphics Driver
billybob2 writes "VIA has released a 113,800 line open source graphics driver with full mode-setting support for CRT, LCD, and DVI devices along with 2D, X-Video, and cursor acceleration. Harald Welte, VIA's open source representative, states that the next step is to add 3D (see preview), TV-out, and hardware codec support while integrating this work with existing open source projects. VIA has pre-installed Linux on a significant portion of the company's latest products, including the EVEREX gPC2, 15.4" gBook, and CloudBook. It has also helped port the open source CoreBoot BIOS (previously LinuxBIOS) to several of its motherboards." VIA seems to be making good on the promise of its open source initiative announced last April.
Not yet, but soon hopefully. As stated in the OP.
It is really cool to see more hardware vendors moving to open source. Drivers are one area where more eyes are needed to help make the bugs shallow.
Thoughts on tech, Software Engineering, and stuff
I hope that this goes better than VIA's prior activities in this area. VIA has some very, very cute hardware for linux project purposes(loads of small form factor boards, without the restrictions that intel has been putting on atom), some decently interesting netbooks, etc.
If I can trust that VIA video will actually work properly under linux, their boards become considerably more attractive for my purposes. The prospect of coreboot support for such boards would be gravy. I'd love to be able to put together some little linux widgets with linux burned right into the motherboard.
As an act of faith, we should build something cool out of this - not to mention promote them to non-gaming computer users.
If we can optimize a graphics driver or do new things with it, they can sell more hardware and everybody wins. God knows ATI isn't making any money off of their drivers.
Hopefully we can use this to drive the point home.
I have developed a truly marvelous proof of this comment, which this signature is too narrow to contain.
Maybe they wronged the open source community in the past, maybe they didn't (I personally don't know). Let's show them that we are forgiving of past mistakes and fully welcome them and their donated code into the FOSS world. They made things right, let's not dwell on the past.
-- Will program for bandwidth
Yes, because sharing source code so that you can get extra help from the rest of the world so you can all work together on software is horrible and wasteful and will produce crappy software and is way too expensive for any company to do.
Oh wait, there are several companies doing that already, never mind.
I buy graphics cards for their hardware, and I expect the software to utilize the hardware as best it can, and if anyone can help with that and with fixing bugs etc then all the better.
On the specific point of arguing "IP" politics though, do you honestly think the world has better graphics hardware right now because of the closed nature of graphics drivers? Because guess what, it's usually competition which spurs the development of better technology, competition which drives innovation in the world, so to tell me with a straight face that without the secrecy and closed nature of Nvidia's and ATI's graphics drivers, graphics technology would be further behind than if it were more open and there was more competition for making better hardware instead of screwing around with driver secrecy, that'd be a feat. I believe that most all patents and secrecy now days is nothing but harmful. In a world that's so inter-connected, there are very few examples I can find for justifying monopolies on ideas. They most always serve only to make the rich richer and poor poorer. (See Microsoft's patent FUD, for example, and try to tell me that did any good for the rest of the world.)
Promote true freedom - support standards and interoperability.
It is likely they went through a process of discovery. The discovered that keeping the software open source has very little impact upon maintaining competitive advantage on the hardware or making innovative leaps in hardware design and keeping those proprietary. For hardware producers, software is just another overhead and working to minimise that cost makes sense.
There is a real push to achieve low cost ubiquitous computing, UMPC's, smartphone/PDA etc. and every cost saving makes it far more achievable and obviously maintains reasonable profit margins for the hardware manufacturers.
At the moment hardware manufacturers find their profit margins squeezed while their products are carrying closed source proprietary software with 10 times the profit margin, it makes absolutely no business sense as a hard ware manufacturer to put up with this. I am sure most hardware manufacturers thought that M$'s idea of free hardware and 'renting' the software was a load of B$.
Chaos - everything, everywhere, everywhen
The whole argument for FOSS 3D video card drivers is just silly in my opinion. Very very very few people have the skills necessary to write good drivers for these chips (others can learn, but that takes months or years to do). The people who write these drivers do it as a full time job, and the drivers are some of the most important IP in a graphics card (if they were released under a gpl like license, it would be much easier for a new competitor to develop a product).
What about the SuSE radeonhd developers? They work full time. You speak as if programming 3D graphics is rocket science. It is rocket science, if you don't have the specs. Otherwise, it would have been done YEARS ago.
And in five years' time, when they've stopped supporting your card in the latest kernel version, you do what?