Slashdot Mirror
AMD Intentionally Added Artificial Limitations To Their HDMI Adapters
An anonymous reader writes "NVIDIA was caught removing features from their Linux driver and days later Linux developers have caught and confirmed AMD imposing artificial limitations on their graphics cards in the DVI-to-HDMI adapters that their driver will support. Over years AMD has quietly been adding an extra EEPROM chip to their DVI-to-HDMI adapters that are bundled with Radeon HD graphics cards. Only when these identified adapters are detected via checks in their Windows and Linux Catalyst driver is HDMI audio enabled. If using a third-party DVI-to-HDMI adapter, HDMI audio support is disabled by the Catalyst driver. Open-source Linux developers have found this to be a self-imposed limitation and that the open-source AMD Linux driver will work fine with any DVI-to-HDMI adapter."
Seriously, AMD, Why?
Do they make that much on adaptors that they care?
Since when?
If companies would dedicate only 1/10th of their let's-screw-with-our-customer-resources to actual improvement of their products, *gasp*, I would be so happy.
It's crazy that companies go through all this trouble to protect a revenue stream from something as inexpensive and generic as a DVI to HDMI adapter.
Really, if they want to make a little more money, why not charge an extra dollar for the card itself and be done with it?
DVI/HDMI don't even carry power, so you can't use the "it might fry the device" excuse that Apple uses with their lightning plugs.
It was practically designed by the copyright industry so that they can control everything. I mean they have just about ruined the spec preventing it from being useful. Why does it need an encrypted signal? It kind of ticks me off. I recall troubleshooting and actually putting my amp system into the shop TWICE at the manufacturer's suggestion because they didn't recognize (or admit) that the problem I was experiencing was all about HDMI. (And to think all I wanted to do was play a video game through my amp and to the TV... what copyright interest is there in that?!)
Remember back when there was all kinds of competition in the video chipset\card market? 3DFX, Rendition, S3, Matrox, etc... Now we are down to two choices and they are both screwing us over... I guess that's what happens when competition is limited. What to do?
Brought to you by Carl's Junior.
this is a normal part of a functional modern consumer capitalism. planned obsolescence, crippled interoperability and limited features are all things corporations adopt in order to drive profit and increase sales yearly. its why your cellphone doesnt have expandable RAM anymore and your game consoles and processors routinely change size, shape, and pin count. The problem is not AMD, its the notion that any economic system constructed on a finite level of resources can questionlessly and consistently achieve percentages of growth regardless of demand. well built, creative and useful products serve no purpose, but are sometimes accidents of fortune in the creation of a product. once its established, each iteration becomes a steady descent into nothing more than a means to achieve what you had, and define yourself based on unrealistic expectations set by advertising and product research teams.
this problem cannot be fixed, because we would have to stop purchasing the product. we cant stop, because the product is the standard by which we esablish our likes and dislikes, as well as our perception of everything from uniqueness to wealth and success. Put your TV on the curb, download a copy of adblock plus, and in six months this entire article will seem the very definition of the hedonistic treadmill.
Good people go to bed earlier.
Stallman, is that you?
gpl-gpu kickstarter launches tomorrow. A fully LGPL 2D/ 3D graphics accelerator written in Verilog. Currently running in an Arria IIgx. GPLGPU Kickstarter
It can't. The complaint is that a non-standard feature is only enabled for known non-standard adapters. The story is flamebait.
You do not have a moral or legal right to do absolutely anything you want.
I guess I'm missing something here. What is the big deal if HDMI audio is turned off when using DVI since DVI doesn't carry an audio signal anyway?
So, just the tip then? Promise?
This is exactly what's happening. Reading the summary, my first thought was that it was incorrect and my second thought was that the writer was clueless. After all, DVI doesn't support audio so how can DVI out provide audio to a DVI - HDMI adapter? The answer is; only by breaking the standard.
So, if you break the DVI standard and send audio out what happens? There are no adverse effects, at all, ever, even when the connection is DVI - DVI? It seems to me that they are simply adding a safety feature to their non-standard implementation. 'If we don;t know for absolute certain that the end point is HDMI, don't send audio out the DVI interface.'
If AMD put HDMI ports on their video card, they'd have to pay licensing/royalty fees to HDMI Licensing, LLC. By only putting DVI connectors on their video cards, ATI doesn't have to pay the fee. But for the small percentage of customers who *want* HDMI, they sell the adapter and pay for the licensing costs with that instead. Since they sell far fewer adapters than cards obviously, the overall license fees paid become much less.
Presumably the EEPROM is in there because the HDMI Licensing lawyers aren't complete idiots, and required the card to make sure the adapter is licensed. Tossing a 10-cent 24LC01 or something in there with a magic byte on it probably didn't break the bank.
Just for a minute.
Just to see how it feels.