Slashdot Mirror
XIG Releases Commercial OpenGL X-Server
Ansgar Philippsen writes "XIG has released a first version of their hardware accelerated OpenGL X-Server.
They offer a gamers edition (full screen only) and a professional edition (all goodies included). They support a wide range of chipsets.
I would be very curious to see some comments if anyone has tested this product, especially under non-gaming conditions, e.g. a scientific OpenGL app running in a window. Additionaly, a comparison to XFree's upcoming 4.0 version will be very interesting.
Unfortunately, I could not find any details on their implementation. XFree and PrecisionInsight have released a great amount of detail on their DRI/GLX implementation, and it sure would be nice to see how XIG did it." Interesting points: This is of course not open source, and at $99 for the game version and $250 for the pro version, its not cheap, but it does support several cards that aren't supported under XF86 (like my Number 9 Rev 4 for example).
It may support that number nine card that I've never heard of, but I didn't see any 3dfx, nvidia, or matrox cards on the supported list. It seems strange that XIG would claim a "gamers" edition without *any* of the most popular 3d gaming cards out there being supported.
Jeremy
Looking for a Python IRC bot?
Unfortunatly, this release comes at a great expense to the free software community.
XiG, orignally founded by ex-xfree developers, has hired away four of Xfree's most proficint developers, including Dirk.
This has been a great loss to the Xfree project, and has been the reasons for the continied delays in the XF864.0 betas.
So, It looks like we'll all be using XiG sooner or later.. Which is probably for the best.
Sosumi. just kidding. DONT!
It looks very interesting, but it's a Bad Thing that it's closed source :( :-)
Let's hope the XFree people learn all kinds of interesting stuff from the non-free server, so we can all enjoy a good opensource licensed OpenGL Xserver
Emphyrio
This gets posted every time anything related to X come up. Where is your proof?
I think this is ok. Better than ok. I would almost say that this is a good thing. Too bad there aren't more things like this. (You know, like good things.)
check out MetroX from MetroLink http://www.metrolink.com.
Although closed-source and non-free (both beer and software) it's damn good.
If you lika me like I lika you...
Too bad 9 is bankrupt. The i128 series was and is a great card.
-jwb
Hi all, If you want to run a Rev 4 under XFree86 I think you can use the T2R (Ticket to Ride) drivers. I dont think you can run games with it though. I havent done this but while I was working for NINE I heard this was possible. Since the Rev 4 is based on the T2R chip there isnt a problem. However, there is no accelerated 3d. I have used there beta product and even got it running under Linux and have run Q3 for the Rev 4. Hey, its not 3dfx but that is more a function of the hardware than the software. I think Xi has a pretty good product personally. -Thanks and happy new year, -Graphicsboy (xNiner)
I finally got in touch with my inner child...he's a little shit.
Accelerated X needs to focus on TV Out. The only
cards that have TV Out support are lame jumpered
Trident cards (looks like crap except for 320x200)
and I heard of a hack to make the VooDoo3 3000
work.
Some of these cards look fantastic on a TV when
using Windows... I would pay $100 for an X server
that supports GL and takes advantage of most TV
out boards.
Mark
Now that $Linux$ is such a hot commodity, more and more commercial software companies will start releasing products for the market and hiring away open source developers.
...
- The software won't come with source
- The software will be expensive
- RMS and many others will BITCH BITCH BITCH
Congratulations - you wanted Linux to be popular? Well know it is, and the rules are going to change. All this "free stuff" is slowly going to start going away
What about the next pre-release xfree org would release? It should be released before the end of this year... that's in 4 days.
Anyone know if they're gonna make it?
see xfree
Currently, the utah GLX project (glx.on.openprojects.net) has GLX support from Matrox G200 and G400 cards, ATI RagePro (and derivatieves), and some (not in the main source t ree) support for S3 virge cards.
0 0_Linux.htm )
The speed of the project is amazing - after gX00 support was implemented, they got the ATI driver running in under a month.
It's completely open source, and the only thing thats stops cards from being supported is the availibility of documentation. I'd rather see card manufacturers support this effort (some have - Matrox has a press release out touting the success of GLX and of opening their card specs- http://matrox.com/mga/press_room/lat_press_rel/G4
The problem with the Revolution IV under XFree 3.3.5 is that it is not 3D accelerated. It is more or less a generic SVGA card. Only the 2D acceleration is there. OpenGL is not that and cannot be gained by Mesa for the i128. You can't run quake 3 on it at all. It is the one thing that is sad about the card. Ticket to Ride is the only thing that works with the SGI Flat Panel, so I'm stuck with it for the moment, unless someone else knows a card that supports an OpenLDI connections.
Short delay in releases
[December 1999]
The XFree86 Project has been working very hard to get the 4.0 release out the door. It is taking a little longer than expected so we will be releasing the next pre-4.0 snapshot (3.9.17) before the end of the year. We expect to release 4.0 about two months later in mid-Q1/2000.
XFree86 3.3.6 will be released in parallel with 3.9.17 as well.
Congratulations. You've written something with no coherent meaning whatsoever.
Open Source is a wonderful thing in that it gives people the ability to make their own changes -- make the program better themselves.
They key is *better*.
XiG competes with XFree not in cost, but in performance. I purchased XiG v5 even though XFree was up, running and working fine. Why? Because AcceleratedX smokes XFree in screen updates on my system (TNT2 card, dual P3-450).
The biggest visual cue is logging out from KDE -- I can watch the screen paint in 1280x1024x32 with XFree when it does the full-screen mask just before logging out. Takes a full three seconds. XiG blinks and is done in less than one.
Performance is what matters. If XiG can't get it's act together with nVidia, Matrox and 3DFx then they won't sell too many packages. If XFree handles those, it's going to be out in front.
You don't need to boycott XiG if they can't get those chipsets and can't do it better than XFree. It won't be necessary.
-chill
Learning HOW to think is more important than learning WHAT to think.
Rob Malda is Yet Another Guy who made a million bucks off of Linux ...
I noticed some people seem to focus on how this 3d-accelerated X is closed source and how that really sucks. Well, these people are out to make a superior product to Xfree86 (not saying it is, but that is their goal). They want to make money off of all of the linux gamers out there that may be frustrated that they can't seem to get quake to work in X windows with their less then Voodoo 3 or GeForce 256. If their product was open source, then anybody could download the source code and save themselves 99 bucks. That also isn't to say people wouldn't pay for the packaged version (just like people still pay for packaged linux distributions), but I think they make more money with their close sourced stuff. They also have Solaris and Freebsd versions of their servers if I'm not mistaken.
On a side note, I have a friend that uses Accelerated X with his Viper V770 and he says it smokes Xfree86.
The first link is to the cards that are supported in 3d-accelerated X, and the second link is the cards that are supported in Accelerated-X.
Two different programs, and unfortunately the OpenGL version has some serious support shortfalls. (so far, anyhow)
Illegitimi non carborundum
XiG has hired away four of Xfree's most proficient developers including Dirk.
...
I think something like that would be announced on the XFree86-devel list... (which hasn't happened.)
This is just a rumor.
This has been the reasons for the continued delays in the XF864.0 betas.
The reason why XFree86 is progressing somewhat slower than most other open source projects is, IMO, the fact that its development is too much closed up.
Subscription to the development list only after approval, no write access to the CVS trees,
In the long run, XFree86 makes it very very difficult for new developers to get in; any developer leaving for whatever reason can't be replaced as quickly as it works in other projects.
So, it looks like we'll all be using XiG sooner or later..
Definitely not. If XFree86 gets stalled, there will be a more open fork, even if I have to start it myself.
This message is provided under the terms outlined at http://www.bero.org/terms.html
- costs nothing
- comes preinstalled with most distributions
- Open Source hype
If XiG and other companies want to compete on this playground, they'll have to offer real advantages, such as better hardware support, and even that doesn't appeal enough to some people to justify a price higher than that of a full-blown Linux distribution.The most dangerous threat to OSS I can see is that some of these companies are hiring away good OSS developers to work on closed-source products.
"I love my job, but I hate talking to people like you" (Freddie Mercury)
It's that 64meg Ram free above what the OS takes that hurts. Granted, I've got it, but still, If I want to use up all my memory, I'll keep Win98.
>Congratulations. You've written something with no coherent meaning
>whatsoever.
Guy must have been on the Star Trek:The Next Generation production staff.....
I agree - performance is a key issue. However, 2d/3d acceleration has been available for Nvidia based cards for quite some time now (since 6/99 I believe). The old super-slow KDE logout hasn't been around since. Even at 32 bit. True, there is no 3d acceleleration at 32bpp, but, it'll happen. Nvidia has since opened their drivers and specs, and I suspect that the next set of drivers to be released will offer much better performance.
Don't give up just yet...
No thanks. I don't smoke anymore.
-----------
"You can't shake the Devil's hand and say you're only kidding."
I have used XiG's X-server in the past when I have a video board not supported by xfree86. The situation is reverse this time, very unusual... My Matrox G200 is supported by xfree86 and the glx project (once they make a stable release), but not by XiG. This is completely opposite from what I have seen in the past. Is the open source movement gaining enough attention to surpass commercial software in this respect?
-----------
"You can't shake the Devil's hand and say you're only kidding."
They want to make money off of all of the linux gamers out there that may be frustrated that they can't seem to get quake to work in X windows with their less then Voodoo 3 or GeForce 256. If their product was open source, then anybody could download the source code and save themselves 99 bucks.
... what's $100 to play Q3A in linux .. :)
-----
I see this from another perspective. I have a TNT1 that works great for Q1 and Q2 in Windows. Unfortuantely, the nvidia accelerated support sucks, so instead of opting for a TNT2 ultra or a Geforce I went with a Voodoo3 for Q3A. Why? As I see it, 3dfx has supported linux more in the past, and as far as nvidia is concerned, too little, too late, they should have released their drivers a long time ago. I'll spend my money on the companies that support linux, nvidia be damned!! Besides
Dirk is up and running on the Devel list of Xfree. Don't know where you got that from. Next Snapshot will be available soon. Anon
It is what it is. Next Release will be out soon. Expect it January.
$99 *is* cheap. You people have had your
view so distorted by GPL-exploiting pricing
schemes that you think software, as a rule,
should not be more than $50. Which is ridiculous: no product, no matter what the
product, should cost more than $50!
Purchasing SGI OGL certification wont help you, its my undertstanding (I'm not a OGL person) that the certification is limited to a particular setup (OS/hardware/driver). ie you certify a particular implementation, not the client side API (Mesa).
We live in a free country (free as in speech, not beer). It up to the individual to make the make the decision about where he wants to spend his money (for me, my time is way more important than money).
Thats really funny, considering who YOU now work for.
Is XiG paying you ex-xfreeers to stay quiet so that Xfree can quietly die without anyone else picking up the torch?
and I'll tell you where to send the $51 check for your next toothbrush.
Your an idiot.
Hey Smart Guy!
It should be "You're an idiot".
Still no descent RivaTNT suport in linux, ahhhhhh......., My Q3 framerate is just horrible.
-entropy
my other penis is a vagina
It's nice that somebody finally made OpenGL work right with X, but they could charge just a little less for it. For that cost, I think I'd be more inclined to use WinNT/2k for professional uses. Sadly, win has more apps, and is about the same cost, if not cheaper. If they cut the cost down a little (maybe 25% or so), I'd definately purchase a copy, but for 300 bucks, it isnt worth it. Heck, last time I checked there were about 3 opensource (free) projects working on porting OpenGL to X. I think I'll just wait, maybe even contribute, for those projects.
=======
There was never a genius without a tincture of madness.
There's a good review here.
The title amused me, "3d Linux is Here n Now." Why they used an "n" instead of an & or even "and" I don't know. And I thought they sold X, not Linux. Next we read about the two editions, especially notable is that the profession edition is solely for "the professional who has to grind out a living with this stuff." Then there's the OpenGL Compiance, which uses NO knockoffs! Amazing. Soon you'll get to upgrade to "OGL" which I don't know what it is. And the sentence "Sure, we have to pay a royalty to Silicon Graphics Inc to make use of their IP, but we believe it is worth it to insure quality and stability of the products" is funny in itself. The support for 30 graphics cards really comes down to about three different chipsets. Updates are free, although they only anticipate they will be. Also Xi's 3D X is "riddled with bugs and offers many more areas for continuing performance enhancements". So be sure to register!! (note the 2 exclamation points)
Have you ever tried to get X86 Solaris to work on a laptop and use the best graphic modes? If so, then you'll appreciate XiG drivers.
There's money to be made in supporting graphics cards and writing x-servers for intel unix platforms where business is done. Maybe not so many linux developers or gamers are interested in buying non-free x servers, but you can bet that there are enough people interested to keep them profitable.
I wouldn't be surprised to see some bundling agreements like redhat had with metro-X a while back...
It's a matter of time before we see PC software that comes on a bootable cd running linux that autodetects the hardware and just runs without the need to install or configure. I'd bet that a game developer trying to use this model would want to have the best/fastest drivers for graphics and would be interested in striking a deal with XiG.
There's no point purchasing the testing software. SGI gave the software to the Mesa author to use for free. Read the Mesa webpage. The latest test results are posted, and Mesa is not yet conformant. But it's getting pretty close.
I am fine with Xi's product, in fact, I called and had mine shipped early. 3D Accelerated-X uses a kernel module that supports a few standard GART interfaces (Intel, VIA, ...) and uses a character device (/dev/xsvc i think). The product gives me better frame rates in Q3A than the latest S3 reference drivers for my Savage4 GT/Pro. It uses SGI Licensed OpenGL 1.1.1, unlike the Mesa Project's OGL-like API. Trust me, when it comes right down to it, Mesa is still crap. Also, the $250 price is /extremely/ cheap for a product of this quality, the companies I have worked with pay $12k for their SGI workstation implementations. The 3D Accelerated-X would probably cost this much if they had paid for the OpenGL conformance tests. Xi cannot be expected to support every card on the market, they will have a licensing problem. The nvidia, 3dfx, matrox, and ati drivers are all GPL/open source. If they release open source and closed source drivers in their product, they will slaughter that beautiful code. And for all of you kiddies saying stuff about linux going big and companies releasing commercial software, check out Xi's page, they've been around for a while. ;)
I have been a linux user since RHL 1.0 in 1991, and I really hate to see linux go down the drain. With such hateful users it _will_ do this, so please hold down the flames, linux is gonna keep goin without all the immature children sending bitch letters to Mr. Dvorak...
I bought the Rev. IV with the SGI flatpanel since it appeared from the Number Nine website that they would support Linux users. However my questions about dpmi or how to change the intensity of the backlight were not being answered. Instead I was told to ask XFree about Linux related questions! To tie this rant in with the topic at hand, as long as hardware manufacturers don't publish the specs for their products their usability is limited at best. Yes, the Rev. IV and the SGI flatpanel are great products, but to enjoy hardware accellerated 3D graphics (or something as trivial as being able to adjust the brightness) you need to run proprietary software (XiG or Number 9s driver for Microsoft).
leibold@pacbell.net
What I don't get is why Diamond, Creative, etc. don't just release their own closed-source drivers (X servers). If they did, they would lose nothing except a little money to pay the programmers, and they would gain a lot of customers. I get why they don't want to release OSS drivers - competitors could reverse-engineer the hardware from the software. But if they would just include Linux drivers, they would get lots of fans. Then they would succeed or fail depending upon their hardware's merits instead of whether there is any support from your and my favorite OS. RMS types still wouldn't be happy, but oh well.
Switch the . and the @ to email me.
There are no databooks available for the 3Dfx 3D hardware; there is a 2D databook, so Xi Graphics has been able to offer support for some 3dfx hardware in 2D/X mode. AFAIK, XFree86 relies on using a binary library provided by 3Dfx (GLIDE), which is not open source/GPL/whatever. The IP remains in the hands of 3Dfx and free software offers an interface to the real binary proprietary driver.
There is no support for the Matrox boards because of missing critical data for the 3D hardware. Some of the 3D hardware is openly documented by Matrox, but certain portions that give useful speed increases are not described. If 3D Accelerated-X claimed support for the Matrox boards using partial documentation, the performance would be lower than should be available, users would be disappointed. This is not a problem for free software developers; they can offer suboptimal software and people are grateful to have their card supported in any way at all. It is probably unacceptable for us to claim support and then deliver a small fraction of the speed that the card should deliver.
Similar properties apply to nVidia. The "free" X Server has been developed by an nVidia employee. Although the source code is available for XFree86, the data book is not available. Consequently if there is a bug or if someone wants to extend or improve the nVidia X Server, e.g. for higher speed or to fix a bug, there is no reasonable way to do so. The availability of source does not mean that you control the software; the IP remains in the hands of those with the databook.
Cheers, JeremyC.
Jeremy Chatfield, Technical Evangelist, Xi Graphics.
Of the other two co-founders, one was never involved in any software development at all and is not a programmer.
The technologically significant co-founder was also never a member of XFree86, but he contributed the sources that XFree86 used. Thomas Roell was the developer of X386, the free software X Server before XFree86. He remains the primary developer for the company and has developed most of the ideas that form the basis for XFree86 4.0, several years ago.
We have not hired four XFree86 developers at any time in the company history. AFAIK, we have interviewed several XFree86 developers over the five years we've been running, but we've never hired any. Our X Server/graphics chips hires are usually made from hardware driver developers that we train to understand graphics chips. If anything, we add to the pool of graphics hardware expertise.
Cheers, JeremyC.
Jeremy Chatfield, Technical Evangelist, Xi Graphics.
I am an ex-academic. I appreciate that rms' ideas might encourage diversity and novelty in creating algorithmic solutions. However, most of an X Server these days isn't novel solutions that can be patented, but technowledgery. It is knowing which registers to poke on a graphics chip, in which order, at which time intervals, to get a correct and clear image. This is not IP in the traditional sense, and I don't think the propogation of this knowledge would do much for any other field of software development.
X Servers and graphics chips are intrinsically pretty boring. You have to follow someone else's fifteen year old ideas about what graphics should be like and marry it to an insanely complex new chip that was developed a few weeks ago with inadequate documentation.
If the sources for Accelerated-X were made available, it wouldn't significantly add to the IP value of free software. The registers to drive a Matrox chip faster can't be applied to make an ATI or any other graphics chip faster, much less a non-graphics chip. They can, however, be applied to make an XFree86 implementation of an X Server for a Matrox chip yet faster.
All that would be accomplished by making Xi Graphics source code available would be to give a transient speed increase to XFree86 at the expense of the loss of a few dozen jobs. At the end of the process, you'd still have an XFree86 team that generates slower X Servers that fail the X test Suite and that are less robust than Accelerated-X.
What you'd be missing is a source for an X Server implementation that makes some effort to be faster, better and offers timely support.
I do believe that making novel algorithms available can improve other efforts. For example, there is little doubt that public inspection of crypto code is valuable. However, public availability of which register to poke is not, in my mind, of the same order.
It is however, valuable. If your machine crashes because some programmer can't be bothered to correct a bug, you may lose hours of work. If you can't correctly display an image of some project on which you are working, you may cause millions of dollars of lost productivity when a pipe or wire is sent the wrong way because it was drawn incorrectly because a programmer ignored the X specs or thought that their opinion about the significance of meeting the spec was important.
I do believe that open inspection of security code and OS code can improve it. I do not believe, with practical evidence, that open inspection of complex register poking code for graphics, has much to recommend it. I don't think rms' model for software improvement applies usefully to improving register poking on graphics chips.
XFree86 already demonstrates that the principle isn't working. I can crash XFree86 far faster and more easily than I can crash Accelerated-X. I can make XFree86 display incorrectly far more easily than I can make Accelerated-X display incorrectly. These are not the result of algorithmic improvements unique to Accelerated-X. They are the result of significant practical effort to find the best set of registers to poke and of a QA process intended to find errors before a user sees them. IMO, this is entirely not the point of GPL.
AFAIK, the point of GPL was to find a better algorithm, not a better register. The GPL makes no claim about the quality of the code it is to produce; that has been inferred and is the subject of religious adherence to creed rather than repeatable practical measurement. In any case, as I started off pointing out, XFree86 is not GPL'ed... you probably have to apply a different argument for non-GPL bt freely available sources ;-)
FWIW, I can contribute anecdotal evidence about Linux' stability versus Windows. I can contribute practical, measurable, repeatable evidence about XFree86 versus Accelerated-X stability and correctness. Two different types of data. I'd welcome a practical, repeatable and measurable way to demonstrate Linux reliability versus Windows, rather than refutable anecdotal evidence. I'd love to see an independent group test the verifiable behavior of XFree86 and Accelerated-X Servers for stability and correctness.
Cheers, JeremyC.
Jeremy Chatfield, Technical Evangelist, Xi Graphics.
You can find it at http://linux.3dfx.com/open_source/drivers.htm Its open source, and 2D performance is the best I have seen so far. I am still evaluating 3D performance, please post you comments.
see this website
It appears that this statement is not entirely correct.