Releasing the drivers is NOT trivial. There is significant stuff in those drivers which nVidia does better than everyone else and which could be used in drivers for other cards. If they released it, they would lose a significant competitive advantage that they currently have.
Again, I understand the advantages of open source drivers. I have written around 100,000 lines of GPL'd code, and I'm proud of it. I just hate the fact that everyone on Slashdot expects nVidia to basically forfiet a big stinking wad of cash so that they can give us a gift. And then you go and say "Fuck 'em" when they don't do it. And you call them greedy?
BTW, the nVidia kernel module is not tied to any specific kernel version. It comes with a source code layer which you compile for your particular machine.
I am getting really sick of everyone attacking nVidia for supporting Linux.
Figure 1: Level of OpenGL support provided by various Windows hardware vendors
3dfx: Works with Quake 3. ATI: Works with Quake 3. Matrox: Works with Quake 3. nVidia: Full OpenGL support on all cards.
As you can see, nVidia has put a LOT more into their drivers than anyone else. I am working on a 3D game engine, and I have ported it to Windows, but it ONLY works on nVidia cards simply becaule no other company supports OpenGL lighting (yes, if it is not done in hardware, you are still supposed to have a software implementation. nVidia has both). If they released that open-source, they would lose an edge over the competition. YES, a significant portion of their drivers could be used in drivers for competing cards.
If you don't believe me, go look. They also have un-obfusicated source code implementations there, and "driver development kits" for various OS's. Unfortunately, because they licensed some technology from other companies, they were not allowed to put up complete specs. The missing peices are rather important, so nVidia decided to write drivers for us so we could use them.
Figure 3: nVidia's options
Hire PI to make DRI drivers. Cost: high
Make their own DRI drivers. Cost: high
Port their *possibly better* Windows infrastructure to Linux. Cost: low
Release source code and let the community do the work. Cost: $millions in lawsuit
I would like to see the drivers released open source as well, and I am not convinced that it won't happen. However, I talked to one of the engineers, and I can tell you one thing for sure: The zealot attitude of most Slashdotters is only making the situation worse. Anger will get us nowhere.
Now I am going to go install my GeForce 2, which came today. Joy.
You have the resources and the balls? Then go sue them! IANAL, but don't they have a legal obligation to give the complete source code, under the GPL, to every person who downloaded the binaries? So go download the binaries if you haven't already, and then demand the source code! If you get it, send me a copy. If you don't, sue their asses off, and set a precedent. I'm sure many of us/.ers would be willing to donate some money to the offense fund.
You know what? You're right. I feel like e-mailing nVidia Nick right now and demanding the source code which they have a legal obligation to give me. Hell, I wonder if I could sue them myself... too bad I don't have the resources.
3dfx's drivers are way ahead, and much better, and alot contributing to that is because they are open..
Actually, the nVidia GeForce is the fastest card you can get for Linux right now, and the drivers (which I have been using since they came out) are quite stable. Haven't crashed on me yet, and I have been playing Q3A quite a bit over the past few days.
Not that I am happy about this GPL violation, or the fact that the drivers are closed, but they are VERY good drivers, especially considering the fact that they are "beta".
Large Scale C++ Software Design, by John Lakos. This book has done more to improve my coding and software design skills than any other book I have read. If you program in C++, you MUST read this book. Until you have, you don't know the language. The concepts described in the book apply to other languages as well (as long as you are using OOP).
------
Not that I am particularly happy about this, but..
on
MP3.com Loses In Court
·
· Score: 5
They were distributing copyrighted material without a license. Even if they were sure that the users alreay owned the CD's, the legality is still very questionable. And with the availability of free ripping software, the usefulness of such a service is also rather questionable.
At least, that's what Nick Triantos of nVidia, the guy responsible for the Linux drivers, just told me. Apparently, the drivers released yesterday have full support for the GF2. For once, we appear to have drivers for a new product before the Windoze people!:)
If that thing really is in stores on friday... hell yeah...
Are you just purposely looking for any excuse you can find to bash nVidia? Perhaps looking to gain a few karma is the meantime? I have NEVER before heard ANYONE say that because something is beta, it could not possibly be stable. You know perfectly well that beta software can be very usable. Obviously, they are calling it beta because it is the first release, and you should never call your first release anything other than beta.
If that isn't enough for you, I have a GeForce 256 and I am happily getting the same framerates in Quake 3 that I normally get in Windoze. Hell, even my 2D performance has been doubled by the new drivers. And guess what? I have not had a crash yet.
Question: What do you think this article is about, if not the fact that nVidia JUST DID release drivers that outperform everything else on Linux? ------
Sorry, not so. Theoretically, an XF4 module can run on any other OS using the same processor, so the driver would work on *BSD/x86 and such. However, the drivers nVidia released today appear to be a bit more than just an XF4 module, so I am not certain that they have even that level of compatibility. ------
Dude, chill out. Yeah, I want open source drivers as much as you do. And I know why they are important. That's one reason why I am planning to wait for the ATI Radeon rather than buy a GeForce 2 (I hope ATI goes open source). All I was saying is that we should not get mad at nVidia for making a small mistake back in the day when they had never heard of open source.
And everyone puts the "no reverse egineering" clause in their agreements. Guess what? The law says you can reverse engineer it anyway if your purpose is compatibility (i.e. port to a different OS).
But, yeah, I'm an open source freak too. I just think of it as a privilege rather than a right.
Don't be fooled by the.src.rpm's. They do not contain source code. (did they think they could get that by us?)
Let's hope that ATI releases open source drivers for the Radeon. It looks like that card will be the best thing out there in the next few months. (yes, it beats the GeForce 2 IMHO)
------
Re:3dfx is basically gone
on
ATI Radeon 256
·
· Score: 1
The whole keyframe thing didn't impress me too much. Keyframes were used in Quake 2, but now most games use skeletal animation, which usually does not involve keyframes at all. But, keyframes may come back into style once we start animating individual limbs more. Of course, the Radeon has skeletal animation accelleration in hardware as well, and it is better than nVidia's.
What impressed me was the shadow casting stuff. I have been wondering about how best to implement shadows for some time. It is really a lot harder that you'd expect. I am very happy to see it done in hardware.
Odd... I submitted this hours ago, yet my writeup was rejected...
Anyway, the ATI Radeon can do 1.5 gigatexels per second. The Voodoo 5 can only do 667 megatexels. So, the Radeon will far outperform a V5. And it has T&L! What a deal! The funny thing is that 3dfx is hyping the V5 based on its fill rate...
Now, on Wednesday, nVidia is going to announce the GeForce 2. It will have a fill rate of 1.6 gigatexels, just a bit higher than ATI's offering. On the geometry side, the GF2 will do 250 million triangles per second. I don't know how fast the Radeon is as far as geometry, but if anyone else knows, please share! It is also rumored that the GF2 will be in stores on Friday. As in, THIS Friday. Whoah.
Back on ATI's side, the Radeon looks like it will have more features that the GF2. As a game coder, I like that.:) Also, ATI is likely to have better Linux support. I also like that.
It looks like choosing between these two cards will be tough, but I'm leaning towards ATI right now. One thing that I know for sure, however, is that 3dfx is not in the running. Their only hope right now is to drop their prices very low. I would not like to be working at 3dfx right now.
FLAIMBAIT!?! WTF? It's true, damnit. Go to nVidia's web site. Watch the flash video. See the numbers fly by. Notice that the first one is "1600000000 texels/second".
How was that flaimbait? Who am I drawing flame from? Huh? I am just trying to let everyone know that they probably should not get excited over the V5 since something much better is going to be out so soon.
I would not be suprised if they were, say, holding off their Linux driver release until after the GF2 was ready so as to get Linux users to buy it rather than an older card...
Poor 3dfx. In two days, nVidia will announce the GeForce 2 (they have a nifty flash movie on their home page now). Apparently, in four days (Friday) you will be able to go pick one up at your local computer store. From what I've heard, the GF2 will have:
1.6 Gtexel/sec fill rate. (up from 480M in the GF1, or 667M in the V5)
30% faster T&L.
fast FSAA (full screen anti-aliasing, like the 3dfx T-buffer)
possibly mpeg2 encoding/decoding on board.
The bottleneck is no longer in the fill rate. The GF2 is limited only by the bandwidth to its on-board RAM banks. That's not one that they can fix easily.
Slashdot Mirror
Apparently, you weren't listening.
Releasing the drivers is NOT trivial. There is significant stuff in those drivers which nVidia does better than everyone else and which could be used in drivers for other cards. If they released it, they would lose a significant competitive advantage that they currently have.
Again, I understand the advantages of open source drivers. I have written around 100,000 lines of GPL'd code, and I'm proud of it. I just hate the fact that everyone on Slashdot expects nVidia to basically forfiet a big stinking wad of cash so that they can give us a gift. And then you go and say "Fuck 'em" when they don't do it. And you call them greedy?
BTW, the nVidia kernel module is not tied to any specific kernel version. It comes with a source code layer which you compile for your particular machine.
------
I am getting really sick of everyone attacking nVidia for supporting Linux.
Figure 1: Level of OpenGL support provided by various Windows hardware vendors
As you can see, nVidia has put a LOT more into their drivers than anyone else. I am working on a 3D game engine, and I have ported it to Windows, but it ONLY works on nVidia cards simply becaule no other company supports OpenGL lighting (yes, if it is not done in hardware, you are still supposed to have a software implementation. nVidia has both). If they released that open-source, they would lose an edge over the competition. YES, a significant portion of their drivers could be used in drivers for competing cards.
Figure 2: Register level specs for nVidia RIVA chipsets (128, TNT, TNT2)
If you don't believe me, go look. They also have un-obfusicated source code implementations there, and "driver development kits" for various OS's. Unfortunately, because they licensed some technology from other companies, they were not allowed to put up complete specs. The missing peices are rather important, so nVidia decided to write drivers for us so we could use them.
Figure 3: nVidia's options
I would like to see the drivers released open source as well, and I am not convinced that it won't happen. However, I talked to one of the engineers, and I can tell you one thing for sure: The zealot attitude of most Slashdotters is only making the situation worse. Anger will get us nowhere.
Now I am going to go install my GeForce 2, which came today. Joy.
------
We don't want to hear about your naked thighs!
------
You have the resources and the balls? Then go sue them! IANAL, but don't they have a legal obligation to give the complete source code, under the GPL, to every person who downloaded the binaries? So go download the binaries if you haven't already, and then demand the source code! If you get it, send me a copy. If you don't, sue their asses off, and set a precedent. I'm sure many of us /.ers would be willing to donate some money to the offense fund.
------
You know what? You're right. I feel like e-mailing nVidia Nick right now and demanding the source code which they have a legal obligation to give me. Hell, I wonder if I could sue them myself... too bad I don't have the resources.
------
3dfx's drivers are way ahead, and much better, and alot contributing to that is because they are open..
Actually, the nVidia GeForce is the fastest card you can get for Linux right now, and the drivers (which I have been using since they came out) are quite stable. Haven't crashed on me yet, and I have been playing Q3A quite a bit over the past few days.
Not that I am happy about this GPL violation, or the fact that the drivers are closed, but they are VERY good drivers, especially considering the fact that they are "beta".
------
Large Scale C++ Software Design, by John Lakos. This book has done more to improve my coding and software design skills than any other book I have read. If you program in C++, you MUST read this book. Until you have, you don't know the language. The concepts described in the book apply to other languages as well (as long as you are using OOP).
------
They were distributing copyrighted material without a license. Even if they were sure that the users alreay owned the CD's, the legality is still very questionable. And with the availability of free ripping software, the usefulness of such a service is also rather questionable.
------
::slaps forehead in disgust::
Oh man, that argument is so stupid that it doesn't deserve a reply.
The nVidia Win2k drivers are also beta, BTW.
------
oh well.
------
At least, that's what Nick Triantos of nVidia, the guy responsible for the Linux drivers, just told me. Apparently, the drivers released yesterday have full support for the GF2. For once, we appear to have drivers for a new product before the Windoze people! :)
If that thing really is in stores on friday... hell yeah...
------
Are you just purposely looking for any excuse you can find to bash nVidia? Perhaps looking to gain a few karma is the meantime? I have NEVER before heard ANYONE say that because something is beta, it could not possibly be stable. You know perfectly well that beta software can be very usable. Obviously, they are calling it beta because it is the first release, and you should never call your first release anything other than beta.
If that isn't enough for you, I have a GeForce 256 and I am happily getting the same framerates in Quake 3 that I normally get in Windoze. Hell, even my 2D performance has been doubled by the new drivers. And guess what? I have not had a crash yet.
------
Question: What do you think this article is about, if not the fact that nVidia JUST DID release drivers that outperform everything else on Linux?
------
------
Sorry, not so. Theoretically, an XF4 module can run on any other OS using the same processor, so the driver would work on *BSD/x86 and such. However, the drivers nVidia released today appear to be a bit more than just an XF4 module, so I am not certain that they have even that level of compatibility.
------
Dude, chill out. Yeah, I want open source drivers as much as you do. And I know why they are important. That's one reason why I am planning to wait for the ATI Radeon rather than buy a GeForce 2 (I hope ATI goes open source). All I was saying is that we should not get mad at nVidia for making a small mistake back in the day when they had never heard of open source.
And everyone puts the "no reverse egineering" clause in their agreements. Guess what? The law says you can reverse engineer it anyway if your purpose is compatibility (i.e. port to a different OS).
But, yeah, I'm an open source freak too. I just think of it as a privilege rather than a right.
------
They did not write new drivers from scratch. They ported their Windows drivers. The Windows drivers are protected by various NDA's.
------
Too bad they can't release the source code legally due to various NDA's between them and other companies.
------
Don't be fooled by the .src.rpm's. They do not contain source code. (did they think they could get that by us?)
Let's hope that ATI releases open source drivers for the Radeon. It looks like that card will be the best thing out there in the next few months. (yes, it beats the GeForce 2 IMHO)
------
doh. 25 million triangles. I knew that.
------
The whole keyframe thing didn't impress me too much. Keyframes were used in Quake 2, but now most games use skeletal animation, which usually does not involve keyframes at all. But, keyframes may come back into style once we start animating individual limbs more. Of course, the Radeon has skeletal animation accelleration in hardware as well, and it is better than nVidia's.
What impressed me was the shadow casting stuff. I have been wondering about how best to implement shadows for some time. It is really a lot harder that you'd expect. I am very happy to see it done in hardware.
------
Odd... I submitted this hours ago, yet my writeup was rejected...
Anyway, the ATI Radeon can do 1.5 gigatexels per second. The Voodoo 5 can only do 667 megatexels. So, the Radeon will far outperform a V5. And it has T&L! What a deal! The funny thing is that 3dfx is hyping the V5 based on its fill rate...
Now, on Wednesday, nVidia is going to announce the GeForce 2. It will have a fill rate of 1.6 gigatexels, just a bit higher than ATI's offering. On the geometry side, the GF2 will do 250 million triangles per second. I don't know how fast the Radeon is as far as geometry, but if anyone else knows, please share! It is also rumored that the GF2 will be in stores on Friday. As in, THIS Friday. Whoah.
Back on ATI's side, the Radeon looks like it will have more features that the GF2. As a game coder, I like that. :) Also, ATI is likely to have better Linux support. I also like that.
It looks like choosing between these two cards will be tough, but I'm leaning towards ATI right now. One thing that I know for sure, however, is that 3dfx is not in the running. Their only hope right now is to drop their prices very low. I would not like to be working at 3dfx right now.
Oh, here's some links:
Again, nVidia will be announcing the GF2 on Wednesday. Check their site then for details.
------
Ehh... what defines an abuse of my bonus, anyways?
------
FLAIMBAIT!?! WTF? It's true, damnit. Go to nVidia's web site. Watch the flash video. See the numbers fly by. Notice that the first one is "1600000000 texels/second".
How was that flaimbait? Who am I drawing flame from? Huh? I am just trying to let everyone know that they probably should not get excited over the V5 since something much better is going to be out so soon.
I would not be suprised if they were, say, holding off their Linux driver release until after the GF2 was ready so as to get Linux users to buy it rather than an older card...
------
Poor 3dfx. In two days, nVidia will announce the GeForce 2 (they have a nifty flash movie on their home page now). Apparently, in four days (Friday) you will be able to go pick one up at your local computer store. From what I've heard, the GF2 will have:
The bottleneck is no longer in the fill rate. The GF2 is limited only by the bandwidth to its on-board RAM banks. That's not one that they can fix easily.
References:
If my info is correct (it could be wrong), then as of this Friday 3dfx will be officially fscked.
------