4 ms·

AMD's response is 25% talking about unrelated Exynos code, 35% sarcastic complaints about Linux culture and 20% explaining why its naive to care about code qual

by ajarmst 10y ago

AMD's response is 25% talking about unrelated Exynos code, 35% sarcastic complaints about Linux culture and 20% explaining why its naive to care about code quality and style. It concludes with a barely veiled threat about how they won't change and that not merging their code is what is keeping Linux off the desktop. I think we're done here.

geezerjay 10y ago
> It concludes with a barely veiled threat about how they won't change and that not merging their code is what is keeping Linux off the desktop. It seems to me that they made no threat. They simply endorsed NVidia's product line for anyone interested in running Linux on the desktop.
- XorNot 10y ago
  Gotta say this is my takeaway. If near latest kernels work with nvidia, I'll buy nvidia in the future (I'm all amd at the moment).
  - tankenmate 10y ago
    And yet AMD releases far more of it's specification for its chipsets than Nvidia does (which releases next to none). This is the reason that the AMD open source drivers are within 10~20% of performance of the closed source drivers on a number of chipsets (not all) whereas on Nvidia chipsets the open source driver is often just to boot a system and get X running enough to install the closed source driver.
    - geezerjay 10y ago
      > And yet AMD releases far more of it's specification for its chipsets than Nvidia does (which releases next to none). That is only relevant if any third-party has any interest in taking up the challenge of developing an alternative driver.
      - tankenmate 10y ago
        And the open source drivers that do exist (and are far better than the Nvidia open source drivers) are proof that said third parties exist. So the net take away is that if you are a pragmatic open sourcer then you should buy AMD hardware. And even better support the open source coders who do write these drivers; cash, bug reports, testing, documentation, etc.

by ajarmst 10y ago

geezerjay 10y ago

> It concludes with a barely veiled threat about how they won't change and that not merging their code is what is keeping Linux off the desktop. It seems to me that they made no threat. They simply endorsed NVidia's product line for anyone interested in running Linux on the desktop.

XorNot 10y ago
Gotta say this is my takeaway. If near latest kernels work with nvidia, I'll buy nvidia in the future (I'm all amd at the moment).
- tankenmate 10y ago
  And yet AMD releases far more of it's specification for its chipsets than Nvidia does (which releases next to none). This is the reason that the AMD open source drivers are within 10~20% of performance of the closed source drivers on a number of chipsets (not all) whereas on Nvidia chipsets the open source driver is often just to boot a system and get X running enough to install the closed source driver.
  - geezerjay 10y ago
    > And yet AMD releases far more of it's specification for its chipsets than Nvidia does (which releases next to none). That is only relevant if any third-party has any interest in taking up the challenge of developing an alternative driver.
    - tankenmate 10y ago
      And the open source drivers that do exist (and are far better than the Nvidia open source drivers) are proof that said third parties exist. So the net take away is that if you are a pragmatic open sourcer then you should buy AMD hardware. And even better support the open source coders who do write these drivers; cash, bug reports, testing, documentation, etc.