3 ms·
Not a sin but it's not really just about supporting (or optimising) their products, its about doing so whilst trying to increase the lock-in beyond what is achi
by klelatti 5y ago
Not a sin but it's not really just about supporting (or optimising) their products, its about doing so whilst trying to increase the lock-in beyond what is achieved on performance grounds alone.
I may be wrong but my experience is that AMD has been a bit better on this is the past e.g their OpenCL libraries supported both Intel and AMD whereas Intel's were Intel only.
- mumblemumble 5y agoI would assume that's not entirely a fair comparison, though. Intel's 3D acceleration hardware only ever appears in Intel-manufactured chipsets, which only ever contain Intel-manufactured CPUs. AMD, on the other hand, also supplies Radeon GPUs for use with Intel CPUs. For example, that's the setup in the computer on which I'm typing this. So I have a hard time seeing anything nefarious there. The one is obviously a business necessity, while the other would obviously be silly. Perhaps that changes with the new Xe GPUs?
- klelatti 5y agoSorry, should have been clearer - Intel's CPU OpenCL drivers only supported Intel and not AMD whereas the AMD's CPU OpenCL drivers supported both - so GPUs not relevant in this case. I can see how if you've invested a lot in software you'd like to get a competitive advantage over your nearest rival so maybe a price we have to pay.