4 ms·

This is not really open source, just a dump of boilerplate code that is of no real value to any hackers. It serves as a good PR stunt but is not really of any t

by exDM69 14y ago

This is not really open source, just a dump of boilerplate code that is of no real value to any hackers. It serves as a good PR stunt but is not really of any technical value. I write software for ARM system on chips for living so I was naturally interested in what would a competitor's software stack look like. And I was very skeptical that they would have actually revealed anything of importance. And, unfortunately, I was right. There's nothing important here (at least in the 3d part). The OpenGL implementation is still somewhere in a binary blob that is not accessible. The graphics drivers would reveal crucial information about the hardware design and give an advantage to the competitors who can use that information and the software itself to make chips cheaper. I'm not talking about established competitors in the high end market but the anonymous small chip companies that do chips for the $100 Android tablets you can get from Asia. Note: I would really like that everyone in the SoC business would open source everything they had and and the competition would be about who designs and manufactures the badassest silicon chips. But that's just not the way it works and I can't do anything about it.

hermanhermitage 14y ago
Boilerplate? The title is "Open source arm user land". Which is exactly what the code is. With all the available code you can expose VideoCore services to bare metal or new OS ports. The OpenGL ES implementation is accessible via the interface. The VideoCore firmware has not been open sourced and that claim hasn't been made.
seacond 14y ago
Is there no value to a computer beyond graphics and 3D? It's fascinating to see people who would seem to be aligned with the RPi's goals getting hostile toward the RPi Foundation. Why is this? My (probably wrong) guess on the psychology at work is that it is not the lack of much forward progress in this project (unquestionably, they have made _some_ forward progress by making the RPi, regardless of whether it is "enough"), but it is the idea of "stealing someone else's fire". It threatens people whose devoted purpose is to fight for what they perceive as the impossible: a totally open device or those whose mission it is only to complain about the lack of openness in devices (cf. actually willing to make sacrafices to use an open device). It steals their fire. The more open things become, even if only a little more open, the less they have to fight for or complain about. Their devoted purpose starts to deflate. It's less important. And I would guess there are also those who just can't stand to see any sort of change. When the "impossible" starts to seem eventually possible, it's disorienting for them. My understanding of this announcement is that it's directed at people who are trying to port other OS's to the RPi. Having this code makes their work easier. What if I do not use Linux much? What if I am not insistent on using my computer only as a TV set or a game console? What if my usage is text-based? What if I just want to run another OS on the Pi? Would I consider making this userland code available a definite step forward?
wmf 14y ago
I disagree strongly. The value is that if APIs change (which they will), the drivers can be ported forward. Unlike all those poor routers stuck on Linux 2.4 forever, Raspberry Pi can now be maintained by the community. The purpose of open source isn't always to learn. Sometimes the purpose is just to make your computer work. (It's interesting that hackers were opposed to softmodems and such for many years but now people are taking the opposite stance in this thread.)
neckbeard 14y ago
You aren't the only person to think this: http://airlied.livejournal.com/76383.html http://airlied.livejournal.com/76383.html "really what they've released is totally useless to anyone who uses or develops this stuff."

by exDM69 14y ago

hermanhermitage 14y ago

Boilerplate? The title is "Open source arm user land". Which is exactly what the code is. With all the available code you can expose VideoCore services to bare metal or new OS ports. The OpenGL ES implementation is accessible via the interface. The VideoCore firmware has not been open sourced and that claim hasn't been made.

seacond 14y ago

Is there no value to a computer beyond graphics and 3D? It's fascinating to see people who would seem to be aligned with the RPi's goals getting hostile toward the RPi Foundation. Why is this? My (probably wrong) guess on the psychology at work is that it is not the lack of much forward progress in this project (unquestionably, they have made _some_ forward progress by making the RPi, regardless of whether it is "enough"), but it is the idea of "stealing someone else's fire". It threatens people whose devoted purpose is to fight for what they perceive as the impossible: a totally open device or those whose mission it is only to complain about the lack of openness in devices (cf. actually willing to make sacrafices to use an open device). It steals their fire. The more open things become, even if only a little more open, the less they have to fight for or complain about. Their devoted purpose starts to deflate. It's less important. And I would guess there are also those who just can't stand to see any sort of change. When the "impossible" starts to seem eventually possible, it's disorienting for them. My understanding of this announcement is that it's directed at people who are trying to port other OS's to the RPi. Having this code makes their work easier. What if I do not use Linux much? What if I am not insistent on using my computer only as a TV set or a game console? What if my usage is text-based? What if I just want to run another OS on the Pi? Would I consider making this userland code available a definite step forward?

wmf 14y ago

I disagree strongly. The value is that if APIs change (which they will), the drivers can be ported forward. Unlike all those poor routers stuck on Linux 2.4 forever, Raspberry Pi can now be maintained by the community. The purpose of open source isn't always to learn. Sometimes the purpose is just to make your computer work. (It's interesting that hackers were opposed to softmodems and such for many years but now people are taking the opposite stance in this thread.)

neckbeard 14y ago

You aren't the only person to think this: http://airlied.livejournal.com/76383.html http://airlied.livejournal.com/76383.html "really what they've released is totally useless to anyone who uses or develops this stuff."