On Tue, 2 Oct 2001, Gareth Hughes wrote:
> Jeffrey W. Baker wrote:
>
> > On Wed, 3 Oct 2001, David Johnson wrote:
> >
> >>There is some seriously proprietary stuff with idct that for legal
> >>reasons ATI wouldn't want to expose.
> >>
> >
> > That is one of the most ridiculous statements I have heard. Substitute
> > some equivalent terms in there:
> >
> > "There is some seriously proprietary stuff with the Pythagorean Theorem
> > that for legal reasons ATI wouldn't want to expose."
> >
> > "There is some seriously proprietary stuff with the quadratic equation
> > that for legal reasons ATI wouldn't want to expose."
>
> Okay then...
>
> I think what David's suggesting is that ATI's implementation of an iDCT
> in hardware is pretty cool, and they're not about to go and tell
Or it could be that the iDCT core was not developed by ATI, but by someone
else, and ATI just licensed it. This could explain why they are so
adamant about not releasing the docs. As for TV-out they might be afraid
that releasing the specs could be consired equivalent to providing
Macrovision circumvention device. Or, perhaps, they are under contract
with Macrovision..
Vladimir Dergachev
> everyone how they did it. Last time I checked, they were the only
> vendor to offer such a solution, and thus you may want to consider their
> position on the matter.
>
> -- Gareth
>
> _______________________________________________
> Dri-devel mailing list
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/dri-devel
>
_______________________________________________
Dri-devel mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/dri-devel
