Another interesting point is that you have your own fork of the
XFree tree. This further limits the input into the design by
eliminating all the qualified X developers without direct rendering
interest from the discussion. They all live/work on the XFree lists
and don't watch
Let me toss in my 2 cents.
The problem is that DRI development has never reached critical mass in the
open source world. There was a time when there were quite a few developers
working on DRI related projects a PI or VA but much of the design
discussions
were private and people couldn't eaves
Of course we don't know exactly which patents are involved, or what the
terms of the transfer were. But my guess would be that the patents
primarily involve hardware, and Microsoft is interested in covering its
potential liabilities as it moves into the hardware market (though XBox,
Homestation
What you say is true, it isn't all that difficult for you and I, but compare
that to Windows where you have one driver set for a whole range of adapters
and all the user has to do is download and click. That is why Windows is so
popular. It is simple. Just because you can say something like
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [Dri-devel] Radeon 8500, what's the plan?
Date: Tue, 2 Oct 2001 17:19:53 -0400 (EDT)
Well, we (GATOS) do have the docs, under similar NDA. I believe PI/VA was
more doc-rich ;) But (looking in them) they
** well, let's see how many flames I can generate with this.. **
I'll see if I can generate more.
One point that I think has been missed is that while Open Source in
general (and Linux, in particular) improves a lot user and developer
experience, the binaries get even less value than in
From: Gareth Hughes [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Jeffrey W. Baker [EMAIL PROTECTED]
CC: David Johnson [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [Dri-devel] Radeon 8500, what's the plan?
Date: Tue, 02 Oct 2001 18:02:16 -0700
Jeffrey W. Baker wrote:
On Wed, 3 Oct 2001, David Johnson wrote
Loki didn't get low level (i.e. register level) idct docs. They got an
idct
library with docs on how to use that library. I don't think PI/VA got
them
either. There is some seriously proprietary stuff with idct that for
legal
reasons ATI wouldn't want to expose.
Would you know
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
From: Gareth Hughes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [Dri-devel] Radeon 8500, what's the plan?
Date: Thu, 27 Sep 2001 12:05:13 -0700
Dacobi Coding wrote:
But are they planing to, or have they allready releaced the specs
for the new
From: Gareth Hughes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [Dri-devel] Radeon 8500, what's the plan?
Date: Thu, 27 Sep 2001 12:56:53 -0700
David Johnson wrote:
They did release specs (under NDA) to many people (including
yourself
t
11 matches
Mail list logo
