Um in addition to saving power in notebooks, you'd probably also end up
creating a lot less heat. Though this might not be the case with NVidia
cards ;-) Most reviewers of the Radeon came to the conclusion that the
fan was purely for looks, something that I couldn't even say about my K6-2.
P
the real solution is to make it so they
don't have to RTFM.
David
>From: John Tobin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Subject: Re: [Dri-devel] Radeon 8500, what's the plan?
>Date: Wed, 3 Oct 2001 00:14:16 -0500
>
>You know that there is a reason
You know that there is a reason why they provide the tar.gz file
so that people using different kernels can use the driver. The
RPMs are simply there for the people that don't o upgrade the
kernel and stick with what Redhat gave them, making it easier for
them. I don't think that compiling and ins
Around 3 o'clock on Oct 3, Peter Surda wrote:
> I don't understand what this fuss about hardware accelerated idct is. In which
> situation you actually get use of it? When I play DVDs on my Duron 650 I get
> over 50% free CPU time with a software-only dvd decoder (vlc), the card only
> does yuv-
On Wed, 3 Oct 2001, Peter Surda wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 03, 2001 at 01:17:03AM +, David Johnson wrote:
> > Actually I think SiS offers an idct solution as well but beyond protecting
> > intellectual property there are potential legal issues with exposing how ATI
> > decodes copy righted, cop
>
>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
>Macrov
> > 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.
>
>Woul
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
On Wed, 3 Oct 2001, David Johnson wrote:
>
>
>
> >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)
> >
&
On Wed, Oct 03, 2001 at 01:17:03AM +, David Johnson wrote:
> Actually I think SiS offers an idct solution as well but beyond protecting
> intellectual property there are potential legal issues with exposing how ATI
> decodes copy righted, copy protected DVD.
I don't understand what this fuss
>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:
>
>>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:
>
>
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
>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
>
On Thu, 27 Sep 2001, Gareth Hughes wrote:
> David Johnson wrote:
>
> >
> > They did release specs (under NDA) to many people (including yourself
> > through PI/VA Linux).
>
>
> Sure, but not to people in the general open source community, and with the demise of
>PI/VA, I would say the cha
Gareth Hughes wrote:
> Sure, but not to people in the general open source community, and with
> the demise of PI/VA, I would say the chances of a driver done by anyone
> other than ATI are slim to nil. Isn't that what we're talking about?
I agree that the general open source community is not a
On Thu, 27 Sep 2001, Peter Surda wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 27, 2001 at 08:19:46PM +, David Johnson wrote:
> >Sure, that is a valid point but we need to remember that in the past
> >ATI has not been adverse to supporting open source drivers or to
> >releasing specs to qualified people
On Thu, Sep 27, 2001 at 08:19:46PM +, David Johnson wrote:
>Sure, that is a valid point but we need to remember that in the past
>ATI has not been adverse to supporting open source drivers or to
>releasing specs to qualified people.
They are very friendly actually. They provided m
On Thursday 27 September 2001 21:56, you wrote:
> David Johnson wrote:
> > They did release specs (under NDA) to many people (including yourself
> > through PI/VA Linux).
>
> Sure, but not to people in the general open source community, and with the
> demise of PI/VA, I would say the chances of a
>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 rele
David Johnson wrote:
>
> They did release specs (under NDA) to many people (including yourself
> through PI/VA Linux).
Sure, but not to people in the general open source community, and with the demise of
PI/VA, I would say the chances of a driver done by anyone other than ATI are slim to
ni
>From: "Daniel Vogel" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Subject: RE: [Dri-devel] Radeon 8500, what's the plan?
>Date: Thu, 27 Sep 2001 15:51:31 -0400
>
> > They did release specs (under NDA) to many
> They did release specs (under NDA) to many people
> (including yourself through PI/VA Linux).
Keep in mind that ATI was paying VA Linux to develop Radeon Linux drivers at
the time.
- Daniel Vogel, Programmer, Epic Games Inc.
___
Dri-devel mailing l
On Thursday 27 September 2001 21:05, you wrote:
> Dacobi Coding wrote:
> > But are they planing to, or have they allready releaced the specs
> > for the new Radeon chips? And I mean full specs complete
> > with V/P Shaders and TL?
>
> Did they ever release specs for the original Radeon? No. One
>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 plani
Dacobi Coding wrote:
>
> But are they planing to, or have they allready releaced the specs
> for the new Radeon chips? And I mean full specs complete
> with V/P Shaders and TL?
Did they ever release specs for the original Radeon? No. One would
guess the same policy will apply in this case
On Thursday 27 September 2001 19:55, you wrote:
> Dacobi Coding wrote:
> > Hello people!
...
>
> Not to say that ATI won't switch to a binary-only driver as well, but
> anyway...
But are they planing to, or have they allready releaced the specs
for the new Radeon chips? And I mean full specs com
Dacobi Coding wrote:
> Hello people!
>
> I was just wondering, what's the plan regarding
> Radeon 8500 DRI support?
>
> I been hearing rumors about ATI switching to
> a unified driver structure much like Nvidia's.
> Can anyone verify wether this is true or not,
> and if it is true, how it wil
On Thu, 27 Sep 2001, Dacobi Coding wrote:
> Hello people!
>
> I was just wondering, what's the plan regarding
> Radeon 8500 DRI support?
>
> I been hearing rumors about ATI switching to
> a unified driver structure much like Nvidia's.
> Can anyone verify wether this is true or not,
> and if it
Hello people!
I was just wondering, what's the plan regarding
Radeon 8500 DRI support?
I been hearing rumors about ATI switching to
a unified driver structure much like Nvidia's.
Can anyone verify wether this is true or not,
and if it is true, how it will affect the DRI project?
-Jaco
30 matches
Mail list logo
