Go Back   nV News Forums > Linux Support Forums > NVIDIA Linux

Newegg Daily Deals

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 06-22-12, 10:59 PM   #13
macemoneta
Registered User
 
macemoneta's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: NJ
Posts: 159
Default Re: We apologize

Nvidia loses the bid on an up to $500M order for GPUs, because their driver isn't open source. Maybe now they can see the value. For less than 1% of that, they could have hired two well-paid full-time developers to work on the open source code - for the last ten years.

http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?pag...tem&px=MTEyNTE
macemoneta is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-23-12, 11:56 AM   #14
johnc
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 92
Default Re: We apologize

Quote:
Originally Posted by macemoneta View Post
Nvidia loses the bid on an up to $500M order for GPUs, because their driver isn't open source. Maybe now they can see the value. For less than 1% of that, they could have hired two well-paid full-time developers to work on the open source code - for the last ten years.

http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?pag...tem&px=MTEyNTE
A very untrustworthy source.

Take with a grain of salt.
johnc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-23-12, 02:10 PM   #15
macemoneta
Registered User
 
macemoneta's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: NJ
Posts: 159
Default Re: We apologize

There are already about 10k hits on Google search: http://goo.gl/EEDSq

If the story isn't true, Nvidia PR is snoozing.
macemoneta is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-23-12, 02:15 PM   #16
johnc
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 92
Default Re: We apologize

But it's the same article rehashed in 10,000 different places.

It's the details which I think are suspect IMO, not necessarily the overall story; and the takeaway conclusion -- that this possible loss was due to their driver being closed source -- is even more suspect.
johnc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-24-12, 06:07 PM   #17
FuturePilot
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 35
Default Re: We apologize

Dear Nvidia:
Thank you for supporting Linux as much as you have. Please don't be discouraged by the amount of BS that comes from some FOSS fanatics.
FuturePilot is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-26-12, 04:56 PM   #18
uOpt
FreeBSD cheering section
 
uOpt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Boston, MA, USA
Posts: 609
Default Re: We apologize

It's a mixed bag, really.

On one hand the drivers as provided are high quality, and the people in the team are great. I consider Aaron in particular an ally when it comes to fighting little insanities like Xorg's tendency to destroy classic Unix functionality e.g. with what they derogatorily call "Zaphod mode". The NVidia drivers keep the flag up here.

Which brings us to what I consider a bigger problem, and that is random actions on part of Xorg. The quality of some of their work and the way that they react to bug reports is way below anything the binary NVidia driver portion has to offer. If I had any interest in X11 programming I'd Split the Project in a Heartbeat(tm).

On the other hand we have seen the first outright refusal to support hardware that is out in the wild. The refusal to even make an attempt to support Optimus was a bad decision on part of NVidia, because now people have a valid reason to say that Linux and FreeBSD are second class citizens in the NVidia driver world.

Then there is the issue of legacy drivers which put some (not many, but some) of us into problems that we wouldn't have if we used an Xorg driver.

Finally, all the "little things" like Xen support, Xv over multiple cards and multi-seat come on top, things that are in theory supported by Xorg open source drivers and not by the NVidia binary drivers (there were more items like these but the newest beta drivers added a whole bunch).

But again, no reason to blame the individuals in the NVidia driver team for high level decisions.

I would also like to mention that what the OP suggests addresses none (as in zero) of my own concerns.
__________________

My Unix benchmark results
uOpt is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-01-12, 01:39 AM   #19
anketell
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 12
Default Re: We apologize

I agree that it's a mixed bag.

While I agree that the quality of NVIDIA drivers on Linux are generally of high quality and that I don't really have a great interest in Optimus Technology. I guess everyone has their own itch. I would expect that NVIDIA would support base functionality for most of their cards. Or at least not remove this support once provided.

This is the case with the version of the GT330M that inhabits the Toshiba A660 as I reported some seven months ago X Server fails to start Fedora 16 GT330M. Further to this, I have not received a response for six months. Meanwhile I'm left with FC14 that has been EOL for this time.

On the subject of dealing with NVIDIA and while Linus tends to overuse superlatives, I too have found myself somewhat frustrated over this issue. A response that deals with specifics ie we will not provide support for your GT330M again, while undesirable, is better that a void.
anketell is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
nvidia: RT @NVIDIAGeForce: We'd like to apologize for any confusion @Patriots_12_St News Archived News Items 0 06-01-12 06:30 AM

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:54 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.1
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 1998 - 2014, nV News.