Linked by Thom Holwerda on Sat 6th May 2006 17:01 UTC, submitted by Phoronix
3D News, GL, DirectX "We have been overwhelmed with requests to take a serious look at the frame-rate performance differences between the various open-source and proprietary contenders. Our first article on this topic, which will likely be the first of a series of examinations, is looking at the differences between the X.Org open-source ATI Radeon driver and that of ATI's official but proprietary fglrx display driver."
Thread beginning with comment 121773
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE: IP
by deathshadow on Sun 7th May 2006 01:40 UTC in reply to "IP"
deathshadow
Member since:
2005-07-12

>> Why cant Linux developers and the Linux community just respect companies intellectual property?

Because that would be 'working for the man'.

>> One of the issues I see with these closed source drivers is that you cant just "install" a driver, you have to compile the driver(part of it) every time you update your kernel. WHY?

Because Linus still has his head up his backside about the kernel interface to drivers and devices, and refuses to set a FIXED api for getting at things - making it nigh impossible (or at least damned tricky) to make a driver that works in BOTH 2.6 and 2.4 off the same codebase, much less 2.6.1, 2.6.13, 2.6.pick a damned revision.

If I was a hardware manufacturer, I'd flat out REFUSE to make drivers for linux on those grounds ALONE, before we even got into the dirty {censored} hippy intellectual property debate.

Reply Parent Score: 4