Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

News for nerds, stuff that matters

Slashdot Log In

Log In

Create Account  |  Retrieve Password

ATI Committed To Fixing Its OSS Problems

Posted by kdawson on Thu May 10, 2007 10:17 AM
from the about-time dept.
Sits writes "Chris Blizzard blogged from the Red Hat summit that an ATI marketing spokesman said, from the stage, that ATI knows it has a problem with open source and is committed to fixing it. Does this mean ATI will finally resolve alleged agpgart misappropriation, and fast track the release of open source 2D drivers on its latest cards while releasing specifications for its mid-range cards? Or is ATI only concerned with fixes to its binary driver to maintain feature parity with competitors?"
+ -
story
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
 Full
 Abbreviated
 Hidden
More
Loading... please wait.
  • by danomac (1032160) on Thursday May 10 2007, @10:19AM (#19068043)
    I'd wager a guess they're going to fix the binary drivers only.

    Why would they open a spec when they can compete with the binary drivers?
    • by InsaneProcessor (869563) on Thursday May 10 2007, @10:23AM (#19068117)
      The video card industry is so secretive with thier software. ATI even locks the BIOS so after POST you cannot access the card to download it. They are so afraid that the competiition will find out how they work or that someone else will build a better driver. This is the only part of the PC buisiness that is this large, yet this secretive. I thing that they are just overly paranoid.
      • by div_2n (525075) on Thursday May 10 2007, @10:55AM (#19068727)
        Or maybe they have some sloppy hacks to try to improve frame rates for certain games so that they score better in comparisons. Anyone remember the Quake 3 [slashdot.org] fiasco that ATI was involved with?
      • Actually, it's more likely that the reason all their software is locked away and kept secret is because it's probably infringing on numerous software patents. When Joe Sixpack can go down to the patent office and register a doubly linked list as his own invention, lots of possibilities for lawsuits open up.

        I did some research into this for a course, but I don't have sources to cite off the top of my head. Definitely something worth looking into.

        - shazow
        • IP (Score:5, Insightful)

          by pedestrian crossing (802349) on Thursday May 10 2007, @03:04PM (#19073537) Homepage Journal

          They have already sold the card, so it doesn't matter as far as revenue who writes the best driver. Good open drivers might help sell cards. I would sure choose a good card with a good open driver.

          I think it's an IP issue. They've bought into some fundamental patented IP, the license forbids releasing driver source (or it's something they have patented and it is counted as an asset on their Balance Sheet), and the patent covers something so integral to their design that it isn't worth the R&D it would take to get around it.

        • by LWATCDR (28044) on Thursday May 10 2007, @04:05PM (#19074627) Homepage Journal
          "I'm sure that they could even get a performance boost if they let millions of hackers with tons of free time optimize things for them."
          I am not.
          1. Millions of hackers? There isn't a single FOSS project that millions of hackers have contributed too.
          2. There are very few people with the experience to write a good much less great 3d driver.
          3. Even with the specs I am guessing that the majority of contributions will be security or code clean up and not performance optimizations.
    • Why would they open a spec when they can compete with the binary drivers?


      Because they can compete with open source drivers. Otherwise, why would Microsoft fear Red Hat and Novell?
      • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

        Because they can compete with open source drivers. Otherwise, why would Microsoft fear Red Hat and Novell?

        C'mon, we all know the likelihood of them doing that is slim to none. There's nothing pressuring them to do this. Last I checked, NVidia doesn't have open source drivers either.

        As the poster above you indicated, the video card industry is pretty secretive. The chances of them opening the spec and revealing their "trade secrets" are extremely slim to none. Unless something else happens in the indus

  • by Timesprout (579035) on Thursday May 10 2007, @10:19AM (#19068045)
    Why dont you ask ATI what it means. How is Slashdot supposed to be privy to ATI's roadmap?
  • This is not news (Score:3, Insightful)

    by cyphercell (843398) on Thursday May 10 2007, @10:28AM (#19068199) Homepage Journal
    If you read the original article that all of this questioning is derived from you realize the article summary has more content than the linked story. This means aproximately nothing. ATI pays lip service to open source software news at 11.
  • by plcurechax (247883) on Thursday May 10 2007, @10:30AM (#19068241) Homepage
    I know from talking to them at the Ottawa Linux Symposium a couple of years ago that the technical people within ATI were keen to support Linux the best that the could, but said they were mainly limited by management / legal to aim for competing with whatever nVidia offered the Linux community. If nVidia offered a complete open source driver, they would be pressured to do the same.

    • by dpilot (134227) on Thursday May 10 2007, @10:57AM (#19068785) Homepage Journal
      I have owned or made purchasing decisions for 6 3D graphics cards.
      * 2 were Matrox G400s, based on their being the first mainstream card to get 3D hardware support under Linux. I even ran Utah-GLX on one.
      * 1 was an ATI Radeon 8500LE, based on price/performance and the existence of the open source R200 drivers.
      * 3 are nVidia cards, since there's no competitive contemporary open source 3D any more, and the quality of nVidia's binary seems to be better. There are reverse-engineering efforts on both, but it's unclear who will be the clear winner on this.

      So I *have* put my money where my mouth is, and will continue to do so.

      I also recommend hardware for friends and co-workers, and this is a factor. Even for a friend who is only going to use Windows, if all else is equal I would advise that he "reward" the company for its Linux support. Notice that in this case I said, "all else is equal," and let the friend know why I gave the advice I did.
      • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

        no competitive contemporary open source 3D any more, and the quality of nVidia's binary seems to be better.

        I'm not going to directly disagree with you because I'm unsure how you'd define the above. What 3D tasks do you want the card to do? Because if all you want is basic 3D acceleration good enough for e.g. TuxRacer [sourceforge.net] or Open Arena [openarena.ws]and the fun desktop effects with Compiz/Beryl [oreillynet.com] then Intel has very nicely provided complete Free/OpenSource drivers [intellinuxgraphics.org] for most of their integrated components (*) including the GMA

        • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

          Only problem is that I have never seen an Intel video board. They all seem to be integrated on the motherboard. So if you have an AMD system you are stuck.
    • by krbvroc1 (725200) on Thursday May 10 2007, @11:14AM (#19069107)
      So much for showing a little leadership? Basically, we will just follow nVidia. I've got 1U Supermicro rackmount servers that have ATI 'Rage MX' chipsets on them and there is not even a solution for these chips other than a very slow unaccelerated driver. They don't even have a working binary driver.

      ATI's lack of driver quality and commitment has always been a problem for me. I went from 3dfx to Nvidia and have never personally purchased an ATI product specifically because of their poor Linux support.
  • Marketing? (Score:5, Funny)

    by markov_chain (202465) on Thursday May 10 2007, @10:31AM (#19068265) Homepage
    an ATI marketing spokesman said, from the stage, that ATI knows it has a problem with open source and is committed to fixing it.

    There goes the good old problem solving by marketing. Wait until their developers hear about this :)
    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      Marketing is not a problem. Lawyers and managers are.
    • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

      Oh, never question that the developers know that there's a serious problem. Trust me on that one. It's just I seriously doubt that middle and upper management have a single clue as to how to honestly fix it.
  • by wowbagger (69688) on Thursday May 10 2007, @10:33AM (#19068305) Homepage Journal
    I'll believe that AMD/ATI is fixing their problems when I can have a driver that:
    1. Supports XvMC
    2. Supports the tuner on my All-in-Wonder, either via XVideo or Video For Linux
    3. Has reasonable 3D performance without locking up (GoogleEarth will kill my card dead in seconds, requiring a hard power off to fix it.)
    4. Has reasonable 2D acceleration.
    5. Runs on the current release of the kernel - on i386 and i386-64 AT LEAST.
    6. Supports PCIe cards


    This is *the* limiting factor which has prevented me from buying a new computer - any new machine would be an i386-64 with PCIe video, and right now the only real choice there would be Intel graphics.
    • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

      This is *the* limiting factor which has prevented me from buying a new computer - any new machine would be an i386-64 with PCIe video, and right now the only real choice there would be Intel graphics.

      First the nit: i386-64? Are you on crack? If you want to call it something cutesy, call it AMD64. The 486 was the last non-RISC CPU either AMD or intel made. Everything since has been internally [mostly] RISC with an x86 decoder glued onto it.

      Now the meat: Why is nvidia not an option?

      And actually, a better q

  • by Anonymous Coward on Thursday May 10 2007, @10:35AM (#19068351)
    ... when they only mean 'Linux support'. And personally, I don't consider closed source binaries OSS support at all. AMD has been good about making the information available for open-source programmers so their chips can be supported. Perhaps their purchase of ATI will force a shift in the corporate culture there too. Well, we can hope.
    • by TheRaven64 (641858) on Thursday May 10 2007, @11:44AM (#19069701) Homepage Journal
      Mod that post right up. Intel are doing it the right way, by releasing DRI drivers. Any operating system that wants to support DRI can then use the Intel DRI drivers. Once the DRI code is running on a kernel, it's just a matter of porting the small glue layer for each card (or card family) and then the bulk of the driver can be compiled and used whatever the underlying architecture is.

      Even the nVidia binary drivers have wider support than ATi, since they work on OpenSolaris and FreeBSD as well as Linux.

  • Current State (Score:5, Interesting)

    by scubanator87 (1023313) <scubanator87&gmail,com> on Thursday May 10 2007, @10:37AM (#19068397)
    I am currently running the *newst* ati binary drivers and although they have added the Catalyst Control center (improvement ofer the old fglrx control center) mine (and a few other people i know using the same driver) cant seem to get dual monitor to work. And with the Opensource ati driver atleast AIGLX works but still no dual head display.

              ATI needs to step up the quality of their coding and there is no *good* reason why ati does not support AIGLX and why their 8.35.5 is having problems with dual monitors. Because my laptop uses ati and i was so displeased with its state of drivers forced me to go with nvidia when i built my desktop a year ago. Im sure many people using Linux stay clear of ati when possible for the same reason. When and if they get their stuff together it will receive a warm welcome...if they do it right that is.

    Also why is it people need programs like envy [albertomilone.com] to install their drivers. Hopefully ATI and nvidia will pick up the slack hear and make it easer to install the drivers.
  • Dell .... (Score:5, Interesting)

    by taniwha (70410) on Thursday May 10 2007, @10:47AM (#19068573) Homepage Journal
    suddenly Dell is shipping boxes with Linux .... a big customer to ATI .... and Dell is talking to Ubuntu .... "How do we know which of our boxes work well for Linux, will cause us the least amount of tech support grief' ... Ubuntu guy says "well these drivers don't work so well .... they're not well supported by their manufacturers" ..... Dell guy starts crossing boxes with ATI cards off the list .... and tells ATI marketting who start worrying that Dell will start to not buy ATI at all .....
    • Re:Dell .... (Score:5, Interesting)

      by LWATCDR (28044) on Thursday May 10 2007, @10:58AM (#19068801) Homepage Journal
      That was my thought. But it gets worse. Dell is also a big and relatively new AMD customer. Intel's integrated graphics solution works very well under Linux. So for the low end Linux solution Intel maybe the system of choice. The Dell guys might start crossing ATI and AMD off the list. Intel offers easier on stop shopping and a more politically correct FOSS system.
        • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

          Thanks for the tip, however (at risk of taking this even further offtopic) I can't even login - the initial boot screen is totally garbled. I did find a few forum posts which suggest a way of running the full installer and substituting some drivers at some point, but as I said I was really just looking to run the live cd and try out some stuff. When I get a chance maybe I'll install a blank disk and do a full install.
  • Oh Oh! (Score:5, Funny)

    by shking (125052) <babulicmNO@SPAMcuug.ab.ca> on Thursday May 10 2007, @10:55AM (#19068737) Homepage
    A friend of mine recently had his dog "fixed". What, exactly, does ATI intend?
  • by keko_metal (1010011) on Thursday May 10 2007, @10:55AM (#19068739)
    I own an ATI 9800 PRO graphics card. It's a great piece of hardware. But "I need a good driver", which is translated to: If they don't release an outstanding driver in the next few weeks, my next card will be nVidia. Or better... If they don't release an outstanding full open-source driver in the next few weeks, my next card will be nVidia. Yes. I know that nVidia drivers aren't outstanding, and aren't open source. But I've been stuck in the bad side so long, that I won't be satisfied with "just the same as the competition".
    • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

      same here - I'm up for a new (probably Dell) high-end laptop this month and honestly, because of the drivers, ATI's getting the shove (and I'm a fan, I used to work for them) - if I'm spending $3000 for hardware I want some that will suspend and resume, shutdown without freezing etc etc simple things - though WoW would be nice too
    • by DrYak (748999) on Thursday May 10 2007, @04:19PM (#19074837) Homepage
      There are open-source R300 [sf.net] drivers that cover the 9500 up to x850 range of cards. I've used it for on old 9600XT AGP card (AGP chip) and HIS-overclocked X800 AGP card (PCIe chip with PCIe-to-GP bridge). The performance seem to be acceptable for my needs - which is surprising, knowing that R300 driver was completely developed from reverse engineering.

      Recently the driver has been included in the official DRI tree. Most distro use it to provide open-source 3D acceleration. It is the default drivers for near every GPL-compatible Beryl/Compiz LiveCD (like Kooraa, for exemple) and function well enough with them (the same can't be said for official binary drivers).

      As usual you should stop focusing on the hardware maker - who doesn't { have the possibility to / want to } throw resources at an OS that represents only a smaller fraction of their market share.
      You should instead seek what has been produced by the OSS community - through large-scale collaboration they often manage to put out some marvels.

      There no way one could except ATI to open-source drivers. They may have problems with code in their drivers that wasn't produced in house and that can't be opened cheaply.
      BUT what AMD/ATI realy need to do is to help the DRI/FreeDesktop guys develop their own driver, and for that they need to document a little bit their chips. The best thing could do to the OSS community isn't trying to make their BLOB drivers less borked. The best thing would be to provide list of registers and samples so the community could write a R500 driver.
  • In other news (Score:5, Informative)

    by diegocgteleline.es (653730) on Thursday May 10 2007, @10:57AM (#19068787)
    Announcing free software drivers for the new Intel 965GM Express Chipset [marc.info]

    ATI, NVIDIA: fuck you. Open source graphic drivers are possible, period.
      • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

        Make sure you contact ATI and nVidia and explain to them what you did and why you did it.
        The more detailed the explanation, the better. This is how we educate manufacturers.
  • by iamacat (583406) on Thursday May 10 2007, @11:21AM (#19069223)
    How do we feel about Microsoft's decision to exclude open source drivers by requiring signatures on everything in XP/Vista? Would we want them to rule out GPLed software based on MFC and .Net? It's no better for Linux to enforce a particular license for drivers or impose license restrictions on KDE/Qt apps. An operating system should be license-neutral for any applications and plugins it supports. A user should not be limited in what kind of hardware he can buy for his Linux computer.
  • by TheGratefulNet (143330) on Thursday May 10 2007, @11:32AM (#19069455)
    right now, as much as I dislike it - nvidia IS the linux owner for HTPC use.

    all the howtos talk about the nvidia binary (sigh) driver and how it helps (but isn't a full solution) to mpeg motion accel. in hardware.

    but with ati, there IS no solution. "don't use ATI" if you use linux and want fast video for home theater use.

    I bought an ati card for the windows side of my htpc design - but I won't be buying them again until they show an xvmc driver for linux.

    its just a shame they ignore unix like that; especially in the days when HTPC building is really starting to get popular.

  • Thanks ATI (Score:3, Interesting)

    by MetricT (128876) on Thursday May 10 2007, @11:37AM (#19069565) Homepage
    While everyone is harping about ATI's past sins, I'd like to thank ATI for committing to fixing those problems. We should commend (and purchase from) companies that make our lives easier (I'm looking at you, Broadcom...)
    • They're a small team working on the drivers, the OpenGL group as a whole. And they're laying off 5% of their workforce to placate the stock market on dismal earnings- do YOU think they're going to carry through on that commitment in the next 6-24 months? I don't. I'm not commending anyone for anything until I see results- while Matthew Tippet's team (small one- very small) has done amazing things for us (I wish the man's team was PROPERLY staffed up!!) he's hamstrung by the upper management's insistence
  • by fo0bar (261207) on Thursday May 10 2007, @12:04PM (#19070069)
    I attended the Red Hat summit last year. Lots of good information (there were a ton of talks about Xen, a good one about the finer points of LVM, etc), but the price wasn't worth making it a yearly thing.

    That being said, I think the conference has the potential to quickly degrade to LinuxWorld-level, and this announcement doesn't surprise me. Companies will come out of the woodwork and start screaming "Yaaa, we like Linux! Hooray for open source!" for a week, but then not do anything until the next conference/expo rolls around.

    (On a related note, the last notebook I bought came with Intel graphics. I specifically chose this because I didn't want to deal with the headache of ATI and Nvidia's binary drivers. Intel is no saint, but at least having full 3D drivers in Xorg is nice.)
  • by Bearhouse (1034238) on Thursday May 10 2007, @12:08PM (#19070139)
    Ever heard of, "Certified Output Protection Protocol (COPP), Protected Video Path Output Protection Management (PVP-OPM),
    Protected Video Path User Accessible Bus (PVP-UAB) and Protected Broadcast Driver Architecture (PBDA..."

    All lovely things that Microsoft and ATI (will/do) use to piss you off, and make connecting all of your expensive new PC & AV kit virtually impossible.

    Better binary drivers? Maybe.

    Genuinely 'open' architecture that would enable the OSS community to bypass (more easily) current and future DRM, while still being able to view the result on the lastest hardware? No way.
  • by fudgefactor7 (581449) on Thursday May 10 2007, @02:42PM (#19073129)
    Read my Journal for the scoop, but it works like this: they (ATI) know their OSS/Linux support is "teh suck," but choose not to fix it. Why? The answer is simple: why should they? In the 3D realm, you have two choices ATI or nVidia. That's it. Linux isn't where the bread-n-butter is, Windows is where the revenue is. As a business, you go where the money is, not where your heart may lead you.

    What's more, it may not be just one component that's truly sucky: All I know is that ATI's FGLRX + 3D + Xorg = failure. Their driver may be fine, there could be an issue with Xorg and ATI together, or some unseen combo that nobody is looking at--or it would have been fixed. So, as a result you have, really, only one good choice for Linux 3D, and that's nVidia. Nvidia knows this and loves it. ATI chooses to chase the other guy rather than fix things and gain new converts.

    In a month or two when nothing has come of this, at least you'll know why. Pay no attention to the flapping heads of ATI until they actually DO something.
  • Commercial uses (Score:3, Interesting)

    by madopal (308394) on Thursday May 10 2007, @02:56PM (#19073385) Homepage
    We've been using OpenGL and Linux on ATI cards for our arcade game for over a year now. We're facing a major hurdle, though. AGP hardware is getting harder and harder to find in quantity, and the fglrx drivers don't correctly support vblank in the PCIx cards they have [cchtml.com]. We're trying to use the commercial end to get pressure on them through the buyers, but it's slow going.

    When they can't be bothered to get their drivers to pay attention to vblank properly, you know it's not their top priority.
    • by fruey (563914) on Thursday May 10 2007, @10:44AM (#19068529) Homepage Journal
      Hack the hardware? Have you any idea how complicated graphics cards and 3D acceleration is when you have no specification on the hardware at all?
    • by the_humeister (922869) on Thursday May 10 2007, @10:52AM (#19068667)
      Uh, people have been working hard to understand how the hardware works in order to write open source drivers. See here [freedesktop.org] for example. The problem is that ATI doesn't open up the specs for their recent cards so there are very few and tedious avenues to having open source drivers (eg. reverse engineer the binary drivers, probing hardeware settings, etc). As far as I know, there's practically full opne source 3D drivers for R100-R200 based cards, somewhat full 3D drivers for R300 based cards, and no support for later models. So the OSS community is working on the driver issues, it takes time without documentation.
      • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

        Apparently (rumour alert), the newer Radeons are very similar, in terms of interface, to earlier ones. Porting the drivers over requires about a 100-line diff; most of the changes are register locations, the actual semantics are similar. Unfortunately, the person who wrote the diff did so under NDA, and ATi didn't allow him to release it.
    • by Ruie (30480) on Thursday May 10 2007, @11:19AM (#19069199) Homepage

      So far I'm hearing "commercial company hasn't written Linux drivers for their card". That's a legitimate complaint, but if the OSS community's reaction is to whine about it on cheesy blogs rather just hack the hardware...?
      No, it is not, but it is strictly for pleasure only.

      You see, 3d cards are complicated. On top of that the hardware itself if often finicky with lockups to the point that they should really be considered bugs. So, you can only start once your got the hardware in your hands (which means after release) and with lots of work, at best you will have something semi-working a year later. It will be at least another year before the drivers mature so everyone can use them mostly without lockups. In the meanwhile ATI will release a few more variations and, if you are aiming for comprehensive support, you are back to square one.

      If ATI wants to be nice to Open Source it means releasing partial specifications (at the very least) before the card is ready so that all their cards work with 2d, Xv and multi-monitor/multi-card when they are in stores (or a couple of months later) and having full specifications no later than 6 months after release.

      Anything else and we are back to scrounging for older well-supported cards - which also happen to be a good deal cheaper and have less of a margin for ATI.

      The latest card I have is Radeon 1600 - and given a choice I would gladly go back to R300 (or better yet - Rage Pro) if only those cards supported the resolutions I need and PCI express.

      • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

        Fuck "hacking the hardware" and "whining about it". The "Open Source Community", specifically Dave Airlie, have already written Free drivers [livejournal.com] for the ATI cards, that ATI WILL NOT ALLOW THEM TO RELEASE. Note that that blog entry is from the middle of last fucking year.

        At this stage, to buy anything except an Intel GMA X3000 is madness. Intel are delivering fully Free/Open solutions that are powerful enough for anyone except hard core gamers (and said games don't exist on Linux anyway) and CAD people.

        The

      • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

        In reality, they're not. The API driving them IS. They're just multiprocessor stream engines these days. Pretty much little more than a 4, 8, 16, etc. way SMP machine for all intents and purposes. I should know, I worked on driver work for one of those "complex" beasties- the driver's feature set is what is really complicated and much of that has been done by the DRI crowd and just needing refining.
    • by 644bd346996 (1012333) on Thursday May 10 2007, @12:29PM (#19070547)
      Short answer: no.

      Long answer: No. X11+GLX is very different from GDI+DirectX. In almost all cases, it would be easier to reverse-engineer the hardware, rather than wrap the driver api. Also, it would probably be impossible to use windows graphics drivers in a secure manner. And the extra translation layer would kill performance. If you are going to reverse-engineer the drivers, you might as well look at the hardware info, and not the software api.

      Note that in some cases, it is possible to use Windows drivers on a *nix operating system. The NDIS network card driver api is well documented, and is supported by projects for Linux and FreeBSD.