Jeff Spaleta wrote:
do you know exactly how responsible nvidia is for
the state of nv driver development that is available as part of X?
Perhaps, more than perhaps.. nv could also be claimed as their driver
too. Maybe the disparity in functionality between the nv driver and
the closed nvidia driver is delibrate. Maybe the developers provided
as much functionality in the open nv driver as the feel they can do
and its not so much a decision that the engineers are actively making
as it is a set of legal opinions and or business decisions
constraining their actions. Or maybe they are just twisted evil
dwarves who like watching the drivers break as the kernel development
churns forward.
That's an interesting point to consider, but you have to understand that
NVidia is a company, and therefore is only interested in two things: profits
and market share. All NVidia wants is to own the Linux market share (and they
pretty much do), because even if it's only half a percent or so of the desktop
market, it's half a percent they would rather own over ATI in the
ultra-competitive graphics market. With that perspective in mind, it makes no
sense from a business point of view for NVidia to somehow deliberately
sabotage or slow down the progress of the nv GPL driver: after all their
closed-source driver is free, all they want is for linux people to buy their
cards... It's also in their best interest to have a solid GPL unaccelerated nv
driver in Xorg, so that things like graphics installer will work...
-denis
--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
