SGI Open Sources GLX 79
An AC was the first to inform us that Silicon
Graphics has released
GLX as Open Source for Xfree86
in order to stimulate the number of hardware-accelerated 3D
drivers supported by Xfree86. Interestingly Red Hat and
SGI are funding new
driver work
to be done by
Precision Insight
on a multiple pipe 3D architecture extension for X. Precision
Insight were the people who brought the NeoMagic drivers to
Xfree86 under contract to Red Hat. Of course it comes with its
own
license: anyone care to comment on it?
Grab the code here.
There is hope... (Score:1)
Info coming soon they have stated on their website for close to 6 months now
Creative Labs is planning to support 3d drivers (Score:1)
The License. (Score:1)
Oh-Yeah (Score:1)
Doesn't Raster have something about buying dinner for anyone who could make some X calls use hardware acceleration? I call dibs!
SGI is OK after all. (Score:1)
First, their Visual Workstations aren't just standard PC's -- there's some thought in the architecture
Second, they really support Linux and OSS.
I was wrong about them. Buy SGI.
Is anyone paying attention to the G200? (Score:1)
I'm really hoping that XFree 4 will have 3D acceleration for the G200 card, but Matrox (who I annoy on a monthly basis about this) still refuses to release any information or write any drivers. The card is still really nice in X with 16M of video RAM, though
More for X? (Score:1)
X is proven technology that has been around for 15 years. I believe that the only people who are clamoring for things like a "complete rewrite" (and those who constantly bitch about X for one reason or another) are those who don't really understand it well enough to appreciate it.
More for X? (Score:1)
I believe he was refering to X itself, not the XFree86 implementation of it in particular.
The concern that X is getting too big is valid. While it may be humanly possible to write a large, complex software program that's relatively bug free, no one has done so yet.
TedC
Amen, brother! (Score:1)
-o
No Subject Given (Score:1)
lately than I have been angry at them. It's odd.
SGI seems to be trying (hard or not) to do the
"right thing" and one often questions why the heck
they aren't taking the stingy backstabbing who
cares what we want route. I figure they'd be
a little more dedicated towards capitalizing...
I see three things:
1> SGI is really dumb and don't realize that this
could hurt them in the longer run. (they're not
exactly in the most financially stable state
right now)
2> SGI is doing this out of the kindness of their
hearts and doesn't seek any returns at all.
3> SGI sees this as a plan to profit, and in the
process gives us exact what we want.
Idealistically, it'd be the second case.
Realistically, it's the third case, which if it
is, has proven to me that capitalism really does
work for everyone! hooray!
Three cheers for SGI!
Repeat after me... (Score:1)
Redhat and SGI are funding new driver work (Score:1)
Isn't Redhat just so Eviiiillll......NOT
How about a pat on the back for Brian Paul (Score:1)
It seems to me that he did more than anybody to stimulate these developments, by writing Mesa. We should all be grateful for all of his very hard work.
The future sure looks bright!
Are you totally deranged? (Score:1)
NT 3.5 was properly engineered. NT 4.0 is not.
Nice job, SGI. (Score:1)
I'll be thrilled if I can purchase one of SGIs Visual workstations in the near future, install Linux on it, and be able to take full advantage of the graphic horsepower of the machine.
Thanks to everyone at SGI that made this possible!
It didn't start at one... (Score:1)
So, it's just a number anyhow. Can we just party at big round numbers?
Who's with me on a big Whoo-hoo? (Score:1)
according to ati, they are not releasing 3d drivers forn non windows platforms, and they consider their 3d implemetations to be completely proprietary information. maybe they would change their mind if enough people asked them, but i wouldn't count on it any ime soon.
other things aside, the ati's (at least mine) are also really good 2d cards for x, which is what i mostly care about anyway
So, (Score:1)
Actually, had we started the calender at the year 0, the same way we normally count our age, then it would in fact be the new millenium on 1-1-2000. Does anyone know if that's the case? Or did the year number start at 1?
--
This makes sense... (Score:1)
Given that SGI has press releases saying that they are going to support Linux, something like this is needed for their new Intel machines.
This is a very positive development and I hope there is a driver available for my Matrox G200 in the future. I've been meaning to go through my OpenGL books, this will help inspire me to actually get Mesa and start working on some 3D stuff (haven't used gl in years).
What timing... (Score:1)
License looks OK at first glance (Score:1)
I am downloading now, so I don't know what is in the package. If it's the whole of Open GL and is really Open Source licensed it would kill Mesa.
SGI used stochastic dither antialiasing in their renderer, which is patented by Pixar (I left there last week to form a new company and am technically "on vacation" at the moment). That's just one of the areas where "infringement" might be a problem. I hate software patents.
Bruce
Sweet! (Score:1)
turn of the century (Score:1)
There was no year 0 A.D.; the 1st Century A.D. was from the year 1 to 100, inclusive. The 1st Century A.D. had to start with the first year A.D., which we write as 1 A.D.
Someone wrote in to PC magazine a while back about how stupid this was, and that common sense shows that the century starts with 2000. He proceded to give an argument that disproved his own point; he said something to the effect of "Everyone would agree that your 100th penny is part of your first dollar." That is, of course, entirely true, which means that your 2nd dollar starts with your 101st penny. Centuries work in exactly the same way.
This in no way precludes having a great party on 31-Dec-1999. I fully plan to have a huge party on that date, to celebrate the "rolling over of the odometer", as it were, and another huge party a year later, to celebrate the end of the century.
More for X? (Score:1)
THANK YOU SGI!!!! (Score:1)
Obviously #3 (Score:1)
Sheesh (Score:1)
In closing, go SGI!
This is great news (Score:1)
-Erik
Cool URL... (Score:1)
:)
-Erik
It's really simple: (Score:1)
I know some pencil-necks are quivering with impotent rage that not every convention of mankind is mathematically precise, but most of us accept it and plan to party this year like the next begins the next millenium. Because according to society's ever-sloppy definition, it is. Try to get over it.
SGI taking cues from IBM (Score:1)
I used to work in a large all SGI shop. To sell the Visual Workstations to management, there would have to be assurances that the existing administrative routines be preserved.
And that takes NT, an OS designed from the ground up to be incompatible with non-MS systems, out of the picture entirely.
Thus, those machines will need an alternative operating system that can play with _any_ existing configuration. I've got one on the tip of my tounge-Linux.
Less than a year ago I had marked SGI for dead by 2001. They are extending the lease on life every day it seems.
I totally agree (Score:1)
I found one thing that some people won't like - the acronym is GPL....;)
What timing... (Score:1)
Out-by-one errors are so *pervasive*!
Same again, Embarrassed Anonymous Coward.
Perhaps you meant, by 2000. Or Y2K if you must.
Finally! I was going to write my own 3d opengl (Score:1)
in kernel graphics is not faster than user-space graphics.
Why does everyone think that graphics *acceleration* has to be in kernel space? "Wheee let's throw everything into the kernel that has the slightest thing to do with hardware" and we'll end up with a monster kernel ala NT4!
(kernel/s/ i know, NT4 is a micro-kernel arch).
So why aren't the SANE scanner backends integrated into the kernel? They send whatever scsi commands they want to a scanner via the scsi generic interface. surely we can't allow that in user-space!!
get a clue people.
unix is good precisely because the all the functions aren't integrated into the kernel. because the kernel implements a simple safe interface to hardware, and leaves the rest to userspace.
ie simple framebuffer that can do some simple functions like change video modes, reset the card,
etc. And leave the accelerated and 3d graphics to X or *whatever*.
If the whatever cocks up, the kernel can always recover.
KISS!!!!
You MUST hassle your hardware vendor! (Score:1)
This is good news BUT, in order to get decent 3D accelleration, we HAVE to keep after the hardware companies.
I work for one of these companies (although i cant say which one) and let me tell you they are all in the "considering it" phase, but they really need to know that there is customer interest before they invest man-hours writing X drivers.
This is the most important thing the Linux/FreeBSD/etc. community can do at this point. The more _polite_ and _persuasive_ emails the hardware companies recieve, the better. None of these companies want to be "the first to try it" and then get burned. It must be proven to affect their bottom line.
Wow... (Score:1)
Wow...sounds like linux may be getting real multimedia development afterall.
No Thanks, but I'll take a Yoo-hoo. (nt) (Score:1)
"It's Brazilian"
Who's with me on a big Whoo-hoo? (Score:1)
You would get better performance by cutting X and GLX out of the loop and using a console opengl implementation such as mesa/3dfx. This would be true for any opengl implementation.
Embarrass Matrox (Score:1)
Matrox is one of the good guys! (Score:1)
This is great news (Score:1)
Precision Insight is also working on enhancements to GLX [precisioninsight.com] which will be the
basis for a hardware driver kit that can be used to build drivers for specific boards.
G200 Questions (Score:1)