| |||||||||||||
What's in it for Intel?What's in it for Intel?Posted Dec 25, 2008 6:14 UTC (Thu) by dlang (✭ supporter ✭, #313)In reply to: What's in it for Intel? by sbishop Parent article: Alan Cox is moving on from Red Hat
re-read your statement and substatute nVidia for Intel.
now think about the state of video support on Linux
also remember that Intel makes a lot more than just CPUs, they have network cards, video cards, sound cards, etc. each of these needs a driver team at the very least.
In some areas (networking for example) I think they just pay driver development teams.
In other areas (Video for example), they not only pay driver developers, they also pay developers to work on the underlying subsystems to implement new features and better take advantage of the capabilities of the chips
(Log in to post comments)
What's in it for Intel? Posted Dec 26, 2008 20:29 UTC (Fri) by ceplm (subscriber, #41334) [Link]
Note that two of the three (ATI and Intel) "big three" already meaningfully cooperate with the open source community (being followed by some other ones -- VIA).
What's in it for Intel? Posted Dec 26, 2008 21:03 UTC (Fri) by dlang (✭ supporter ✭, #313) [Link]
they do now, but for several years Intel was the only one that did. and ATI's cooperation (through AMD) is very recent (recent enough that it hasn't had much impact yet)
What's in it for Intel? Posted Dec 26, 2008 21:12 UTC (Fri) by ceplm (subscriber, #41334) [Link]
Recent? IIRC -- a year and half. And you apparently don't have the right distribution, Dave Airlie provided tons and tons of fixes to -ati driver, and people (mainly) from OpenSuSE created -radeonhd using that information. That's pretty big impact in my books.
What's in it for Intel? Posted Dec 26, 2008 21:15 UTC (Fri) by dlang (✭ supporter ✭, #313) [Link]
great, I thought it was about a year and didn't think that the updates had made it in yet. I'm glad to to be wrong about that.
|
|||||||||||||