Intel Linux love.

[drag]

Ok ok. Intel isn't the best company in the world or anything like that. (being behind things like the big push behind DRM and such)

But it seems to be liking it's relationship with Linux and open source drivers.

First off Keith Packard's talk at the Debian Miniconf:
http://mirror.linux.org.au/pub/linux.co...07/video/monday/monday_1450_Debian.ogg

Since Intel is the only vendor that is producing open source drivers and hiring X hackers, this puts them at about the forefront of Linux Open source driver support.

Stuff like getting X's memory management up to snuff. They are changing how the hardware works to get away from bios modesetting so that you won't need the 915resolution hack to get it to work on non-Vesa-standard resolutions (while at the same time developing the modsetting branch so that it can work on as much existing hardware as possible. There are several entertaining 'IP' related reasons why Linux users have to currently use the 915resolution hack).

Then more general X things like getting rid of the dependance on xorg.conf, the ability to hotplug input devices, and the ability to hotplug monitors. He also says that Intel has commited itself for good open source driver support, so that when hardware is released you'll have a Linux driver for it.

Hopefully that is not BS, because more pseudo-details about Intel's discrete video cards are being released. It's suppose to be a monster. It's just rumor at this point (with unidentified non-intel 'sources')
http://www.vr-zone.com/?i=4605

They are going to start off by releasing the high-end version first. Possibly 32nm fabrication technology (I am expecting 45nm first though). 16-core GPU per core. Slated for around late 2008 early 2009.

It's suppose to be sixteen times more powerfull then current generation hardware, namely the Nvidia G80 designs.



Also Intel just released a new Linux driver for their 3945ABG wireless card.

You know, the card that required the obnoxious propriatory userspace daemon? They changed the firmware and now you don't need that anymore. The driver is based on the new d80211 (devicescape) wireless stack instead of the current 80211 stack that intel released a while ago and has been incorporated into the kernel.

No more propriatory kernel or userspace bits needed for it to work anymore (although I am assuming that the firmware is still very very very propriatory)

And even though it's a code dump, it compiled and worked for the kernel developers on the first try.
http://kerneltrap.org/node/7704


Weird stuff.

 

[xSauronx]

watched the vid

i *really* need to get cable though

 

[Alone]

Intel has become less of a devil to me in recent months. I used to be an AMD fanboy, but then I really just stopped and thought about what I was doing. Intel is great, and their technology is great. I'm just glad they're following through on something more important. It doesn't surprise me to find that they've realized there's such room to grow, and that room is currently Linux.

Won't be too long now before hardware is just as easy to setup in Linux as it is in Windows. Personally, I haven't run into any compatibility issues, but I don't have wireless Internet, and that seems to be the main problem as of late.

 

[drag]

Depending on how you look at it it is probably a more positive reflection on Linux then on Intel.

I realy do like AMD (they are more honestly open then Intel), but the companies they depend on (Nvidia and ATI) for motherboards and video cards are failing them. I was hoping that AMD would convince ATI to open up, but ATI comes with so much IP baggage I am afraid they aren't going to have much impact.

One way to look at it is that this increase of support for Linux is definately not because Intel likes open source.. they aren't doing out of good feelings... they are doing it because they feel that there is a economic advantage to supporting Linux with open source drivers for their hardware. That this sort of stuff is something they see actual demand for from their customers.

Maybe.

 

[Bremen]

Nice stuff. I've been drafting a nice letter to AMD for awhile now explaining why my next purchase will be Intel even though I prefer their (cheaper) processors. If I can even get a high end graphics card with open drivers in linux I'll be in heaven.

 

[bersl2]

Originally posted by: drag
Depending on how you look at it it is probably a more positive reflection on Linux then on Intel.

I realy do like AMD (they are more honestly open then Intel), but the companies they depend on (Nvidia and ATI) for motherboards and video cards are failing them. I was hoping that AMD would convince ATI to open up, but ATI comes with so much IP baggage I am afraid they aren't going to have much impact.

One way to look at it is that this increase of support for Linux is definately not because Intel likes open source.. they aren't doing out of good feelings... they are doing it because they feel that there is a economic advantage to supporting Linux with open source drivers for their hardware. That this sort of stuff is something they see actual demand for from their customers.

Maybe.

So, in other words, maybe somebody has finally decided to listen to what we've been trying to say for a while, which is that any halfway-decent hardware design that doesn't expose all its internal secrets coupled with FOSS drivers made in accord with our development model provides a high return on a low investment.

Wait, what did I just say? :moon:

 

[aidanjm]

I read that intel is being very unhelpful indeed when it comes to the open bios projects, whereas AMD has fully embraced the idea of open source bios code, and there might even be motherboards released by major manufacturers with AMD's blessing coming with open source bios as the standard option. so I guess intel will support open source where it is expedient, oppose it in situations where it might conflict with a business objective or project (like the trusted computing initiative vs an open source bios)

 

[BladeVenom]

Originally posted by: drag

Since Intel is the only vendor that is producing open source drivers and hiring X hackers, this puts them at about the forefront of Linux Open source driver support.

Hasn't IBM done a lot for Linux?

 

[HeartView]

Originally posted by: aidanjm
I read that intel is being very unhelpful indeed when it comes to the open bios projects, whereas AMD has fully embraced the idea of open source bios code, and there might even be motherboards released by major manufacturers with AMD's blessing coming with open source bios as the standard option. so I guess intel will support open source where it is expedient, oppose it in situations where it might conflict with a business objective or project (like the trusted computing initiative vs an open source bios)

That is not entirely fair. One could openly support open source and still be adamantly opposed to the GPL, for instance (I know many people like this). Not all open source is created equal and every for profit business has to weigh in on the financial considerations for going open source with any project. It seems like you are suggesting that someone (or a company) is either all for open source or they are completely opposed to it. If true, that sounds more like religion than business.

 

[drag]

Originally posted by: BladeVenom

Originally posted by: drag

Since Intel is the only vendor that is producing open source drivers and hiring X hackers, this puts them at about the forefront of Linux Open source driver support.

Hasn't IBM done a lot for Linux?

Sure., sorta.
Plus IBM doesn't make any video cards.

That is not entirely fair. One could openly support open source and still be adamantly opposed to the GPL, for instance (I know many people like this).

Their crazy. The main real reason people have to hate the GPL is becuase they want the ability to use GPl'd code in their own software without releasing any code themselves.

While that's fine, but different licenses are their for different purposes. 'adamantly opposed' sounds like religion to me.

Not all open source is created equal and every for profit business has to weigh in on the financial considerations for going open source with any project. It seems like you are suggesting that someone (or a company) is either all for open source or they are completely opposed to it. If true, that sounds more like religion than business.

Intel is huge dicks about a lot of stuff. They aren't releasing any documentation, a lot of stuff is hidden from hackers and the people they are working with are all doing it under NDA.

For open source stuff all Intel is doing is code dumps and unless you want to sign away your rights that is all your going to have to work with. Plus they don't allow people to redistribute their firmware which requires that you go their site and go 'thank you thank you' intel and agree to a EULA before you can use your hardware.

AMD generally speaking is much more open and much easier to work with. They release documentation, they are helping out with the Linux bios. They are generally a Linux-friendly and OSS friendly company. This is just one of those historical facts.

But you need to take what you can get. If you want open source video drivers Intel is the only player in town. Plus they are making sure that their 'centrino' laptops are very well supported with about-as-good-as-it-gets power management support and wireless support.

They are both much better then some companies though.. Like broadcom or Nvidia or ATI for instance. Worlds better. No contest.

(In fact if you want to know the truth, the only reason you have 3d graphics from Nvidia and ATI in the first place is because the movie industry had moved from SGI to Linux/x86 for their graphical workstations. Neither ATI or Nvidia could give a rats ass about Linux desktop or Linux gamers.)