New High Priority Project: PowerVR drivers
- Thread starter Vitel
- Start date
WizardStan
Mega GP Mania
- Joined
- May 24, 2008
- Messages
- 16,731
This doesn't mean anything for the Pandora, really. It's not likely to give us faster or better drivers than the ones we currently have, it's really only for the people with more extreme open source ideals.
myownlittlworld
Member
- Joined
- Aug 20, 2010
- Messages
- 179
That's awesome!!!
Vitel
Active Member
s/with more extreme open source ideals/who value their freedom/
WizardStan
Mega GP Mania
- Joined
- May 24, 2008
- Messages
- 16,731
No, I meant what I said. That's why I used the word "ideals" specifically. I can value freedom and still hold a different standard for what is required of those freedoms and I don't like the implication you are giving me that I cannot.
Tempel
Active Member
WizardStan: Couldn't it conceivably give us full OpenGL? Granted, that's probably years away, but if we're lucky, maybe the work done on current PowerVR chips will still be applicable to whatever hardware ends up in the Pandora 2.
@WizardStan, I think you've got the wrong end of the stick. vminko was quite right to correct your "extreme" characterisation. You can certainly hold different standards if you choose, but understand people are going to take offence if you dismiss their ideals "extreme" simply because they do not match your own.
metallurge
Still Fresh
Yeah, I kindof find this a bit offensive, as well. No biggie, WS, I respect your contributions to the community too much to get overly excited about this. But seriously, closed source drivers are always a dicey thing. I usually don't buy hardware that is only functional with closed source drivers. Let's not forget, this is called OPENpandora for a reason. Open source drivers for the hardware is kinda part of the core mission, IMHO.
WizardStan
Mega GP Mania
- Joined
- May 24, 2008
- Messages
- 16,731
Gor dangit, before hitting submit I tried three different wordings to try and find the right way to say it without offending anybody or sounding pretentious and it was taken offensively anyway. I didn't say it was absolutely extreme, I said "more extreme", as in much greater. Vminko's attempt to correct me actually helps illustrate the point: to the people that this matters to, open source means absolute freedom, closed source means no freedom, and that's the only thing that will really be gained with an open source driver: peace of mind for those that care.
bzar
A Commando
^ Also the possibility for the community to fix/implement stuff.
Hey, it's cool bro! But you know Free Software and Open Source Software are two very different ideas, rite? One is not a more extreme version of the other.
Caine
Hardcore Member
In principle I agree with WizardStan on this, however in this particular instance I thought it was the video drivers which are blocking the upgrade to a newer kernel version (which would allow utilization of the DSP) as they are not compatible with the newer ones.
Last edited by a moderator:
myownlittlworld
Member
- Joined
- Aug 20, 2010
- Messages
- 179
Once this change is implemented, how many non-free drivers will run parts of the OP? In other words, after the video drivers are switched out, how much of the OpenPandora will still be closed?
WizardStan
Mega GP Mania
- Joined
- May 24, 2008
- Messages
- 16,731
Sorry guys, I didn't mean to ruffle anyone's feathers, I was just trying to point out that to the average user this isn't that big a deal and they shouldn't get too excited while still acknowledging that there are people for whom this is a big deal. No, the video drivers aren't holding up a newer kernel; yes it could eventually lead to full OpenGL, but if open source video drivers on desktops are any indication I wouldn't hold out hope for it's performance against OGL wrappers around OGLES.
The microcontrolers that drive the nubs run closed software, but we don't currently have any way of changing it even if we did have the source.
myownlittlworld
Member
- Joined
- Aug 20, 2010
- Messages
- 179
When we reach that point, what's effectively a static piece of hardware that doesn't do much outside of basic IO and can't be modified, replaced, or updated, I'm less intrigued. It's the same logic that rendered the BIOS projects unnecessary until fairly recently (when BIOS became writable and more of a big deal generally, as I understand it). So, if that's even a target, it seems like it'd be a very low priority target.
As far as being important to the average user, everybody involved so far is right, but the more folks we get involved in the project, the greater use it'll be to the average user, which I bet is where some of the feather-ruffling came from.
Last edited by a moderator:
Vitel
Active Member
The WiFi driver uses binary firmware.
WizardStan
Mega GP Mania
- Joined
- May 24, 2008
- Messages
- 16,731
No it doesn't. It was replaced long, long ago.
edit: or wait... firmware? What are we talking about here?
Last edited by a moderator:
Caine
Hardcore Member
The GMA 500 is a PowerVR chip, so it is a Pandora problem.
