Mailinglist Archive: opensuse (5130 mails)

< Previous Next >
Re: [SLE] Re: [OT] Meta-discussion on the IP issues of GPUs and 3D -- nVidia _did_ release open source for NV0x!
  • From: "Bryan J. Smith" <b.j.smith@xxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Sat, 27 May 2006 10:05:08 -0400
  • Message-id: <1148738708.2766.47.camel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
On Sat, 2006-05-27 at 10:30 -0300, Alvaro Kuolas wrote:
> Who knows why they change NV47 to G70.

Marketing possibly.

NV47 is appropriately named, since the GeForce 7 (G7x) is basically the
_same_ core design GeForce 6 (NV4x).

Just as the GeForce 4Ti (NV25+) was the same as the GeForce 3 (NV20).

Just as the GeForce 2 (NV15+) was the same as the GeForce (NV10).

About the only "standalone"/"don't bother using it again" design was the
ultra-crappy GeForce FX (NV3x).

> Anyway, I will stop ranting now.
> Thanks for your light on this nvidia / ATI / intel / "IP" subject.

You have to be _careful_ to note that sometimes, not everything is as it
seems. I find 90+% of Linux advocates can make things _worse_
sometimes. The whole 3D/GLX realm is one. But there's an even bigger
one ...

E.g., SCO v. IBM is one such detail. SCO's filing against IBM in March
2003 was _valid_ against IBM -- IBM withheld Monterey source code from
SCO and, more directly, _violated_ the Non-Compete by helping Linux
(_regardless_ of whether any IP transfer occurred). The key to this is
to read items 50-55 (and _ignore_ the "lead-up" which is _not_
inflammatory towards Linux, but _required_ for the "Non-Compete"
portion). SCO assumed IBM was going to settle.

When IBM didn't, *WE* the Linux community, gave SCO a political avenue.
Why? Because *WE* the Linux community, did not stop to listen to Cox,
ESR and even Linus himself that the original filing was a "contract
dispute" and _not_ about Linux. So in May 2003+, when the lawsuit was
expanded and the "smokescreen" put up (e.g., suing anyone running Linux
that had a contract with SCO -- like AutoZone, Crysler, etc...), *WE*
are partially to blame for that.

IBM screwed over SCO ... *BAD*!
And I see several other, pro-Linux, pro-GPL companies in their path.
IBM wants to be the _sole_ UNIX/Linux vendor.

Sun is next (who has donated _far_more_ GPL to Linux than IBM).
HP is after that.

At some point, Red Hat is going to be taken down, since they didn't
think before they bought JBOSS:

Anytime you put hundreds of millions of dollars of IBM's market at risk,
which Caldera did by purchasing SCO, IBM will kill you and has the
lawyers and IP to outlast you. Could you imagine AIX5L on Itanium IA-64
and AMD x86-64? IBM did, and they decided Caldera's fate 20 days after
Caldera purchased SCO. And that was _before_ IBM was even moving much
of their product line to Linux (which is still virtually _little_ actual
GPL -- only some _limited_ MPL-like).

And that's why a jury in Utah will find IBM _guilty_ of many counts of
the original March 2003 by SCO. Yes, most of the added May 2003 items
are jokes, and SCO has lost on many injuctions and preliminary rulings
there -- SCO IP is _not_ in Linux. But IBM harmed SCO badly, and the
violating non-expiring Non-Compete existed for a reason. Unfortunately,
when SCO _wins_ on those other counts (assuming they can last to trial
-- something IBM was counting on _not_ happening back in early 2003), 90
+% of the ignorant Linux community and 100% of the ignorant IT media
will ass-u-me it's about Linux IP.

Never has been. Never will be. That's just the post-2003 May
"smokescreen" -- a "smokescreen" that would have _not_ been possible had
the Linux community not been so ignorant of contract law and rabid.

Bryan J. Smith Professional, technical annoyance
Americans don't get upset because citizens in some foreign
nations can burn the American flag -- Americans get upset
because citizens in those same nations can't burn their own

< Previous Next >
Follow Ups