Amiga.org
Amiga News and Community Announcements => Amiga News and Community Announcements => Amiga Software News => Topic started by: DJS on September 14, 2004, 02:00:03 PM
-
Elbox Computer is pleased to have completed development of drivers for a series of new TV card models, these drivers being released today.
See the Mediator Driver Guide (http://elbox.com/mdg.html#TV_TUNER) for the current list of PCI TV cards supported in MEDIATOR busboards.
The MM CD 1.26 update is free for all registered Mediator Multimedia CD users.
Additionally, the new tv.library ver. 4.0 has added Stereo-NICAM TV sound processing for TV cards fitted with a single-chip Digital TV Sound Demodulator-Decoder TDA9874A by Philips.
The new library has added processing of the new Front End by YMEC: TVision 5V TVF-8533B/DF. These Front Ends are installed in the latest Prolink TV cards, e.g. in the now-supported PixelView PlayTV Pro MPEG (model M4800). New Front Ends are much more sensitive than those fitted in older TV card models. Quality of the broadcast is now excellent, even when the antenna signal is relatively weak.
The new library has added processing of the new radio sets installed in the latest TV cards. These are single-chip, digitally tuned FM stereo radio sets TEA5767 by Philips. To ensure handling new radio sets, the API of tv.library was expanded. The current developer's documentation (ver. 4.0) is available from the Mediator Multimedia CD 1.26. The new tv.library is compatible backwards with all the previous tv.library functions maintained. As a result, the current versions of TV card control GUI--like TvR (http://www.ppa.pl/software/software-tvr.html) and SuperTV (http://www.petergordon.org.uk/)--work with the new tv.library without any modifications.
The MM CD 1.26 update includes also the new driver for Fast Ethernet 10/100Mbps cards. The FastEthernet.device ver. 1.15 driver has been reworked for AmigaOS4 compatibility.
Take advantage of MEDIATOR!
Info on the current versions is available in the DOWNLOADS (http://elbox.com/downloads.html) | Mediator section (http://elbox.com/downloads_mediator.html).
The current list of supported PCI cards is available in the Mediator Driver Guide (http://www.elbox.com/mdg.html).
The info about Mediator-related sources you will find in the COMMUNITY section (http://elbox.com/community.html).
-
So when will the Shark show up that so many people got a mediator for? OS4 has been working on the A1 for some time now.
-
Good work on the new drivers.
I'm also interested in hearing about the status of Shark - any news?
-
Shark would be sweet. We'll see if it ever comes out. :-?
-
Yeah, were's the shark ? 8-)
-
Yay. More TV cards. Where's 3Com network card support? Adaptec and Symbios/LSI Logic SCSI card support? Matrox and ATI video card support? Oh wait. They'd probably have to use open source drivers as a resource which would force them to open source portions of their drivers as well. God forbid.
-
Yeah it seems Elbox doesnt care much for new hardware support. If they would just allow OpenPCI to work on the Mediator we would have so many great drivers. The Pegasos can use many ATI cards, SCSI cards, TV cards, SB Live! cards, and so many more. It uses OpenPCI and I'm sure the drivers wouldnt be to hard to port over for use on the Amiga with a Mediator.
-
A little Amiga-esque irony: The Mediator 3dfx drivers are almost certainly based on stolen intellectual property. 3dfx was long gone before the Mediator was released, and I don't recall Nvidia starting a 3dfx licensing program. (OK, this is pure speculation, but it seems likely. Did Elbox ever announce an agreement with Nvidia? My guess is that Elbox used the leaked 3dfx source code as a starting point.)
Speaking of 3dfx being long gone, what genius decided to launch Mediator with support for a dead product line? I'd understand if Mediator was an open solution. But it isn't. It would have made more sense (to me anyway) to provide support for video cards that are still being manufactured. Then again, it's an Amiga product. . . . And I'm beating a dead horse. Mediator is what it is--a closed, pay-per-use solution for a captive market.
-
@Acill
Yeah it seems Elbox doesnt care much for new hardware support.
They do not care for the new hardware support?
What is this news about then?
If they would just allow OpenPCI to work on the Mediator we would have so many great drivers.
Really?
According to some people (redrumloa) even the simple RTL8139 100Mbps OpenPCI driver does not work stable in Pegasos. Or is redrumloa lying us?
http://www.amiga.org/forums/showthread.php?t=11488
The Pegasos can use many ATI cards, SCSI cards, TV cards, SB Live! cards, and so many more.
What does Pegasos have to do with this news?
BTW. What ATI models have 3D support under current Morphos? Are there any? Where can I find the list of TV cards supported in Pegasos under Morphos?
-
@@Trev
A little Amiga-esque irony: The Mediator 3dfx drivers are almost certainly based on stolen intellectual property. 3dfx was long gone before the Mediator was released, and I don't recall Nvidia starting a 3dfx licensing program.
It is incorrect, Trev.
Mediator was released long months before 3dfx was gone.
It takes only a few minutes to check in the Web when Mediator was released and when 3dfx was gone:
http://www.elbox.com/news_00_06_08.html
http://www.nvidia.com/object/IO_20010612_6602.html
I'm sure you should check it for yourself instead of writing untrue things here.
Did Elbox ever announce an agreement with Nvidia? My guess is that Elbox used the leaked 3dfx source code as a starting point.)
You really think that companies announce in public signing every single NDA?
Or you just want to troll here a bit?
BTW. Are you a Mediator user? I guess you are not. You are probably only an anti-Mediator Troll.
-
/me gets some popcorn and soda.
Kids eh, they'll never grow up :roll:.
-
:laugh::roflmao::laugh:
-
Actually, I'm just an Amiga user. I've been called many things, but only 99% of them were true. ;-)
The Mediator PCI 1200 shipped in September 2000, just three months before Nvidia's acquisition of 3dfx was announced. 3dfx had been in decline for quite some time, and Nvidia would have been working with 3dfx on acquisition details well before an official announcement was made.
3dfx stopped licensing its technology after the release of the Voodoo 2. They were especially closelipped about Glide, their 3D API, and quite reticent with regard to their software and hardware interface in general.
Why would 3dfx break with tradition and license their technology to Elbox? I just don't see it happening.
And really, this isn't trolling. It's just an open discussion. It's not like I'm proclaiming the v1r7u3s of one PCI solution over another. I'm just criticizing Elbox's abuse of the market and lack of support for current video cards.
In other news, the SharkPPC will begin production in January 2001: http://www.elbox.com/news_00_10_12.html (http://www.elbox.com/news_00_10_12.html) :-P
EDIT: It just occurred to me that under US law, it would be entirely legal to produce an OpenPCI library for Mediator to support new PCI video cards, as the currently supported cards are no longer "reasonably available in the commercial marketplace." The US Copyright Office did at least one thing right with repsect to reverse engineering, circumvention, and the DMCA. http://www.copyright.gov/1201/ (http://www.copyright.gov/1201/)
Trev
-
"So when will the Shark show up that so many people got a mediator for? OS4 has been working on the A1 for some time now."
I doubt anything will be done to get AOS4 to run on renamed sonnet cards untill AOS4.0 is released. I think it has been said by both Elbox and Hyperion.
btw. does AOS4 use OpenPCI ?
-
@Trev
The Mediator PCI 1200 shipped in September 2000, just three months before Nvidia's acquisition of 3dfx was announced. 3dfx had been in decline for quite some time, and Nvidia would have been working with 3dfx on acquisition details well before an official announcement was made.
Elbox had also to work on drivers before the Mediator release.
Anyway, first were the Mediator 2D drivers for Voodoo, and only then Nvidia took over 3dfx. Voodoo 3 was one of the best PCI graphic card at that time. Nothing strange that Elbox chose Voodoo 3.
3dfx stopped licensing its technology after the release of the Voodoo 2. They were especially closelipped about Glide, their 3D API, and quite reticent with regard to their software and hardware interface in general.
Why would 3dfx break with tradition and license their technology to Elbox? I just don't see it happening.
As you are reffering to 3dfx Glide and their 3D API, you should know that Voodoo3 3D drivers for Mediator were written by Hyperion, not by Elbox.
Are you saying then, that Hyperion Voodoo3 drivers "are almost certainly based on stolen intellectual property?" :-o
And really, this isn't trolling. It's just an open discussion. It's not like I'm proclaiming the v1r7u3s of one PCI solution over another. I'm just criticizing Elbox's abuse of the market and lack of support for current video cards.
If you check the Mediator Driver Guide by Elbox, you will see well over 200 PCI cards supported in Mediator. Why did you choose Elbox to criticise then?
Because they have written many more drivers than other Amiga producers?
In other news, the SharkPPC will begin production in January 2001
Do you blame Elbox that OS4 is not ready yet? :-o
-
Can't...stop...responding. ;-)
Obviously, Elbox spent time before the Mediator release working on drivers. If they did all the work themselves, kudos. I'd still like to see support for more video cards on the Mediator. Calling the Voodoo 3 "one of the best PCI graphic card at that time" is subjective, and we welcome your opinion; however, I disagree. Matrox has been the undisputed leader in 2D image quality since the release of the first Millennium card. ATI and Nvidia implementers have only recently begun closing the gap. (Please note that I'm only talking about the consumer and low-end corporate markets.)
It's possible that Hyperion used leaked source code. I did note that this was purely speculation on my part. I do have more respect for Hyperion than I do for Elbox. No one wants to admit it, but the Amiga market is focused on hobbyists, and hobbyists want open solutions. That's not what Elbox offers, and that's had an impact on my opinion (I repeat, *my* opinion) of Elbox in general.
With respect to the SharkPPC, I was just making a joke. Announcing the imminent release of a product three to four years in advance is pretty typical in the Amiga community.
Trev
-
@ Trev
I want solutions that work. The Mediator works for me.
I would probably given up on Amiga some time ago had it not been for
the Voodoo 3 sat inside my A1200T.
By the way do you actually own a Mediator?
-
Ugh. Did anyone actually read my comments? Yes, the Mediator works. Yes, it meets the needs of some users in the Amiga community. I just find it funny that Elbox hasn't put forth the effort (publicly) to write drivers for a wider range of display and network adapters. Instead, they focus their efforts on supporting yet another series of TV tuners. It's sad.
No, I don't own a Mediator. I won't buy a hardware product that doesn't at least sponsor an open (i.e. no NDA required) developer program.
Again, this is just my opinion. Everyone else is welcome to theirs. You think?
Incidentally, I have similar feelings towards OpenPCI, which, in its own way, is just as closed as Elbox. Sometimes it's embarassing to be an Amiga user. You'd think a market as small as ours could find common ground, especially for something as trivial as a PCI bus library. If Elbox isn't willing to develop the drivers, then they should let projects such as OpenPCI move forward on their platform instead of requiring developers to sign an NDA for a closed library.
Trev
-
OpenPCI doesn't seem to offer any drivers for devices that Elbox don't
already support and I don't see any drivers for graphics cards in
developement.
To be honest there is not much point in supporting newer graphics
cards for the Mediator As the Voodoo's performance is strangled by the
Amiga's data bus. Of course if Amiga dealers can't source Voodoo
cards any longer then new graphics drivers will be necessary but there
will be no performance advantage.
-
Do you blame Elbox that OS4 is not ready yet?
Wow, step turn and dodge. Elbox coudln't be bothered to get a development system and at least start finding out how to get OS4 running with a shark? At all? No investigation done at least? Just this "OS4 isn't ready yet!" (Despite 1000+ users already having it on their desktop?)
Incidentally, I notice that to this day there's no picture of the Son...er, "Shark" accellerator so I thought I'd provide one:
(http://www.sonnettech.com/imgs/imgs_prods/prodshots/c7200.jpg)
:-D :-D :-D
-
@Bootdisk
If Elbox did send Hyperion a SharkPPC it would still sit there waiting
until OS4 final is out for A1 before they start work on a Shark
version. I think BlizzardPPC may also be a priority over the SharkPPC.
Elbox are not a big company if they had produced SharkPPC a year ago
no one would have bought because there was no OS4 for it and Elbox
would probably be bankrupt by know.
However Hyperion a confident that once OS4 final is ready for A1,
porting to other Amiga platforms should be straight forward and less
time consuming.
We will as always have to wait for now.
-
OpenPCI doesn't seem to offer any drivers for devices that Elbox don't already support and I don't see any drivers for graphics cards in
developement.
The OpenPCI and Picasso96 SDKs are hard to get through official channels, so this isn't surprising.
To be honest there is not much point in supporting newer graphics cards for the Mediator As the Voodoo's performance is strangled by the Amiga's data bus. Of course if Amiga dealers can't source Voodoo cards any longer then new graphics drivers will be necessary but there will be no performance advantage.
Ah! You've touched on my point. Banshee, Voodoo 3, and VSA-100 cards are getting harder to find. Performance isn't really the issue, at least with respect to 2D. I'd like to see support for the Matrox Millennium II (because I have lots of them) and the GeForce 4 MX (because PCI cards based on this chipset are still readily available), but grassroots development for the Mediator is a lost cause, and I can't use a Prometheus (no Zorro III).
Trev
-
Unbelievable that there are still people who are naive enough to take the Shark for real.....
If Elbox had a working Shark, why didn't they ever show it running Linux or any function-test ?
And if they don't have that, how would they know wether it works ?
All academic, since there is simply no sane way to make a PPC attached to a PCI-bus access the Amiga-chipset lying behind the Voddoo-RAM-window in an even remotly compatible way.
-
Poster: Kronos Posted: 2004/9/19 22:16:06
Unbelievable that there are still people who are naive enough to take the Shark for real.....
If Elbox had a working Shark, why didn't they ever show it running Linux or any function-test ?
And if they don't have that, how would they know wether it works ?
All academic, since there is simply no sane way to make a PPC attached to a PCI-bus access the Amiga-chipset lying behind the Voddoo-RAM-window in an even remotly compatible way.
Indeed. If the card works at all, it will have to with it's own DMA, hard drive controller, and RAM, with sound, network, video, USB etc. addressed through the PCI bus, reducing the Amiga to nothing more than a power supply housing with attached mouse and keyboard. IOW: An expensive A1-like.
-
@Trev
I'd like to see support for the Matrox Millennium II (because I have lots of them) and the GeForce 4 MX (because PCI cards based on this chipset are still readily available), but grassroots development for the Mediator is a lost cause,
Have you forgotten what you wrote in your previous comment? Here it is: "I won't buy a hardware product that doesn't at least sponsor an open (i.e. no NDA required) developer program."
So why do you list here NVidia cards (GeForce 4 MX)?
Give us all a link to the site where documentation for NVidia cards is available without NDA?
Don't you know NVidia is very closed about making the documentation for these cards available?
Graphic card producers often do not make available the proper documentation to their products, but even authors of Amiga systems do not make their documentation available (e.g. CGX, P96 or Warp3D) even if you are willing to sign the NDA. MediatorSDK you can have if you sign NDA with Elbox.
Stop trooling, Trev.
It looks that you have more reasons to complain about NVidia, CGX, P96 or Warp3D Teams than about Elbox. :-)
-
@Kronos
All academic, since there is simply no sane way to make a PPC attached to a PCI-bus access the Amiga-chipset lying behind the Voddoo-RAM-window in an even remotly compatible way.
What you write about is a restriction of _turbo cards_ for A1200. When you disconnect the turbo card, these restrictions disappear. Amiga 1200 motherboard allows Direct Memory Access to its hardware, right?
If a A1200 turbo card is to remain in place, access to the mainboard chipset can be provided by the 68k processor of the turbo card. Simple additional software for 68k processor can set it as a slave processor providing SharkPPC accesses to the chipset of the A1200 mainboard. Is it so complicated for you?
In Amiga 3000 and 4000 such restrictions do not exists at all, even with the installed current processor card, the PowerPC PCI card has direct access to the mainboard chipset.
-
You're right tjaoz. OpenPCI and Picasso96 are closed, and according to the authors, it's because of Elbox. Personally, I think it's because of unrealistic expectations. You can't work full-time on an Amiga product and expect to make a decent living. It's sad, and it's unfortunate (especially for good folks like Redrumloa and Jens Schoenfeld), but it's the truth.
And tjaoz, you could play nice and voice your opinions without name calling. I respect your right to your opinion. Please respect mine.
With respect to Nvidia, yes they are protective of their intellectual property, and in today's PC graphics market, it's justified. However, information about Nvidia chipsets is readily available in the open source community.
Would anyone be interested in a Picasso96 driver for SVGA compatible PCI display adapters? I'd like to write one for both OpenPCI and pci.library and make it open source. The Amiga community needs a serious kick in the ass with respsect to market expectations. :-)
Trev
EDITED: Removed two comments about Picasso96 and OpenPCI that really weren't fair to their authors. D'oh!
-
@Trev
OpenPCI and Picasso96 are closed, and according to the authors, it's because of Elbox.
:lol:
And those hurricanes attacking America also come from Elbox?
How is it that Picasso 96 team has not made available their documentation since 1996 for developers who want to write drivers for new graphic cards? Is it really because of Elbox? :-o
And tjaoz, you could play nice and voice your opinions without name calling. I respect your right to your opinion. Please respect mine.
You say it's too few drivers, but you address it to those people who wrote the largest number of drivers.
You say about IP suggesting its theft in writing 3D drivers for Voodoo cards, but you write it against a company who did not write these 3D drivers, etc...
Isn't it trolling, Trev?
With respect to Nvidia, yes they are protective of their intellectual property, and in today's PC graphics market, it's justified.
Go on please... Some companies are entitled to protect their IP and others are not?
However, information about Nvidia chipsets is readily available in the open source community.
Aha? Give but a single link where NVidia chipset documentation is available.
Isn't it so that drivers for NVidia cards for Linux are prepared _solely_ by NVidia, and their key elements (those, which are responsible for access to chipset registers) are available _only_ as precompiled libraries, without source codes?
Would anyone be interested in a Picasso96 driver for SVGA compatible PCI display adapters? I'd like to write one for both OpenPCI and pci.library and make it open source, but the owners of those three products aren't keen on letting people use their SDKs without $$$, l337 skillz, or an NDA, respectively.
What's your problem?
According to your own words in your country disassembling is legal under some conditions. So, you do not need to pay or sign anything. Show us your knowledge and prepare one single driver for any graphic chipset, which is not supported in Amiga so far.
Good luck!
-
I don't think I mentioned 3D drivers anywhere in my initial comments. You brought it up. Elbox developed Picasso96 drivers without licensing Picasso96, so what would lead me to believe they licensed technology from 3dfx? I'm only interested in Picasso96 compatible 2D drivers.
The largest number of drivers? Elbox wrote two, the OpenPCI crew (or someone else--I don't know who) wrote one. Yes, things are really heating up in the race to provide display drivers for Amiga PCI busboards.
Isn't it so that drivers for NVidia cards for Linux are prepared _solely_ by NVidia, and their key elements (those, which are responsible for access to chipset registers) are available _only_ as precompiled libraries, without source codes?
Objection. Leading the witness. But I'll answer anyway. No, it's not true: http://cvsweb.xfree86.org/cvsweb/xc/programs/Xserver/hw/xfree86/drivers/nv/
My words? You're welcome to browse the US Code (http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/) (courtesy of Cornell) and US Copyright Office (http://www.copyright.gov/) web sites.
Dude. Why are you being such an asshole? Why not try to be helpful instead? Aren't we both Amiga users? [Putting on my tjaoz hat.] You're obviously just a troll who loves Elbox and doesn't give a {bleep} about anyone other than himself. (Please forgive me if American sarcasm doesn't translate well in your society.) ;-)
-
@Trev
I don't think I mentioned 3D drivers anywhere in my initial comments. You brought it up.
Unfortunately, it is you who mentioned there 3dfx Glide and their 3D API.
See your post of 2004/9/15 21:18 Updated 2004/9/15 22:12
The largest number of drivers? Elbox wrote two, the OpenPCI crew (or someone else--I don't
know who) wrote one. Yes, things are really heating up in the race to provide display drivers for Amiga PCI busboards.
Do you have problems with counting? Elbox wrote two drivers? Check here (http://elbox.com/mdg.html) to see all the available drivers for Mediator.
Objection. Leading the witness. But I'll answer anyway. No, it's not true:
http://cvsweb.xfree86.org/cvsweb/xc/programs/Xserver/hw/xfree86/drivers/nv/
I didn't ask you to give a link to linux sources, but to give but a single link where NVidia chipset
documentation is available. Can you give such a link?
Why are you being such an asshole? Why not try to be helpful instead? Aren't we both Amiga
users? [Putting on my tjaoz hat.] You're obviously just a troll who loves Elbox and doesn't give a {bleep} about anyone other than himself. (Please forgive me if American sarcasm doesn't translate well in your society.)
As you wrote, you are not a Mediator user. What is a reason of your anti-Elbox trolling here?
If you have lots of Matrox Millenium II cards and you need drivers for them, get up your ass and write these drivers instead of barking at Elbox. Opsss..., sorry..., it not so easy as trolling here... :lol:
-
Unfortunately, it is you who mentioned there 3dfx Glide and their 3D API.
You're right, I mentioned 3dfx and their disposition towards Glide; however, I didn't say anything about Warp3D display drivers. You've misinterpreted my statements. English doesn't appear to be your native language, so I apologize for the misunderstanding. Unfortunately, speaking a language other than English is neither mandatory nor even encouraged in the United States, so English is the only language I know (unless you count dirty words and chat up lines in French). Sorry. . . .
Do you have problems with counting? Elbox wrote two drivers? Check here to see all the available drivers for Mediator.
Let's see. Voodoo.card (one) and Virge.card (two). It looks like the total is still two display drivers. Perhaps your understanding of the number two is different from mine.
I didn't ask you to give a link to linux sources, but to give but a single link where NVidia chipset documentation is available. Can you give such a link?
You didn't specify the type of documentation. It's not my fault you can't read C source code.
As you wrote, you are not a Mediator user. What is a reason of your anti-Elbox trolling here?
I'm criticizing Elbox's lack of support for modern display adapters and their closed developer program. As an Amiga user and a prospective PCI busboard buyer, I'm certainly entitled to my opinions.
If you have lots of Matrox Millenium II cards and you need drivers for them, get up your ass and write these drivers instead of barking at Elbox. Opsss..., sorry..., it not so easy as trolling here...
I'm working on the framework for an open source VGA/SVGA 2D driver right now. Whether or not it gets released depends on the licensing restrictions put in place by Elbox, OpenPCI, and Picasso96. It's a fun project, but I'll need the community's help with testing . . . and I don't yet know if the parties involved will let that happen. I'm feeling positive about OpenPCI and Picasso96. Stay tuned.
Trev
-
@Trev
You're right, I mentioned 3dfx and their disposition towards Glide; however, I didn't say anything about Warp3D display drivers. You've misinterpreted my statements.
Oh yes? So what Mediator 3dfx drivers if not Warp 3D drivers you had on your mind writing: "The Mediator 3dfx drivers are almost certainly based on stolen intellectual property. [...], and I don't recall Nvidia starting a 3dfx licensing program." and "They were especially closelipped about Glide, their 3D API,[...]?"
English doesn't appear to be your native language, so I apologize for the misunderstanding.
Sure, English is not my native language. But I think that these "misunderstandings" result mostly from the fact that you are not well versed in the issue about which you talk so easily.
Let's see. Voodoo.card (one) and Virge.card (two). It looks like the total is still two display drivers. Perhaps your understanding of the number two is different from mine.
If they put support for all graphic cards for Mediator in one driver and called it Mediatorgraphic.card, would that mean support for one graphic card only? We talk here about the number of supported chipsets (like: VSA-100, Avenger, Banshee, S3 86C375, S3 86C325), not number of driver file names.
You didn't specify the type of documentation.
"Documentation" doesn't mean Linux sources, right? Documentation as a rule is a pretty thick book (electronic or paper) with descriptions of all registers, chipset operation, etc. Who thinks seriously about writing drivers, shouldn't he know what documentation is?
BTW. Asking you again: Can you give a single link where NVidia chipset documentation is available?
I'm criticizing Elbox's lack of support for modern display adapters and their closed developer program.
Elbox produces a PCI busboard, not graphic cards. They wrote such drivers which they wanted. You can equally well criticise the Zorro busboard producer for lack of support for better graphic chipsets than S3 Virge (installed in CyberVision 64 3D).
I'm working on the framework for an open source VGA/SVGA 2D driver right now. Whether or not it gets released depends on the licensing restrictions put in place by Elbox, OpenPCI, and Picasso96.
O!? So you have now those potential guilty of your failure in writing these drivers? Are your skills not taken into account here, Trev?
I'm feeling positive about OpenPCI and Picasso96.
Positive feelings about OpenPCI and Picasso96? Why? Because, unlike Elbox, they have done nothing new so far for users of Amiga PCI busboards?
-
Oh yes? So what Mediator 3dfx drivers if not Warp 3D drivers you had on your mind writing: "The Mediator 3dfx drivers are almost certainly based on stolen intellectual property. [...], and I don't recall Nvidia starting a 3dfx licensing program." and "They were especially closelipped about Glide, their 3D API,[...]?"
I didn't have Warp3D in mind at all. My description of 3dfx's position on their APIs was anecdotal. Let's just consider this one lost in translation and let it go.
Sure, English is not my native language. But I think that these "misunderstandings" result mostly from the fact that you are not well versed in the issue about which you talk so easily.
You have a lot to learn about international communication. Granted, I only speak English, but I'm always aware that what I say and/or write may not be properly interpreted by a non-English speaking individual.
If they put support for all graphic cards for Mediator in one driver and called it Mediatorgraphic.card, would that mean support for one graphic card only? We talk here about the number of supported chipsets (like: VSA-100, Avenger, Banshee, S3 86C375, S3 86C325), not number of driver file names.
*sigh*
"Documentation" doesn't mean Linux sources, right? Documentation as a rule is a pretty thick book (electronic or paper) with descriptions of all registers, chipset operation, etc. Who thinks seriously about writing drivers, shouldn't he know what documentation is?
Actually, souce code does qualify as documentation. In this case, the documentation is written in C. How is that any different from documentation written in English, German, etc.? They're all languages used to communicate ideas. Shall I satisfy your need for troll fodder? Why not. No, I don't know of any publicly available documentation written in a language other than C that details the inner workings of Nvidia's various chipsets.
Elbox produces a PCI busboard, not graphic cards. They wrote such drivers which they wanted. You can equally well criticise the Zorro busboard producer for lack of support for better graphic chipsets than S3 Virge (installed in CyberVision 64 3D).
I agree, but programming information for Zorro busboards is publicly available.
So you have now those potential guilty of your failure in writing these drivers? Are your skills not taken into account here, Trev?
Huh? Maybe you should repeat that in your native language. Your first question is nonsensical.
If the Picasso96 folks say, "No, you can't write open source card and chip drivers for Picasso96," what am I supposed to do? In the US, fair use would allow me to reverse engineer their interfaces, but I'd much rather make some new friends and help support a useful piece of software.
Positive feelings about OpenPCI and Picasso96? Why? Because, unlike Elbox, they have done nothing new so far for users of Amiga PCI busboards?
You're drifting. We're talking about display adpater drivers, remember? And once again, you've misinterpreted my comments. I'm feeling positive about using OpenPCI because their dev kit is now publicly available, and I'm feeling positive about Picasso96 because the authors seem like nice guys interested in helping out the community.
Trev