The "Bloody Mess" That Is Intel's Poulsbo Driver 231
AdamWill writes "Phoronix writes about the mess that is the Linux support situation for Intel's new graphics chipset, the GMA 500 — aka Poulsbo. Near the end they refer to my own post on the topic ('Okay, so after a whole day spent bashing around at this crap, I can very confidently and conclusively say, it's utterly broken'). Intel has a reputation as one of the most clued-up open source-friendly hardware companies, but if they can't sort out the mess surrounding the driver for this chipset — which is already used on the Dell Mini 12 and Sony Vaio P, and will be used on many future Intel-based systems — that reputation will take a serious hit."
!gonvidia (Score:5, Insightful)
I'm noticing the tag 'gonvidia', and it's true... as in terms of hardware, Nvidia does seem to be the best. But as in terms of the linux community, they pretty much create problems for everyone. And yes, I know, to the end user that's not always apparent. But the linux desktop really would be a lot farther along if it weren't for nvidia's refusal to open up to the free software community.
If Intel's new open source graphic drivers suck, then obviously yes, that's shitty. But between them and nvidia, if you're going to praise one or the other in the Linux community, it shouldn't be nvidia. Intel's graphic cards still don't support GLSL and the like, but at least you can run an open source driver and it works.
Re:Wonder if this is one of the reasons? (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:!gonvidia (Score:5, Insightful)
More importantly, distributions with closed source drivers are very fragile and easily break. Having an open source driver, its easy to find what went wrong with the changes and fix that. The closed source drivers don't like change. That's my 10+ years with Linux.
Re:If it's open source, fix it. (Score:5, Insightful)
Even if the driver is open source, the chipset documentation might not be. As others have mentioned, it's hard to know how to write a good driver working with nothing more than a bad driver. You need good documentation.
Re:Bit of a tangent (Score:5, Insightful)
Intel's wireless 3945ABG Linux drivers are pretty good. The firmward microcode is released under a closed-source license, but the drivers themselves are open source (and in fact are part of the Linux kernel). That may be offensive to some OSS purists, but I'd rather have good, open-source drivers with closed firmware than non-functional open-source drivers.
It's the same with my opinion about nvidia's drivers. Sure, they're closed-source. But I'd rather nVidia give us working 3d drivers than be stuck with the crappy open-source 2d-only nv driver. It'd be nice if they were open-source, but I'm not going to refuse to use them out of some misguided idealism.
Put another way, if I'm dying of thirst, and a known thief offers me stolen water, I'm going to drink it - it's not like the water is tainted. Maybe that makes me an accessory to a crime (or, in software terms, maybe it encourages closed drivers) but it's better than dying of thirst (or, better than having no 3d drivers at all). nVidia has no real motivation to give us open-source 3d drivers in the first place, so refusing to use their closed driver won't make them change their minds.
Re:Wonder if this is one of the reasons? (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:!gonvidia (Score:5, Insightful)
But the linux desktop really would be a lot farther along if it weren't for nvidia's refusal to open up to the free software community.
nVidias stance is pretty simple: No open source support, period. No specifications, no features of really any kind in the open nv drivers, no help to those who ask, no nothing.
What they have delivers is addition to hardware is a great closed source driver which have simply been the best in terms of perforamnce, features and quality for anything better than integrated graphics. Catalyst (AMD/ATIs driver) has been a mess and despite improving greatly since AMD took over, they're not there yet. While AMD has opened their specifications, the open source Radeon drivers are far, far off from the closed source drivers still. AMD has still said their primary commitment is Catalyst, so who knows when if it'll ever get as good as that, which I said isn't as good as nVidia's.
nVidia has constantly been the ones pushing the boundries for what the Linux desktop can do. Just recently before Christmas they delivered the first working hardware accelerated h.264/vc-1 HD playback /VDPAU) and it's available on pretty much all mainstream nVidia cards. ATI is thinking of maybe adding UVD support to their closed source driver and any open source support is unlikely and certainly not coming soon. Poulsbo is the first I've heard from Intel that actually supports VA API and it sure isn't mainstream motherboards.
You talk as if nVidia has been keeping open source back and maybe the open source infrastructure would have been better if nVidia worked with them instead of doing their own thing. But the Linux desktop? I doubt it. It's been over a year since AMDs first release of specifications, go check out the current state of the open source drivers. When you come back, you might realize that for a long time, the best way to show a Linux desktop has been a nVidia machine with proprietary drivers, not ideologically pure but it works well. But sure, blame the guy up front plowing the road for not towing the open source community too. If the open source community could pull it off, they have the chance now as AMDs specs are in the open, that excuse is gone. Put up or STFU.
Re:!gonvidia (Score:2, Insightful)
If I had mod points you'd be getting them. Everything you said was spot on.
Re:Wonder if this is one of the reasons? (Score:5, Insightful)
Having spent a lot of time in various beurocracies, I can attest that malice and stupidity work very well together. While one does not guarantee the other, they are often interlinked.
Re:!gonvidia (Score:3, Insightful)
Your zealous fanaticism for open source is clearly apparent and clouding your judgement on the situation.
I find it humorous in the middle of an article about how shitty an open source driver is that you see it fit to blame nvidia for breaking a developer release of KDE. The worse part is you think it matters.
Do you get this angry when an open source driver has a bug? No.
Your old cards aren't as good as your new ones? shock! horror! Say it isn't so!
Re:!gonvidia (Score:5, Insightful)
Linux open source purists want special treatment from manufacturers, and it makes no sense. ATI opens specs but their Linux drivers suck. nVidia has great Linux desktop support that advances the state of the art for Linux, as you admit, but they didn't release an open-source driver so you knock them for that.
But nVidia does not release the source code for Windows, either. They are treating all the operating systems exactly the same. Why would a non-zealot go with ATI when nVidia's closed source driver is far superior?
Re:Bloody Mess (Score:3, Insightful)
It must be that time of the month for intel....
Crap like this is what will drive companies _away_ from open source. Look at all the flak that Sun gets regarding it's handling of Open Office. Or countless other examples. The community should be grateful that these companies support FOSS at all, instead, it looks like any company that comes to the FOSS table will be eaten when it doesn't do this right, or doesn't do things 'in the spirit' or takes their time with something.
Re:Bit of a tangent (Score:2, Insightful)
Just to be an asshole, I'm going to correct you too with a car analogy!
GEM is working on Intel because they're the ones who initially wrote it. It's a bit like showing up at a road race with an antigravity mach-1 craft invented in secret, then handing out schematics to it to the other drivers and speeding off over the horizon.
Re:Bloody Mess (Score:5, Insightful)
No, this is not OpenOffice, because drivers are only useful to customers who pay for hardware. When I shop for a laptop, I buy something with good driver support by my chosen OS, which is Linux. So if Intel wants me to consider buying something with their chips, they'd better fix the driver problem. The idea of being "grateful" to somebody making something I might want to buy is neither here nor there.
Re:Reputation? (Score:5, Insightful)
Sounds to me like windows drivers. (Score:3, Insightful)
Honestly, i am sure this is how many "we have to hit the shelfes before 8am yesterday , because this chipset is now the cheapest one"-drivers for windows are developed. Copy and paste everything into your driver instead of defining the dependencies correctly. After all in the end it is a single dll which may be several megabyte of size, nobody looks into that anyway. Nobidy cares in five year. until that time, recommend to everybody using the recovery CD. If things break by an windows update, it's clearly MS fault, isn't it? BTW. MS never certified the driver, so MS clearly says its the manufacturers fault. Just turn of the acceleration - good luck.
In this game there a now three compnaies involved, all of which want to earn money. And the customers of none of the three companies care right now about this driver issue.
-Dell: Customer is happy with Ubuntu, turned it on, worked. When ubuntu upgrades the kernel, dell will pay the driver developer
-Driver developer: copying and pasting saved some time, specification most likely said: should run on ubuntu. Dell is obviously happy
-Intel: Dell as a customer is happy to buy cheap parts.
Re:!gonvidia (Score:4, Insightful)
You do realize that you never ever absolutely have to upgrade your kernel if everything is working hunky-dory, right?
Spare some love for non-Linux OSes. I had a choice with an Nvidia card in my FreeBSD system a while back: upgrade the kernel to fix security vulnerabilities or keep using my graphics card. Nvidia had deprecated my card, so the driver that was compatible with the new kernel didn't support it. Since it was an AGP 2x motherboard that couldn't accept newer cards, the choice really came down to upgrading the kernel, graphics card, motherboard, CPU, and RAM, or sticking with an insecure system. Yay, binary blob drivers!
Re:Bloody Mess (Score:3, Insightful)
Crap like this is what will drive companies _away_ from open source.
Why? If I buy some hardware I expect it to work properly no matter what operating system I'm running (so long as that OS has drivers). It doesn't matter whether you're supporting Windows, Linux, OS X, or whatever - if you release drivers for your hardware and they don't work then you're (quite rightly) going to get flak - people have paid for some hardware which doesn't work as expected.
Or are you saying that companies will also be driven away from supporting Windows because people complain their crappy software doesn't work there (a pretty frequent occurrence)?
The community should be grateful that these companies support FOSS at all
How about the companies being grateful that we're buying their hardware at all?
These days I buy Intel graphics hardware because it generally _does_ work out of the box with Free drivers. The same can not be said about the likes of nVidia. Same goes for 802.11 hardware. Intel seems to be having problems with this driver, but I'm pretty confident that they are working on fixing the problem because they do seem to understand that they don't have some god given right to expect customers to buy their hardware no matter how badly supported it is.
Re:Bloody Mess (Score:3, Insightful)
By all means, offer them constructive criticism. But don't attack them. "Bloody mess"? If someone called the Linux kernel a bloody mess on LKML do you think that his criticism would be heard?