That is all very good, how is this being funded if at all? Or is this the result of a bunch of positive energy from a team riding out a lockdown?

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: ajgpOnly problem with that is any Open Source CPU would have to be of an architecture other than x86 / X86_64 as these are locked by Intel & AMD respectively and Intel is fairly adamant on no-one else ever getting an X86 license (the only other would be VIA).

So any open source CPU would most likely be ARM based, that leaves you in the whole what will be compiled to run on it scenario. A powerful CPU that wont run applications that people use daily will never gain traction.

Two things:

1. x86 extensions tend to fall out of patent after 20 years, so a chip designer could theoretically build and sell high performance x86 chips so long as their instruction set matches Intel/AMD cross-licensed instructions up to the year 2000. There would be a lot of missing decode and multi media extensions but it would be doable in theory.

2. The whole problem can be side stepped by rejecting the use of software in which the user is reliant on a proprietor to compile the software. With freely licensed code, software can generally be built and run for any architecture. Proprietary software is the life blood of predatory vendor lock in.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: Comandante ÑoñardoThis is why we need another player in the x86 CPU market: Nvidia

My day to day hasn't changed much since switching to PowerPC. x86 is fully locked down with licensing constraints and so any x86 instructions newer than 20 years require any aspiring x86 vendors-to-be to bow down to Intel (and by extension, to Hollywood and friends).

Oh and also that detail about a master CPU embedded in all x86 chips which has full access and control over the end user-controllable portion. I would urge everyone here to at least consider keeping a RISC-V, PPC or any other freer architecture box around, for freedom's sake.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

While it is nice that they are building a specialty, out-of-box nvidia solution, they also shouldn't have to. If only nvidia would just follow established standards.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: CyrilNot to mention the reason behind all of that... a newer version of DirectX, really?

That is the entire purpose of the existence of DirectX, to tax development against any other platform. The strategy is working brilliantly as evidenced by Psyonix's decision and countless other games, studios and projects which have fallen for the bait over the decades.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

...of the active total and when "viable workarounds exist" with Wine being mentioned.

"Wine is not harmful to Linux gaming"

"Wine is not harmful to Linux gaming"

"Wine is not harmful to Linux gaming"

"Wine is not harmful to Linux gaming"

"Wine is not harmful to Linux gaming"

"Wine is not harmful to Linux gaming"

"Wine is not harmful to Linux gaming"

Have we learned our lesson yet?

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Bend over, boyos. This time it is Psyonix who are busy teaching the world another very effective lesson in trusting proprietary software: If the source isn't free you are going to get screwed. It is not a matter of if, but when.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Still only x86 CPU options. Admittedly useless from a statistical perspective but I just want to fly my flags.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Having reflected on the issue a bit more, I would like to follow up my earlier comment. Windows (and other proprietary OSes) have one thing which Gnu Linux does not: inertia. It is not an economics or marketing issue so much as it is a social issue. The public simply is not taught general purpose computing.
I suspect that one of the only ways we can begin to tackle this would be by ending "educational partnerships" in which schools teach dependency on proprietary software as a natural way to use computers.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: Liam DaweMarketing and more vendors having Linux installed on their systems. Currently, the Linux desktop has very little good marketing.

Being largely non-commercial, Linux desktop will unlikely ever have that kind of marketing. And I do not see that as a bad thing. The nature of it enforces a soft requirement that users have the wherewithal to be able to install and maintain their own systems. It keeps the Linux space filled with a healthy proportion of above-average-computer-literacy individuals.

I would love to see PC gamers adopt free operating systems as the "default" platform as much as anybody else here, but only if that does not mean doing so at the expense of quality of it's users.

View this comment - View article - View full comments