[Open-graphics] OGD1 makes Slashdot

[Terry Hancock]

Dieter wrote:
> Would it be worthwhile to add a "Note: 3S4000 not the smaller 3S400"
> in the appropriate places?

No, I think that would be a mistake. What might work is to say something
like "with 60,000+ logic units" or whatever -- the relevant statistic
that is getting mixed up.

> The comments from "fpgaprogrammer (1086859)" appeared to be thoughtful
> rather than a knee-jerk reaction.

Mm. Yeah, but still not very on-target...

> 	If you're interested in FPGA programming and a novice at it,

OGD1 isn't really for novices.

> 	If you're serious about FPGA programming (or just willing to pay
> 	$1500 to $3000) you will definitely want to get a board with a
> 	Virtex or Stratix on board:

Do any of these board have the capacity to prototype something like OGA?

Are we making a mistake by not just usng one of those? I'm pretty sure
there wouldn't have been an OGD1 design if the answer were "yes".

> 	FPGA programming environments still mostly suck. it's a market
> 	impeded by proprietary standards and a whole lot of NP-Hard
> 	algorithms. We're working on it...

IIRC, you're quoting him here, and that's a good thing -- he sees the
problem with the tools.

> 	my point is that there are a dirth of FPGA boards with better

Sadly, a "dearth" means a lack (or small number) of something and
"dirth" is not a word; when I'm pretty sure he meant "a large number
of"... <sigh>

> 	cost/performance value that could be used to prototype a
> 	graphics rendering FPGA system. Physical hardware isn't the
> 	limiting factor to an open source graphics card; the open source
> 	FPGA 3-D rendering code is the real missing piece.

Um, yeah. Hence the OpenGraphics project. What's his complaint again?

> 	In fact,
> 	making a board was probably a distraction for this project because
> 	by the time the firmware is ready for real graphics workloads the
> 	FPGA on-board will be obsolete.

Building tools is a distraction from doing the job, then?  Better to
just use your teeth?

> 	Here's some examples of 3-D engines for FPGA from the 6.111 lab at MIT:
> 	3-D Pong (using rasterization):
> 	http://web.mit.edu/6.111/www/s2006/PROJECT/7/main.html [mit.edu] 
> 
> 	Ray Tracing:
> 	http://web.mit.edu/6.111/www/s2007/PROJECTS/5/main.html [mit.edu]
> 
> 	There are hundreds of videos and code for FPGA projects up at
> 	http://web.mit.edu/6.111 [mit.edu] (see project appendices for code).
> 
> This one does miss the point a bit,

Pretty much completely, I'd say -- these are actually arguments for why
you need OGD1. Otherwise, what's he planning to run those 3D engines on?

I'd say our problem is a lack of communication. And way too much to
communicate all at once. We've (I probably should say "you all have")
spent a lot of time understanding the problem and working out a clever
solution, not only to the technical obstacles, but also to the economic
ones.

>>> The lack of "I for one welcome our FPGA overloads" is curious.  :-)
> Sorry, a large fraction of Slashdot threads include a "I for one welcome our
> <foo> overloads" posting.

I see, running joke. Makes sense now. ;-D

> The overall tone was more negative than I was expecting.  Certainly some
> complaints are expected, but I was expecting more positive responses, since
> a lot of slashdoters are into FLOSS.

1) My prior experience with Slashdot suggests it's all negative, so I
wasn't surprised. Maybe I'm biased, but my experience is that people
would far rather bitch about proprietary vendors than construct a viable
alternative ("It may be better to light a candle, but cursing the
darkness is more fun"?)

2) A surprising number of FLOSS advocates are very negative about open
hardware -- either dismissive of its importance (Stallman, for example,
was very dismissive about it for a long time, though I think he's coming
around a bit nowadays) or convinced it's impossible and those of us who
think otherwise are just hopelessly naive or don't understand how open
source works. <sigh>

Cheers,
Terry

-- 
Terry Hancock (hancock at AnansiSpaceworks.com)
Anansi Spaceworks http://www.AnansiSpaceworks.com