[Open-graphics] Re: Open-graphics Digest, Vol 2, Issue 47

[Timothy Miller]

Kent Rosenkoetter wrote:

>>The code morphing software really is SOFTWARE, but I've never seen
>>people demand that it be opened up.  It's the big value-add that
>>Transmeta has for their processors.  What's important is that they
>>release specs for everything you need to know about how to USE the
>>processors, even tips and tricks for optimizing your code to get better
>>morphing results, etc.
> 
> 
> I think the appropriate analogy is that we need to keep the ISA open,
> not the circuit layout. No one badgers Intel for the internals of the
> Pentium. Why should we badger nVidia for the internals of the GeForce?
> All we need are the fully-documented interfaces. The ISA of the
> graphics card. (And for programmable cards, the ISA of the shaders.)
> This is what so many hardware vendors won't give up, and this is what
> this project was originally predicated upon. Right?

EXACTLY.

Someone reminded me that the original design had a programmable setup 
engine (which was later dropped from the spec).  In the future, it will 
reappear.  How to program that will be fully documented.  Doing that 
sort of thing makes MY life a lot easier and gives developers a great 
deal more freedom.  (It's amazing what people will do with your hardware 
that you never conceived of.)