Originally Posted by
Alatar
What I think everyone should understand is that not all software has to be open source. And most software isn't open source... Yet we have people saying that Gameworks should be completely open source or otherwise it's anti-competitive etc.
The thing with this whole 'mess' (honestly just business as usual with more PR sprinkled on top) is that it got so much attention because of some unproven allegations and some completely false claims.
And the sad part is that those claims and lies got tons of coverage but very few people called them out or fact checked them. And if someone managed to do that or even got a counter argument most people didn't care because on the internet everyone's attention span is measured in seconds.
So in the end we have Nvidia who made some cool new tech, but didn't make it open source. Then we have AMD who tried/tries to stop people from using that tech. And we have masses of consumers who are victims of 'tabloid journalism'.
Some of those consumers who only read headlines on articles are now cheering for ignoring new technology and effects that could improve the PC versions of upcoming games. And when the only similar tech AMD is even potentially thinking about is a system where they create a PR name (something like OpenWorks) and then different game developers create and submit the actual effects (read = AMD does little to no actual work), I really have to ask, is it consumers who win here or just AMD's bottom line?
I think Petersen puts it best when he says that at Nvidia they're going to talk about what they do, they're going to do it and they're not going to comment much about AMD's strategy or stuff. That's the attitude I want to see, make your product and software perks and focus on your own stuff. Don't always go screaming about your competitor doing X or Y. AMD marketing as of late has been extremely focused on everything Nvidia does. While Nvidia have just done their thing. How about AMD tried just doing their thing for a while.