• Glog78@digitalcourage.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    15 hours ago

    @FreedomAdvocate there is a reason why WINE = Wine is not (a) Emulator is used. So don’t call a api reimplementation a emulation specially since other api reimplementation have shown to be better than the original implementation from the hardware provider ( example dxvk on amd > the original amd dx implementation ) . But this gets us far from the original topics , my point was if nvidia wanted to have real competition they would have included all those new fance features into official api’s like for example DX or Vulkan or any other.

    They didn’t … and while not directly against the consumer it is against the consumer end.
    So i have brought up another point why i call nvidia anti consumer … neither you like it or not.

    • FreedomAdvocate@lemmy.net.au
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      6 hours ago

      I’m not sure if English isn’t your first language, or if you’re just being wilfully obtuse, but I didn’t call it emulation. I said it is essentially emulation, like WINE. I know WINE isn’t emulation, which is why I said it is “essentially” emulation because it’s doing the same thing - converting calls from one set of APIs to work on other hardware/architecture. It’s not emulation, but it’s essentially the same thing.

      Why would Nvidia want competition? AMD don’t want competition either, but they made FSR work on everything because they were so far behind Nvidia (and because it was all done in software, requiring no special hardware) that they have to give it away to try and catch up.

      Companies making proprietary tech is not anti-consumer - unless of course you think that everything other than making everything free and open source is “anti-consumer”, which I am thinking you might?