Comment by talldayo

Comment by talldayo 10 months ago

cough cough

Remind me who owns the OpenCL trademark, again?

Intel and AMD weren't the ones that abandoned it. Speaking in no uncertain terms, there was a sole stakeholder that can be held responsible for letting the project die and preventing the proliferation of Open GPGPU standards. A company that has everything to gain from killing Open standards in the cradle and replacing them with proprietary alternatives. Someone with a well-known grudge against Khronos who's willing to throw an oversized wrench into the plans as long as it hurts their opponents.

pjmlp 10 months ago

Don't blame Apple for what Khronos, Intel and AMD have done with OpenCL after version 1.0.

It isn't Apple's fault that Intel and AMD didn't deliver.

Reply View 3 replies

talldayo 10 months ago

It is entirely Apple's fault that they rejected OpenCL to replace it with a proprietary library. If this was an implementation or specification problem, Apple had every opportunity to shape the project in their own image. They cannot possibly argue that this was done for any other reason than greed, considering they themselves laid the framework for such a project. Without Apple's cooperation, Open Source GPGPU libraries can not reasonably target every client. Apple knows they wield this power, and considering their history it's both illogical and willfully ignorant to assume they're not doing this as part of a broader trend of monopolistic abuse.
Having shut out Nvidia as part of a petty feud, Apple realized they could force any inferior or nonfree CUDA alternative onto their developers no matter how unfinished, slow or bad it is. They turned away from the righteous and immediately obvious path to complicate things for developers that wanted to ship cross-platform apps instead of Mac-only ones.

Reply View | 2 replies
- pjmlp 10 months ago
  
  The fact is that Intel, AMD and even Google (coming up with Renderscript), didn't gave a shit about making OpenCL something developers cared about.
  
  Reply View | 1 reply
  
  talldayo 10 months ago
  
  That's not their job. CUDA wasn't "something developers cared about" for 11 fucking years and now look at where we are. If the OEMs focused on doing their job and implementing their standards, then neither of us would be trying to assign blame in the first place.
  The worst part is, now that Apple has gone all-in on incomplete and proprietary alternatives, nobody has won. Apple successfully applied their monopoly abuse to a market that they have completely captive. And we want to blame... checks clipboard Intel and AMD, for having renewed interest in a successful decade-old concept.
  
  Reply View | 0 replies

google234123 10 months ago

Would you be willing to share the deal with Apple/Khronos relations?

Reply View 13 replies

troupo 10 months ago

Apple didn't like OpenGL, rightfully, and came up with their own Metal which they released two years before first version of Vulkan was released.
Now people pretend that Apple is bad because it never adopted Vulkan and never implemented the "good modern OpenGL" (which never really existed).

Reply View | 12 replies
- jsheard 10 months ago
  
  It runs deeper than that, during the development of WebGPU it came to light that Apple was vetoing the use of any Khronos IP whatsoever, due to a private legal dispute between them. That led to WebGPU having to re-invent the wheel with a brand new shader language because Apples lawyers wouldn't sign off on using GLSL or SPIR-V under any circumstances.
  The actual details of the dispute never came out, so we don't know if it has been resolved or not.
  
  Reply View | 11 replies
  
  binary132 10 months ago
  
  Apple, refusing to use open standards, and instead demanding everyone else do things their way? Say it’s not so!
  
  Reply View | 10 replies