For those interested, Khronos Group has today announced the release of the Vulkan [Official Site] API version 1.1 and NVIDIA already have a beta driver ready.
Beaverton, OR – March 7, 2018 – The Khronos™ Group, an open consortium of leading hardware and software companies creating advanced acceleration standards, announces the release of the Vulkan® 1.1 and SPIR-V™ 1.3 specifications. Version 1.1 expands Vulkan’s core functionality with developer-requested features, such as subgroup operations, while integrating a wide range of proven extensions from Vulkan 1.0. Khronos will also release full Vulkan 1.1 conformance tests into open source and AMD, Arm, Imagination, Intel Corporation, NVIDIA and Qualcomm have implemented conformant Vulkan 1.1 drivers. Find more information on the Vulkan 1.1 specification and associated tests and tools at Khronos’s Vulkan Resource Page.
Find the official Khronos Group announcement here. You can also see the specification documents here. There will also be plenty of activity at this year's GDC (Game Developers Conferenc) with the Khronos Developer Day Sessions. You can see the full GDC schedule here.
On top of that, they've also got a presentation you can flick through here (~7MB), where you can find slides to explain things a little more like these:
Also, for those interested in testing out any of the new stuff, NVIDIA has their 387.42.05 beta driver out for Linux which includes full Vulkan 1.1 support available here.
On top of that, AMD have also put out their "Radeon™ Software for Linux® Driver 17.50" which includes Vulkan 1.1 support, find that here.
Right now, it doesn't mean all that much for Linux gamers until games and applications start making use of any of the new stuff. We're just reporting on it to keep you up to date.
Post updated to include more info after publishing. We may update it again, be sure to check back!
Article taken from GamingOnLinux.com.
Quoting: EikeUhm, no it isn't. The developers make a game, yes. It costs them time and effort, yes. But what they then give to people for money, the game, is something they still have after they give it. There is a whole lot of effort, ingenuity and reality-distortion (eg DRM) going into maintaining the fiction that each copy of a piece of information is an individual separate thing that the seller is giving up, so we can pretend the model people accept for vegetables and steel is optimal for information as well. But it isn't--we could give everyone access to information with less effort than it takes to prevent access. We can't do that with vegetables. We would be far better off coming up with ways to compensate creators--of games and quite a few other things--that did not involve artificial rationing.Quoting: Purple Library GuyBut information in the modern world is infinitely reproducible for almost zero effort. The barter model of one thing for another thing is based on me giving you a thing which I then no longer have.
That's still what is happening. Many users are giving money for a game, together (hopefully) compensating for the part of their lifetime the developers invested in making it and no longer have.
Last edited by Purple Library Guy on 8 March 2018 at 2:36 pm UTC
Last edited by Purple Library Guy on 8 March 2018 at 2:35 pm UTC
TheRiddick Mar 8, 2018
Quoting: ShmerlQuoting: TheRiddickSoftware DRM still minimises potential software sale loses
That's the point, it doesn't minimize anything of the sort.
Perhaps, but no matter how much you scream murder, DRM is here to stay unfortunately. I generally don't let it get in the way of me buying the software I want.
Last edited by TheRiddick on 8 March 2018 at 3:37 pm UTC
Quoting: TheRiddickPerhaps, but no matter how much you scream murder, DRM is here to stay unfortunately.
Same as other crooked practices in general. It doesn't mean we should give them a free pass. You paying for it, is essentially an endorsement.
Last edited by Shmerl on 8 March 2018 at 5:15 pm UTC
Quoting: TheRiddickDRM has its place. The only time when it becomes a problem is when publishers use multiple layers and virtualisation methods to do it that kill game performance. I think Ubisoft and MS have done this in the past, it doesn't pay off but they still try as they might, silly corporate CEO's and shareholders...
DRM is bad, it's only use is to annoy users that buy your product. Everyone else gets it a week later with disabled DRM from alternatice sources.
https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2017/10/drms-dead-canary-how-we-just-lost-web-what-we-learned-it-and-what-we-need-do-next
stretch611 Mar 9, 2018
Quoting: minjOf course DRM is always broken. Its whole idea is DoA. And often it has nothing to do with copyright:
https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2017/10/drms-dead-canary-how-we-just-lost-web-what-we-learned-it-and-what-we-need-do-next
Personally, I do not like to add to threads without adding actual content. I hate "+1", "me too", "^^" and other similar comments that lack any substance.
However, I need to make an exception in this case, everyone should read that link. It is long, but it will get you to understand DRM.
Patreon
PayPal
See more from me