Open source and proprietary code both have their PROS and CONS. NVidia isn't worse by having proprietary code nor is AMD better for having open source.
Ideally we don't have walled gardens, however one unfortunate truth people conveniently ignore is that some things don't happen (at least not as quickly) without some INVESTMENT for which a company expects to be compensated.
Look at asynchronous monitors (i.e. GSYNC). Fricking awesome and pushed completely by NVidia at first with AMD doing a "me too" attempt which in many cases is quite bad.
What are you even talking about?
Having some demos in 2006 is a far cry from having an actual in-game product that DX12 can incorporate.
(not that you know all the code NVidia actually has anyway but they've been developing ray-tracing since roughly the same time as AMD)
How is NVidia "late to the game" if we get a new game with ray-tracing that only works with NVidia cards?
But Nvidia's implementation is better, winning in blind test and with a more consistent high quality.
I wonder what you're basing this on. All the reviews I read said there wasn't a noticeable difference between both technologies. The only differences I know of (apart from G-Sync being more expensive) is that it's more standartized, meaning that all G-Sync monitors will have low response times and cover a certain Hz range, while Freesync has both monitors with low and high response times, and different Hz ranges on each model...?
Unlike Nvidia, even the older Radeon cards will work with Ray tracing with minimal performance loss. the render performance of Radeon cards in Vegas pro, primer pro are much better than the recent gtx cards.