Microsoft Patents GPU-accelerated Window Manager

Status
Not open for further replies.

Ragnar-Kon

Distinguished
Apr 13, 2010
517
0
18,990
2
[citation][nom]amk-aka-Phantom[/nom]As much as I hate patents for concepts, I'd rather see Microsoft acquiring them than Apple.[/citation]
Yeah Apple and Microsoft (or any other company) are one in the same in my book. Build it, THEN you can patent it. Patents for ideas just doesn't make sense.

And by the way, I understand that GPU acceleration can provide great improvements in many programs, but I'm just not seeing GPU-accelerated Window Managers being one of those programs that will benefit.
 
G

Guest

Guest
@ragnar
companies sell their stuff on Multiple Small Features. go play in standard linux and youl understand what the patent keeps out, and how microsoft/ios gets people then.
 
G

Guest

Guest
@gaborbala
Are you an idiot? This is not a patent for a rectangle, this is a proper patent.

if you read you would see this opens a world up for new shapes/styles/themes. and this can impact a product immensely.

This is the first patent ive seen in a long while that made sense, this technology is unique to MS and they designed it. now if they implement it soon then who knows we might just get Aero+ theme or something.
 
can't help but think linux distros have had gpu accelerated window managers before microsoft had.
but imo ms made a well-timed move patenting this after processor gfx has become more powerful and will get more powerful as time goes on.
 

sinfulpotato

Distinguished
Dec 4, 2008
204
0
18,690
1
[citation][nom]Ragnar-Kon[/nom]Yeah Apple and Microsoft (or any other company) are one in the same in my book.

Apple uses its patents to force people out of the market, Microsoft wants royalties.
 

tofu2go

Distinguished
Jul 8, 2011
29
0
18,530
0
Wait a minute... GPU accelerated window manager? 2003 patent? Mac OS X has had Quartz Extreme, which added GPU acceleration to the window manager, since version 10.2 released in 2002.
 

spookie

Distinguished
Nov 11, 2010
132
0
18,680
0
[citation][nom]tofu2go[/nom]Wait a minute... GPU accelerated window manager? 2003 patent? Mac OS X has had Quartz Extreme, which added GPU acceleration to the window manager, since version 10.2 released in 2002.[/citation]

[citation][nom]de5_roy[/nom]can't help but think linux distros have had gpu accelerated window managers before microsoft had.but imo ms made a well-timed move patenting this after processor gfx has become more powerful and will get more powerful as time goes on.[/citation]

they might have had it long ago...but clearly they never patented it
 

tofu2go

Distinguished
Jul 8, 2011
29
0
18,530
0
[citation][nom]spookie[/nom]they might have had it long ago...but clearly they never patented it[/citation]

Which is a good thing! It would mean that anyone is free to use the idea, and this patent would be nullified by prior art if it ever went to court.
 

cucu

Distinguished
Oct 9, 2008
10
0
18,510
0
WTF they stolen this .and now they pretend and want evrybody to pay them to use that tehnology MDF. the whole windows system is an stolen product from 3.1 to 8. again MDF. i hope they burn in hell.
 

shompa

Distinguished
Apr 2, 2007
72
0
18,630
0
Apple have had GPU accelerated windows system since OSX 10.2 with Qurtz extreme/Core image. It took only 10 years for MSFT to implement the same idea.
 

amk-aka-Phantom

Distinguished
Mar 10, 2011
3,003
0
20,860
31


Stolen from... who? :D



Yeah... you know why? Because so far, Windows was so great that it didn't need it :kaola: Meanwhile, I'm still waiting for Apple to [strike]steal[/strike] implement SLI/Crossfire, acceptable interface and a bunch of other useful things. Microsoft focused on more widespread and useful features and won.

Just you wait, in a few years MS will tear Apple apart and this time nobody will rescue them with a timely investment. The only thing that saddens me about it is that MS will simply take the advantage of Apple's dumb customers and satisfy their lack of intelligence mixed with desire to "use hi-tech gadgets" instead of educating people about technology.



+ 1

Linux has done this for years.
Let me be more specific: you might mean Compiz... yes, it's one of the best windows managers out there. However, the GPU support is very poor on Linux. I recently had to deal with an AMD E-350 based box and there's practically no support for its hyped IGP. I had to do quite a few tweaks to get Compiz running more or less smoothly. So that also kills another myth about how AMD CPUs are magically shining under Linux :D
 

Vladislaus

Distinguished
Jul 29, 2010
1,290
0
19,280
0
[citation][nom]amk-aka-phantom[/nom]ROFL, problem is that your Linux doesn't support any GPUs properly...[/citation]
What? Almost all Nvidia, ATI and Intel GPUs have linux support. VIA and SIS also have a few GPUs that have linux support. Linux may have issues with hardware support, but the GPU isn't one of them.
 

amk-aka-Phantom

Distinguished
Mar 10, 2011
3,003
0
20,860
31


1) No one cares about SIS/VIA, they won't be used in an environment where you want a fancy desktop manager.

2) ATI - see above. Their APUs don't work properly.

3) nVidia - using one myself and no matter whether I use an open-source or proprietary driver, the boot screen doesn't work; why? Modern nVidia/AMD cards' frame buffer is not supported properly or some BS like that, none of the 9000 "fixes" found on the net work.

Seriously, somehow Windows always works with any new hardware made after its release, but Linux always needs a new kernel or a fix or some other nonsense to get it running.

EDIT: 4) Sandy Bridge needs a kernel update unless you're using H61 chipset OR your kernel is the one used in Ubuntu 11.04 or higher. Another pathetic example of HW support fail - somehow, Windows 7 works fine with SB IGPs out of the box or just needs a quick driver installation. Before you say something stupid about how Linux kernel DOES contain the drivers and therefore updating a kernel = installing new drivers, let me remind you that installing drivers is much, much faster.
 

Vladislaus

Distinguished
Jul 29, 2010
1,290
0
19,280
0
[citation][nom]amk-aka-phantom[/nom]However, the GPU support is very poor on Linux. I recently had to deal with an AMD E-350 based box and there's practically no support for its hyped IGP. I had to do quite a few tweaks to get Compiz running more or less smoothly. So that also kills another myth about how AMD CPUs are magically shining under Linux[/citation]
Strange that my mother recently acquired an Eee PC 1215B to replace her aging Eee PC 1000H. The computer also comes with an E-350, I installed Ubuntu 11.04 (her favorite OS) and everything worked out of the box. The only issue I had was that I couldn't resume from sleep. So I installed the ATI Catalyst Control Center through Ubuntu's Restricted Drivers and that solved the problem.
 

Zeh

Distinguished
Dec 7, 2010
168
0
18,690
2
This is a move in the right direction. GPUs seem to be far more powerfull than CPUs, if aplications are coded properly.

I won't be so surprised if I see more support for GPGPU in DX 12, making it easier for devs to shift some of the cpu load to the gpu if need be.

[citation][nom]Ragnar-Kon[/nom]Yeah Apple and Microsoft (or any other company) are one in the same in my book. Build it, THEN you can patent it. Patents for ideas just doesn't make sense.And by the way, I understand that GPU acceleration can provide great improvements in many programs, but I'm just not seeing GPU-accelerated Window Managers being one of those programs that will benefit.[/citation]

It is completely not like that! By "Build then patent" I believe you mean "Start selling it, then patent it"? Cause that would be really dumb. If you really meant "BUILD", I'm fairly sure they did it but are not going public with it until they have the patent.

Also, I think this need for a GPU means we'll soon be seeing a lot of improvements and new features to window management (and we need them, most people just don't realise it).
 

Vladislaus

Distinguished
Jul 29, 2010
1,290
0
19,280
0
[citation][nom]amk-aka-phantom[/nom]1) No one cares about SIS/VIA, they won't be used in an environment where you want a fancy desktop manager.2) ATI - see above. Their APUs don't work properly.3) nVidia - using one myself and no matter whether I use an open-source or proprietary driver, the boot screen doesn't work; why? Modern nVidia/AMD cards' frame buffer is not supported properly or some BS like that, none of the 9000 "fixes" found on the net work.Seriously, somehow Windows always works with any new hardware made after its release, but Linux always needs a new kernel or a fix or some other nonsense to get it running.EDIT: 4) Sandy Bridge needs a kernel update unless you're using H61 chipset OR your kernel is the one used in Ubuntu 11.04 or higher. Another pathetic example of HW support fail - somehow, Windows 7 works fine with SB IGPs out of the box or just needs a quick driver installation. Before you say something stupid about how Linux kernel DOES contain the drivers and therefore updating a kernel = installing new drivers, let me remind you that installing drivers is much, much faster.[/citation]
ATI - Read my post above. And if that doesn't solve your problem then stop being lazy and go to AMD's website and download and install the latest Catalyst.

nVidia - The Nvidia is the GPU I'm more familiar with. I've used Geforce since it was first released and I never encountered a problem. Even know that I'm using a current Geforce I don't have any issue with the loading screen.

Intel - I'm aware that you need the kernel 2.6.37 or higher for Sandy bridge GPU to work. Intel was the one that made this decision.

Windows 7 out of the box doesn't work with Sandy Bridge or almost any other recent GPU. You need to download the driver through the hardware manufacturer website or update the system (unless you have a VIA/SiS/ATI GPU).
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

ASK THE COMMUNITY

TRENDING THREADS