NVIDIA Controls AIB Launch and Driver Distribution

[21CW]killerofall said:
Sounds like he didn't even read the NDA...
Click to expand...
Or he just didn't read anything into the NDA, like some people with an axe to grind are so fond of doing.

Example, the NDA mentions the phrase "for the benefit of Nvidia" - fairly standard legalese. But you've got brain surgeons interpreting that "OMG the NDA literally sez anything you say has to benefit Nvidia or they'll sue you!"

There are some legitimate concerns being raised about Nvidia, but some of the more asinine stuff and conspiracy shit is like it's from the mind of a 12 yr old on Reddit.
 
DPI said:
Or he just didn't read anything into the NDA, like some people with an axe to grind are so fond of doing.

Example, the NDA mentions the phrase "for the benefit of Nvidia" - fairly standard legalese. But you've got brain surgeons interpreting that "OMG the NDA literally sez anything you say has to benefit Nvidia or they'll sue you!"

There are some legitimate concerns being raised about Nvidia, but some of the more asinine stuff and conspiracy shit is like it's from the mind of a 12 yr old on Reddit.
Click to expand...


Lol.
You...actually, never mind. Your brain doesn't seem to work that well
 
Fuck Nvidia and any schills who support their BS. They can always win me back by not being anti consumer but at this point they're digging their grave deeper.
 
DPI said:
Or he just didn't read anything into the NDA, like some people with an axe to grind are so fond of doing.

Example, the NDA mentions the phrase "for the benefit of Nvidia" - fairly standard legalese. But you've got brain surgeons interpreting that "OMG the NDA literally sez anything you say has to benefit Nvidia or they'll sue you!"

There are some legitimate concerns being raised about Nvidia, but some of the more asinine stuff and conspiracy shit is like it's from the mind of a 12 yr old on Reddit.
Click to expand...
Did you read any of the other threads? This was not the standard NDA that nvidia used. It is entirely new and I assume has much more in it that before.
Since you are an expert please break down the new NDA versus the old?
 
Hagrid said:
Did you read any of the other threads? This was not the standard NDA that nvidia used. It is entirely new and I assume has much more in it that before.
Since you are an expert please break down the new NDA versus the old?
Click to expand...
The point wasn't about a specific NDA version, but the brigading mentality that wants to misinterpret legalese as literal to fit their desired outcome, or assume the worst "cuz Ngreedia is evil".

Another case in point, Nvidia asking for contact information of AIB reviewers, and people flipping out that this means Nvidia is "locking down control" - what's the actual fear there? That they're going to call up reviewers and threatento break their legs if they don't write something positive? Or could it just be they want to be able to broadcast notifications that apply to every reviewer, like maybe patch updates or tools? The assumption that it's for something nefarious is what's weird.

Fwiw I think Kyle made the right move for himself, that's not even in question.
 
Last edited:
DPI said:
The point wasn't about a specific NDA version, but the brigading mentality that wants to misinterpret legalese as literal to fit their desired outcome, or assume the worst "cuz Ngreedia is evil".

Another case in point, Nvidia asking for contact information of AIB reviewers, and people flipping out that this means Nvidia is "locking down control" - because they're going to call up or email people and threaten to break their legs if they don't like a review? Or maybe they'd like to broadcast messages or notices that pertain to all reviewers. The assumption that it's for something nefarious is what's questionable.

Fwiw I think Kyle made the right move for himself, that's not even in question.
Click to expand...
Well I guess some people are not as expert as you in legal documents. You should educate them?
 
DPI said:
The point wasn't about a specific NDA version, but the brigading mentality that wants to misinterpret legalese as literal to fit their desired outcome, or assume the worst "cuz Ngreedia is evil".

Another case in point, Nvidia asking for contact information of AIB reviewers, and people flipping out that this means Nvidia is "locking down control" - what's the actual fear there? That they're going to call up reviewers and threatento break their legs if they don't write something positive? Or could it just be they want to be able to broadcast notifications that apply to every reviewer, like maybe patch updates or tools? The assumption that it's for something nefarious is what's weird.

Fwiw I think Kyle made the right move for himself, that's not even in question.
Click to expand...

You see, there's this little fact that the NDA nVidia is currently using is not the standard NDA it has been using for years upon years. There are a number of changes which have been outlined over and over. I guess you have some serious issues with reading comprehension since you can't seem to understand that.

There's no reason whatsoever for nVidia to be requiring AIBs to send names and contact info of reviewers who request AIB items. They are AIB items, not nVidia items. But nVidia wants all this info so they can punish who they want by telling AIBs that they can't send review samples to certain people. It's odd that you don't have a problem with that. The BS you're proposing as the reasons nVidia wants the info is absolutely mind boggling and doesn't make one bit of logical sense.
 
Linus Tech Tips covered this in the wan show on friday. His take that this new nda was more to maintain an even playing field for media, so no one breaks the review embargo.
 
Ranulfo said:
Linus Tech Tips covered this in the wan show on friday. His take that this new nda was more to maintain an even playing field for media, so no one breaks the review embargo.
Click to expand...

Linus is primarily a reviewer, which means the NDA really is not all that different for him and is unlikely to really effect his day-to-day operations or change the content he produces. For most Tech Youtubers the NDA really doesn't phase them because they're not trying to actually take a deep, honest, look at industry practices and crap. A group like LTT would never have been the ones to break something like GPP.
 
Nvidia has been anti consumer for decades now...remember what they did that killed 3dfx...
 
To add to what Derangel said...

Here's the thing. Kyle has said after sending the NDA to his attorney that it is probably fine for hardware reviewers...tech journalists, not so much. If the goal is merely to prevent breaking a review embargo, what's with the 5 year lock-in? That's an eternity in tech. I'm inclined to trust the advice of Kyle's legal counsel more than Linus or, well, pretty much anyone on here. :p

Everyone saying "the NDA doesn't seem that bad" seems to forget that it was looked over by someone with a law degree who has experience with NDAs. And he didn't like what he saw. That's good enough for me.
 
What comes next is pure speculation on my behalf so...

1080 Ti is a pretty good rasterizer, capable of 4k and 1080@144Hz. A GPU that just improves a couple dozens % of raw power won't be very appealing for many as an upgrade path.
Throw in RT and people will want it, will need it... unless RT performance isn't up to rasterizer performance and you get an imbalanced card. They are onto something, but the slow mo Battlefield V demo was not reassuring.

Intel recently tried to avoid -with no luck- comparative reviews of CPU performance with security patches applied. That is just how companies in strong positions behave, perhaps Nvidia is just trying harder.

But why expose yourself to so much negativity just after the GPP unless there is more to lose if you don't do it?

I think they knew they were in for a rough ride with RTX and want to have as much control as possible. And of course if AIB partners can send uncontrolled samples and drivers that is a problem that needs to be addressed.

So in the end I think that there is more to it than Nvidia just being Nvidia, they are genuinely concerned with RTX and want to control the narrative at every level, including AIB samples.
 
Fabel said:
What comes next is pure speculation on my behalf so...

1080 Ti is a pretty good rasterizer, capable of 4k and 1080@144Hz. A GPU that just improves a couple dozens % of raw power won't be very appealing for many as an upgrade path.
Throw in RT and people will want it, will need it... unless RT performance isn't up to rasterizer performance and you get an imbalanced card. They are onto something, but the slow mo Battlefield V demo was not reassuring.

Intel recently tried to avoid -with no luck- comparative reviews of CPU performance with security patches applied. That is just how companies in strong positions behave, perhaps Nvidia is just trying harder.

But why expose yourself to so much negativity just after the GPP unless there is more to lose if you don't do it?

I think they knew they were in for a rough ride with RTX and want to have as much control as possible. And of course if AIB partners can send uncontrolled samples and drivers that is a problem that needs to be addressed.

So in the end I think that there is more to it than Nvidia just being Nvidia, they are genuinely concerned with RTX and want to control the narrative at every level, including AIB samples.
Click to expand...
To me they have some overzealous employees overdoing their jobs when it comes to the marketing and partners.. might be under the guidance of the ceo.. i guess market controls by other means buys you precious time so you can screw up and still remain dominant.. just look at Intel.. that company is run like shit, and they are still dominant, and most likely will remain dominant.... I don't see the need for these games... Merit is where is at, and markets don't shift that fast anyway... (But i guess much slower when you squeezing people)
 
heatlesssun said:
3DFx started to have far too many execution problems. Unless nVidia had a hand in those nothing else much would have mattered.
Click to expand...

Nvidia blatently ripped off 3DFX tech. In '98 3DFX sued over NV use of 3DFX multi texture patents. That hadn't been settled when 3DFX started having issues... so NV filed multiple suites against 3DFX which where all 100% BS, they drained what was left of their cash flow and then bought them. Cause that is how they roll. Once they bought them up they settled 3DFX vs Intel law suits by raiding Intels patents. They where able to do that because 3DFX had the winning hand there as well. Once NV took over Intel realized they would have to actually fight for real and caved.

That Intel settlement set NV up for years getting paid on Intel integrated GPUs. Its why Intel hates NV, and the hole thing is why no other silicon company will ever work with NV. NV are not the sort of company you want to get into any type of agreement with.
 
ChadD said:
Nvidia blatently ripped off 3DFX tech. In '98 3DFX sued over NV use of 3DFX multi texture patents. That hadn't been settled when 3DFX started having issues... so NV filed multiple suites against 3DFX which where all 100% BS, they drained what was left of their cash flow and then bought them. Cause that is how they roll. Once they bought them up they settled 3DFX vs Intel law suits by raiding Intels patents. They where able to do that because 3DFX had the winning hand there as well. Once NV took over Intel realized they would have to actually fight for real and caved.

That Intel settlement set NV up for years getting paid on Intel integrated GPUs. Its why Intel hates NV, and the hole thing is why no other silicon company will ever work with NV. NV are not the sort of company you want to get into any type of agreement with.
Click to expand...

I'm not arguing against any of this and it certainly didn't help 3DFx but at best secondary issues as 3DFx execution fell off the rails. We're not talking about mutually exclusive things but solid execution was what 3dFx needed more than anything. A "nicer" nVidia would have only prolonged the evitable demise of 3Dfx without vast improvements in execution.
 
Fabel said:
So in the end I think that there is more to it than Nvidia just being Nvidia, they are genuinely concerned with RTX and want to control the narrative at every level, including AIB samples.
Click to expand...

But that doesn't really make any sense. Once the cards come out, they are out. The capability of the cards won't change post launch and that's when most of the AIB cards end up coming out. There is nothing for nVidia to "control" regarding concerns of RTX because anyone who can get their hands on a card can have one. Well, I guess there is one way for the performance of cards to be "changed". nVidia could decide to release "miracle drivers" increasing performance by a huge amount like they used to do around the time ATI would release or announce new cards. I never was a fan of nVidia holding back performance through drivers for something underhanded such as that.

This is nothing more than nVidia trying to punish those who don't sign the nVidia NDA or who nVidia just doesn't like. This way they can keep AIB "donated" cards to reviewers they don't like. It's also similar to the GPP: AIBs do what nVidia wants or nVidia will cut off supply of chips to the AIB.
 
SmokeRngs said:
You see, there's this little fact that the NDA nVidia is currently using is not the standard NDA it has been using for years upon years. There are a number of changes which have been outlined over and over. I guess you have some serious issues with reading comprehension since you can't seem to understand that.

There's no reason whatsoever for nVidia to be requiring AIBs to send names and contact info of reviewers who request AIB items. They are AIB items, not nVidia items. But nVidia wants all this info so they can punish who they want by telling AIBs that they can't send review samples to certain people. It's odd that you don't have a problem with that. The BS you're proposing as the reasons nVidia wants the info is absolutely mind boggling and doesn't make one bit of logical sense.
Click to expand...

i dont really have a problem with that. mostly because of the discussion that we are now having. large companies do stupid stuff all the time... Sony's rootkit fiasco, samsungs battery issues, Microsoft's....well just about anything microsoft... seriously how do they stay in business???

the point is.... when a large company screws up- we find out about it because someone makes a stink about it. if people want to say they're just into having "a lot of drama".... thats their deal to interpret whats going on.
but.... i am here. i am also now questioning should i buy nvidia now or not. i am also looking at who says what about the people that bring up their concerns, how they do it and what the responses are from other places..... and i am still here.
this is how the consumer section works (unless you're apple... and then you just use inexplicable brainwashing) and in doing our parts we will be making up the part of the equation that votes with our wallet.

to be honest i find it more odd that anyone would pay money in the form of a pre-order for unreleased hardware with absolutely no reviews from independent sources... THAT to me just seems like insanity.
 
I'm wondering if nVidia created this new NDA as a way to shut down journalism in light of the whole GPP thing. And by offering it directly to Kyle I'm wondering if this was their attempt to silence him.

Speaking of the GPP, what ever came out of all that? Should we be looking for new GPU brands once the Turing cards are released? Or did nVidia back down?
 
The Voodoo 2 was an amazing piece of hardware
SmokeRngs said:
But that doesn't really make any sense. Once the cards come out, they are out. The capability of the cards won't change post launch and that's when most of the AIB cards end up coming out. There is nothing for nVidia to "control" regarding concerns of RTX because anyone who can get their hands on a card can have one. Well, I guess there is one way for the performance of cards to be "changed". nVidia could decide to release "miracle drivers" increasing performance by a huge amount like they used to do around the time ATI would release or announce new cards. I never was a fan of nVidia holding back performance through drivers for something underhanded such as that.

This is nothing more than nVidia trying to punish those who don't sign the nVidia NDA or who nVidia just doesn't like. This way they can keep AIB "donated" cards to reviewers they don't like. It's also similar to the GPP: AIBs do what nVidia wants or nVidia will cut off supply of chips to the AIB.
Click to expand...
The spin the reviewer gives can be very important, Intel's got better single core performance vs AMD , no need to make that up, but the way it was magnified by some reviewers made very hard to get the whole picture. The reviews were pretty polarizing, very few objective ones, but even so some pro Intel ones were pretty puzzling.

Recently we got that Tom'sHardware "Just By It" editorial... there are no words for that.

And now let Nvidia control who reviews what... On day one you will get a lot of reviews "the wait is meant to be shilled" and a lot of blacklisted reviewers scrambling to get cards on retail and make reviews. By the time those objective reviews are out, the damage is done, there is an uphill battle to change the perception set but those initial shills.

There was a time when going to Tom'sHardware and giving it a quick glance, anyone could make a quick purchase decision. Not anymore. So this is very dangerous, they are destroying trust in a whole industry by trying to game the system.
 
Armenius said:
Why do you keep shooting yourselves in the foot, NVIDIA? You got to your position of market dominance based primarily on the strength of your product. Stop acting like a totalitarian dictator.
Click to expand...

well Señor Armenius when you have Market Share + Mindshare you can do anything without repercussions.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top