AMD Funded a Drop-In CUDA Implementation Built on ROCm: It's Now Open-Source

Re:AMD Funded a Drop-In CUDA Implementation Built on ROCm: I... by foobiekr on Monday February 12, 2024 @11:50AM (#39347110)

IBM was also incompetent and the os/2 team in Boca was had some exceptional engineers but was packed witg mostly mediocre-to-bad ones, which is why so many things in OS/2 were bad and why IBM got upset for Microsoft contributing negative work to the project because their lines of code contribution was negative (they were rewriting a lot of inefficient bloated IBM code).

A lot went wrong with os/2. For CUDA, I think a better analogy is vhs. The standard, in the effective not open sense, is what it is. AMD sucks at software and views it as an expense rather than an advantage.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:AMD Funded a Drop-In CUDA Implementation Built on ROCm: I... by AYBABTME on Monday February 12, 2024 @12:14PM (#39347469)

You would think that by now AMD realizes that poor software is what left them behind in the dust, and would have changed that mindset.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:AMD Funded a Drop-In CUDA Implementation Built on ROCm: I... by hyperman1 on Monday February 12, 2024 @12:36PM (#39347735)

Most businesses understand the pain points of their suppliers very well, as they feel that pain and gave themselves organized around it.

They have a hard time to understand the pain points of their consumers, as they don't feel that pain, look trough their own organisation-coloured glases, and can't see the real pain points from the whiney-customer ones.

AMD probably thinks software ecosystems are the easy part, ready to take it on whenever they feel like it and throw a token amount at it. They've built a great engine, see the carossery as beneath them, and don't understand why the lazy customer wants them to build the rest of the car too.

[ Parent | on HN ]