Dealing with this kind of shit was one of the reasons we completely dropped xilinx. Apart from that they were very unhelpful and unfriendly.
That’s what you get when it’s not open source…
Read the entire article, despite not having heard about Vivado previously. I wouldn’t be surprised if a certain company ending in
softslop is somehow involved.The thing that makes sense to me (purely speculative, no real info to back this) is that Microslop isn’t happy about losing money and the user base, so they are pushing their hardware partners to force users back to the platform.
Redis did exactly this back in March 2024, dropping its long-standing BSD license for the more restrictive dual licensing model, and the blowback was severe enough that the community forked it into Valkey almost immediately.
Sounds like this is probably the best approach and outcome for the Vivado community and software. The end of the article recommends either joining in the discussion on AMD’s forums (which only seems to be getting stonewalled) or joining the growing number of people on hacker news.
That’s the second-best approach. The best approach is for it to be copyleft instead of permissively-licensed to begin with.
I don’t disagree, I meant given the current situation. Obviously copyleft would be preferred and should be encouraged.
Uggghhh. Thankfully, I’ve never even heard of this program, but this sets a poor precedent for their future endeavors
Vivado is software for designing hardware on an FPGA. AMD bought out Xilinx, one of the big FPGA manufacturers, a few years back. FPGAs are basically programmable digital circuits: you configure a series of internal logic gates to represent the function of a circuit with memory, data busses, registers, gates, etc. In this fashion, an FPGA could be programmed to function like a CPU, a radio, a video encoder, or nearly any other piece of digital hardware. Very useful for hobbyists and prototyping.
The thing with FPGA software is that there are no open source alternatives. FPGAs have so many complicated blobs and signing keys and proprietary IP blocks that your only choice is to use the manufacturer’s offering.
It is insane to me that something as conceptually basic as FPGAs can even be made proprietary at all, much less that being the universal state of them.
The world of FPGA is full of proprietary hardware and software blocks sadly. I haven’t dabbled since being a student but I remember finding it extremely jarring how on one hand you basically could write whatever hardware blocks you wanted (the freedom is comparable to learning programming all over again but in a fundamentally different way), but also you had super optimized “IP blocks” of software you can pull in like a paid library that you had to license. These blocks make the damn chip much more powerful for those of us not willing to write a fucking CPU, what the fuck do you mean DLC for the chip on my lab table?
Vivado was a bit of a pain but not too bad as far as proprietary software goes. There’s more steps involved than just burning a .hex to a regular microcontroller, the debugging is different, I get it, another program makes sense.
Personally I don’t write much code these days but I find myself yearning for like MS Visual Studio 2008. If I ever want to go back to programming on the side I will probably have to figure out my IDE situation from scratch. VS Community seems nice but there’s a lot of unnecessary features and of course Microslop’s grubby fingers all over it
How is that different from purchasing any other software library?
for those of us not willing to write a fucking CPU
There’s insane maniacs who’ve written fucking CPUs in CSS, Minecraft, and Conway’s game of life, among many other environments not intended for writing fucking CPUs.
Can’t some insane maniac simply write a fucking CPU for FPGAs and release it as open source?
Plenty of insane maniacs have released lots of more useless stuff as open source, why not this?
(Using insane maniac as a compliment here; the world would be a much more boring and unenjoyable place without insane maniacs willing to waste their time making it a better or at least more interesting place.)
Singularly fucking stupid IP gated moronicity. So much profit available before custom chips. Why?
Very useful for hobbyists and prototyping.
True, but that is not the only thing they are useful for; e.g. many high end measurement instruments ship with FPGAs so they can get improvements after release for functionality where implementing it in software would be too slow.
Very true. I believe FPGAs are also popular for aerospace applications, since it’s cheaper to design and patch programmable hardware than to design and physically install ASICs.
Lattice device support some open toolchains, or relatively open compared to the big two. Or something like that, never got to work with them yet.
Thanks, that’s basically what I gathered from the article but I didn’t do any further research.
OP is clickbaiting FUD again. Classic.
What part is FUD? FTA:
Starting with the 2026.1 release, AMD is switching to a tiered licensing model. The free Basic tier covers entry-level devices but is restricted to Windows only. Linux support does not show up until the “Core” tier, which costs somewhere between $1,200-$1,800 per year.
…
When pushed for a real answer, Anatoli pointed unhappy users toward Vivado 2025.2, suggesting they simply stick with it if they did not want to pay. He did mention that 2025.2 loses official support once Vivado 2026.3 ships, but that detail was buried in a thread reply, leaving users with little more than a dead-end recommendation.
They’re removing the free product they offered for Linux and are sticking it behind a $100+/mo license, and the alternative option for not paying is using unsupported software and being left with any security problems unless you pay an ongoing license.
Read the commends at https://lemy.lol/post/66119615
You didn’t link a specific comment, so your reply isn’t worth much. The first ‘substantive’ response I ran across was pretty dumb, effectively saying the Linux app was costing AMD money while offering windows for free and Linux behind a paywall. I didn’t care to keep reading.
So, again, what part of it is FUD?
The part in the OP that is influencing perception by disseminating negative and dubious information about AMD when AMDs actions are actually justified.
when AMDs actions are actually justified.
Yeah, this is the part we’re disagreeing on, because so far I haven’t seen a real justification for why the same app is fine on windows but not Linux and is only accessible on linux through a subscription. What part of Linux specifically costs them money that doesn’t on windows?
Also, just because you don’t like the info doesn’t make it dubious. And ironically, your defense of them is dubious by providing vague responses and unsupported accusations of spreading FUD.
honestly I would stop arguing with this guy. hes responded several times with no detail when you asked him for hit. heck im going to look at his profile and lable him at the least after seeing this.
Is possible to label users on the web app side? Asking for an idiot Lemmy user. Certainly not myself.
Hope you find some good stuff!
K
If anyone had any doubts, you’ve effectively admitted you’re wrong. You can’t even respond to basic questions about the “FUD” anyone is spreading, especially your own.
Maybe try to shill in places that don’t know how to ask basic follow up questions, you’ll probably get farther.
Can you explain?
As far as I can see OP took the original article headline verbatim; the article itself does describe the exact kind of bait-and-switch model as I’ve heard it used: company offers open standard edition, after a while switches it to basic / ‘core’ offering which locks e.g. Linux access behind a (steep) paywall.
Read the comments at https://lemy.lol/post/66119615
The term “bait and switch” has a widely accepted meaning, and this scenario meets the requirements of that definition.
It seems to me that you have some sort of affinity for AMD that causes you to bristle at critiques of the company, but the facts are uncomfortable ones and very plain to see.
Consider that publicly traded companies have no allegiances. Aligning yourself with them makes you a free marketing tool.
K
Not a single one of those comments gives the clarity that you see to think that it does. There were two comments that seemed to support removing Linux from the free tier because… ? No real reason was given, even by these vague supporters as to why it should be free for Windows and not Linux.
K
You’ll have to point me even closer because none of the comments I have seen on that post state what happened is different than what I described above?
I can see a comment stating the switch is justified in their eyes, but it doesn’t negate that it is a bait-and-switch model.
Wish I had time. If you care to dive in, I’ve provided a link to the post. If you don’t believe any of the comments fit, then I guess you don’t agree with the comments, and thats fine.
deleted by creator
