So whats the big deal if they took it off put urself in there shoes they need clients all they can get actually. An add does not boder me as long as I know its helping the pc gaming community expand, its helping amd or intel whoever dosent mattet get there name out, we need to cut these people a break afterall they did cater to our needs and made ryzen for all the fans.

a short jog down memory lane id, not exactly rolling in new game offerings these days, is likely being paid by AMD to hype Ryzen, hence the collaborative link in the drivers. I noticed it, too, and thought that it must have come from the Crimson driver install I had just completed--and now I see that it did. It was deleted immediately, and no harm, no foul...;) I just personally think that sort of thing is a bit silly. I've used nothing but AMD cpus since 1999 and have no plans to change (getting Ryzen soon myself--Intel just hasn't made anything since that has prompted me to go back to them, and AMD has never given me a reason to leave), but I am sure this is part of the AMD-sponsored Ryzen promotion by id. No, AMD isn't getting paid--they are paying id to puff Ryzen, is what's happening...;) I think it is beyond funny, considering that the CPU plebe John Carmack (whom I like just fine when he is confined to his own areas of expertise), while he was with id, once called the Athlon cpu an x86 "hack" (quote, unquote)...ROFL....;) He was actually indignant that AMD would even dare to compete with Intel, not to mention he was miffed because he had to learn how to optimize his games for the Athlon, now, in addition to optimizing them for the extant Pentium architecture at the time! (As if Intel architectures were the only "real" way to do x86 cpus. Too funny!) That was during the time the Athlon was blowing the doors off of the original Pentium architecture, right before Intel pulled the plug and cancelled the Pentium and went back to the drawing boards to come up with Core 1. I have often wondered what Carmack must've thought when Intel licensed x86-64 from AMD to create the Core 2 line of cpus...must've been shocking to see the AMD "hack" adopted everywhere...;) I make joking, good sport of Carmack sometimes, but I really like the guy, actually, and have a lot of empathy for him in some things...! If id had had people as good on the creative end as Carmack was on the technical end, id would be quite a different company today. Instead of the perpetual, never ending Doom parade we'd be looking at a monster developer, maybe--on the order of CDPR, etc. But, can't blame them for wanting to sort of keep things in the family, either. It's just so funny when you hear guys like Sweeney and Carmack opine on cpu hardware, because none of them could ever even begin the first steps of designing an actual cpu. Put Carmack and Sweeney and some other high-level software guys in a basement, command them to "build the next x86 cpu--you can come out when you're done," and then slam the door and lock it--and watch in horrified fascination as their eyes glaze over, their jaws drop to the floor, and the spittle runs down their chins and pools. No kidding, these guys wouldn't have a clue. But that's A-OK and this is not a criticism of any kind, it's just an observation. These days, fortunately, you don't hear these guys saying anything publicly about cpus as both have matured greatly (haven't we all?) OK--sorry about the trip down memory lane...sometimes the ol' neurons get jogged now and then--watching id software love all over AMD's Ryzen brand during their recent commercial collaboration definitely tripped a switch or two....;)

what? i didnt upgrade to 17.4.4 yet but a URL shortcut to a open beta and there is an outrage? does nobody remember AOL, WON.net (valve) and the 90s in general ? that was one of the main ways that any smaller software used to bring attention to something. they put a link on your desktop. if you didnt like it, you deleted it. unbelievable that there are so many complaints that AMD was forced to undo that... put in hidden telemetry service -> nobody cares put one static file (shortcut to URL) on a desktop -> "INTRUSIVE"

I think people are just tired of software doing things that aren't revealed to them. You want to install of link? Tell me. You want to install telemetry services to decrease your R&D budget? Tell me and tell me exactly what is collected. It's basic ethics.

They probably should have had an option to disable it, but other than that i think this "outrage" is from a very vocal minority and should not have resulted in an apology. Its a link ffs..

Thats why UVD bug for GCN 1 will never get fixed (not sure about status with GCN2 OC bugs). Adding telemetry and similar garbage in drivers are more important then having cards working properly.

Thats why UVD bug for GCN 1 will never get fixed (not sure about status with GCN2 OC bugs). Adding telemetry and similar garbage in drivers are more important then having cards working properly.

Yes lets waste resources on 6 year old gpus. Yawn. Surprised people are not crying HD 6XXX cards or HD 5xxx cards dont have relive drivers.

Yes lets waste resources on 6 year old gpus. Yawn. Surprised people are not crying HD 6XXX cards or HD 5xxx cards dont have relive drivers.

Oh, shut up. The Linux driver doesn't have this issue, it's just low priority. They have to fix it, it simply doesn't mean they should immediatelly. And the GPUs are five years old. But their performance isn't. If they sell the RX 460, they can't tell me that my 7970 is antiquated, especially since it actually carries more hardware of the same kind.

If id had had people as good on the creative end as Carmack was on the technical end, id would be quite a different company today.

OT - but they did back then when Romero, Tom Hall, Adrian Carmack (no relations), Sandy Petersen, and Shawn Green were still there, until Romero just ditched work and screwed up the whole thing.

Yes lets waste resources on 6 year old gpus. Yawn. Surprised people are not crying HD 6XXX cards or HD 5xxx cards dont have relive drivers.

They dragged pitcairn and cape verde ( both gcn 1.0 still ) all the way to mid 2015 with the r7 370 and lower. So re-branding mess aside, those are not even 2 year old products yet. As a customer, I fully expect a company to support product at least 2-3 years after launch, don't you?

Oh, shut up. The Linux driver doesn't have this issue, it's just low priority. They have to fix it, it simply doesn't mean they should immediatelly. And the GPUs are five years old. But their performance isn't. If they sell the RX 460, they can't tell me that my 7970 is antiquated, especially since it actually carries more hardware of the same kind.

Also, these GPUs are still among the newest AMD GPUs in the mobile sector (the newer ones are mostly rebrands of GCN 1.0 cards) and I believe they are still sold, so they need to be supported properly.

Were they getting paid for each click/signup? That kind of looks like a referral link.

Also, these GPUs are still among the newest AMD GPUs in the mobile sector (the newer ones are mostly rebrands of GCN 1.0 cards) and I believe they are still sold, so they need to be supported properly.

It is supported properly. Some people blow things out of proportion. GCN1.0 is having better support than Kepler.