Linked by Eugenia Loli on Sun 6th Aug 2006 17:30 UTC
GNU, GPL, Open Source Plenty of loud argument has ensued over whether binary-only drivers belong in an operating system based on open source philosophies. David Chisnall examines the reasoning on both sides.
Thread beginning with comment 149753
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
caring for ppl that dont care
by Yagami on Mon 7th Aug 2006 10:01 UTC
Yagami
Member since:
2006-07-15

why is it that users thar have been using windows all this time , come to linux and want binary drivers ?

you dont care if linux use a binary driver. do you care for linux ?

please , just answer... do you really care ? would you like for linux to keep its stability , security ? or are you using it because linux makes you look 1337 ?

when vista rolls out , will you keep using linux ?

you may not care , but someone has to. specially those that make gnu/linux as they dont know how to continue doing it otherwise.

i wonder how Xorg and Direct-fb development would be if graphics card specs were open ( NOTE , not asking for open drivers )

wonder if ralink and other driver would crash the system with preempt enabled ( dunno if latest versions do , but some versions did )

wonder if my late adsl modem vender already allows me to use a 2.6 kernel , instead of 2.4

NOTE - for those that dont care about the source : nobody is asking you to review , read , change the code. BUT PLEASE UNDERSTAND , if you want things to work , its because someone has to review it ! if no one can review it , we cant make it work.

( see for example , intel graphic cards already work with aiglx ( at lease its what i read in forums , as i have an nvidia ) and nvidia and ati cards dont ( specially nvidia that doesnt work well with 7.1 xserver )) and guess what ?!?? NOBODY CAN DO ANYTHING ABOUT THAT

Edited 2006-08-07 10:02

Reply Score: 2

draethus Member since:
2006-08-02

why is it that users thar have been using windows all this time , come to linux and want binary drivers ?

The average user doesn't care, they just want their hardware to work. Now why doesn't it work? Company won't release specs or write a driver. Why won't it write a driver? Because it needs to be open-source, and they can't do that (often they have no choice - they signed NDAs to get components of that hardware).

you dont care if linux use a binary driver. do you care for linux ?

Of course you do, why else would you use it ;-).

The drivers where open-source matters are general stuff like IDE, USB host controllers, SATA, known standards like SCSI - in other words, stuff that is used on a lot of hardware. When people say driver, they usually mean something used for exactly one piece of hardware. The benefits of writing an open-source driver for one individual product, like an NVidia FX5200, is much lower than writing one for an entire family of devices.

when vista rolls out , will you keep using linux ?

From what I hear, Vista will be terrible, but people ought to try both, just to know what they're missing out.

It amuses me how Linux/OSS zealots expect that every driver can be open-sourced. Obviously they never tried submitting patches to any large open-source project, except maybe their own. And if every hardware manufacturer in the world started making open-source drivers and they were all accepted into the kernel, the kernel source would grow to many gigabytes in size. It's just impractical to keep all the drivers for all the hardware in the world in one kernel tarball.

Linux developers claim that they could change the USB architecture because the drivers were open-source. Rubbish - it was also because there were few drivers to begin with. If there were 1000 drivers, who would have the time to rewrite all the code?

specially nvidia that doesnt work well with 7.1 xserver

Many drivers don't work with 7.1, and I heard NVidia is fixing it. And NVidia cards work much better than Via Unichrome, whose drivers were open-sourced - it still crashes unbelievably often, Linux and Windows.

Driver support has always been a serious issue for me with Linux, and I am doing something about it. For the past 3 years I've been working on getting (the user-space) USB scanner drivers for Windows to work on Linux, and I'm close to finishing. Unlike the SANE project in which 176 of the 1273 listed scanners are completely supported, this should let you run virtually all Windows scanners under Linux.

wonder if my late adsl modem vender already allows me to use a 2.6 kernel , instead of 2.4

You see why an unstable kernel API/ABI, and the general Linux attitude on binary drivers, is bad news?

What are YOU doing to help?

Reply Parent Score: 4

Yagami Member since:
2006-07-15

Of course you do, why else would you use it ;-).


why else ?! lots of reasons.

but do you really care ? would you like linux to be much better than windows and be a great operating system , or do you just care that it works ?and if windows vista ( lets pretend here ) is much better than linux , will you still care for linux ?

ike an NVidia FX5200, is much lower than writing one for an entire family of devices.

but there isnt a driver for a product. there is a driver for a family of products. similar like the ati r200 drivers , dont only work with one product. like the r300 drivers works with a family of products ( 9500,9700,9800,etc )

From what I hear, Vista will be terrible, but people ought to try both, just to know what they're missing out.

yeah , vista is terrible ... but if it was great ? lets just dump linux ?

It amuses me how Linux/OSS zealots
i am not neither a linux nor OSS zealot. i am a freedom zealot

Obviously they never tried submitting patches to any large open-source project, except maybe their own.
well , never really , because kde is a very small open-source project

the kernel source would grow to many gigabytes in size sooo ... that is your reason disc space ... and you have proof for these "gigabytes" , right ?
hey , lets not make translations to other languages , lets just make english and french and german. because then, if we translate to every language , it would grow to many gigabytes.

Linux developers claim that they could change the USB architecture because the drivers were open-source. Rubbish - it was also because there were few drivers to begin with. If there were 1000 drivers, who would have the time to rewrite all the code?

<sarcasm> yeah , those damn liers ! i mean , what a stupid lie of them telling that they could not change how usb worked only because they ... well , could not change how usb drivers worked ! </sarcasm>

Many drivers don't work with 7.1, and I heard NVidia is fixing it. And NVidia cards work much better than Via Unichrome, whose drivers were open-sourced - it still crashes unbelievably often, Linux and Windows.

i am very glad they are working in it. nvidia is friendly to open source developers. they are responsive and care about linux development. although they dont release the specs ( to bad ) they care about linux ( as stated by xorg developers )

but , by the way , i can make nvidia crash linux any time i want. just go to a frambuffer , use fbtv or anything else that uses the framebuffer , and switch back to X ... instant freeze ( this is since the first driver release until now , and will never change )

Driver support has always been a serious issue for me with Linux, and I am doing something about it.

that is great. thanx you for this.


this should let you run virtually all Windows scanners under Linux.

is it going to be like the wifi drivers ? where none has all the features and most crash the system ? will it grow to many gigabytes ?

You see why an unstable kernel API/ABI, and the general Linux attitude on binary drivers, is bad news?

stop and think for a minute. above you state that the linux developers wrongly clamed that they could change the usb architecture because they had open source drivers.
so what do you want ? an architecture that never changes ? to have closed drivers ? and if a bug is found ? and a feature can be introduced ? what if its necessary to change something ????

bad news would it be for a stable api. then , it would be impossible to change things like the usb architecture.

you want a stable api ? you got one ... just look at what X development was. Xfree was as stable as it gets.

not Xorg is evolving , even the api from 7.1 is slightly diferent than 7.0. now , remember Xfree and look now at Xorg... i think i can rest my case.

You see why an unstable kernel API/ABI, and the general Linux attitude on binary drivers, is bad news?

What are YOU doing to help?


well , not spreading FUD for starters. you seem to suffer the " i am smarter than everyone else , and i am the only one that submit patchs to large open source projects , and i am smarter than the linux developers , and i am smarter than the sane developers" . well , what i wanna say is , you may be smart , ( please , i am not insulting or trying to ofend you , fully respect your position ) but please try to keep an open mind! keep an open mind that maybe the linux developers might know what would make it easy to develop linux.

i myself gravitate more around kde and im messaging. how i would love for a fully open and documented msn specs

Reply Parent Score: 1