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 149765
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
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

Legend Member since:
2006-07-27

An operating system should not be a religion. If Vista would be greater in every little detail - well, why not switch?

And having gigabytes of source code is not only a disk space problem. It is likely a big organizational problem. If someone is really able to manage a project that big - great, then no problem. But this is unlikely.

Reply Parent Score: 2

Yagami Member since:
2006-07-15

An operating system should not be a religion. If Vista would be greater in every little detail - well, why not switch?



for end users , and business yes , of course.

but what for the developers , the creaters ? they made their "baby", surelly they about it , and want to make it the best , even if "vista" is better

And having gigabytes of source code is not only a disk space problem. It is likely a big organizational problem. If someone is really able to manage a project that big - great, then no problem. But this is unlikely.

the problem is that drivers dont grow go gigabites. see for example the size of the source kernel compressed and uncompressed.

of course , it it would really get that big , probably a solution would be found. ( maybe kernel-core , kernel-current-drivers, kernel-legacy-drivers, etc )

by the way ... have you noticed how big is windows xp nvidia drivers ? its 40m for english only and 60m for international !!! its bigger than the linux kernel !!

Reply Parent Score: 1

Felix Schwarz Member since:
2005-11-30

An operating system should not be a religion. If Vista would be greater in every little detail - well, why not switch?

Depends on what you expect for the future. If you expect that Windows Vista and its successors will suit your needs for the next 10 years, go for it.

On the other hand, if you like getting the benefits of a free (as in speech) OS (stability, no DRM, no stupid registration/activation hassle), maybe you will stay? And mind you: The free OS won't get better if you do not do anything about it. Relying on others to improve the free system so you can switch back if you don't like Vista anymore, means you are just a freeloader.

Munich (Bavaria, Germany) choose Linux with good reason although it is more expensive (in the next 5 years) than Windows (due to the massive rebates given by Steve - monkey boy - Ballmer).

I think with "Linux" its almost the same as with evolution: If an indiviual does not reproduce itself, from the point of "the evolution" it does not matter if this indiviual was born at all. Its the same with Linux: If you don't write code, test, translate, document, support other users or just give money, you do not matter for "Linux" (whereas you have to buy a proprietary OS so you matter due to your license money).

fs

Reply Parent Score: 2

elsewhere Member since:
2005-07-13

And having gigabytes of source code is not only a disk space problem. It is likely a big organizational problem. If someone is really able to manage a project that big - great, then no problem. But this is unlikely.

Ironically, Andrew Morton has already pointed to that as an issue. The volume of bugs is increasing, because developers aren't motivated to maintain code relating to older systems and peripherals.

So the devs want all driver code in the kernel, despite the fact that even under the current situation they can't properly maintain it.

Zealous idealism meets cold hard reality.

Not that I believe hardware vendors are any better motivated to address legacy hardware support, but it's frustrating that the zealots are too stubborn to admit there may be room for a compromise somewhere.

Oh well. My own fault I guess for not realizing I could only experience true freedom by restricting myself to someone else's ideals.

Reply Parent Score: 2