"Recently there has been a lot of discussion bubbling up regarding the possibility that Ubuntu will ship proprietary 3D drivers by default for some video cards. My aim here is not to discuss the specifics of that decision, which is still being fleshed out and ratified, but to instead define my views on the bigger picture behind the discussion - features vs. freedom."
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Member since:2005-12-31
> Then you need to blame the manufacturer for not providing proper
> specifications so drivers can be made for that hardware. It's that simple.
No, it's not that simple. I can blame nvidia for their policy as long as I want, and still no F/OSS drivers will appear magically in front of me. As much as some people would love it, finding a scapegoat does *NOT* solve the problem. Even if it's an obviously guilty scapegoat as nvidia.
EDIT: added this:
> And don't go carping out the trade secrets argument. Interfaces are
> specific to hardware, so if someone doesn't have that hardware already,
> the documentation of the interface to that hardware does them no good.
You haven't understood the argument. The point is that documentation about the interface can give you clues about the internal structure. This is true even for software, where "blackbox" APIs are preferred, and even more so for hardware. This means that
- a competitor can gain advantages by analyzing the internal structure (meaning one of the smaller competitors, since ATI could probably disassemble the blob drivers if they really want to know)
- a competitor could reveal a possible patent violation and try to sue them
- they may have signed an agreement with an IP (intellectual property) provider of one of their parts that interface specifications must be kept private since that provider fears one of these attacks
Edited 2006-12-19 14:37
Member since:2005-12-02
"Then you need to blame the manufacturer for not providing proper specifications so drivers can be made for that hardware. It's that simple. Manufacturers do *NOT* have to create drivers themselves, they *ONLY* need to document the interfaces to the hardware properly so drivers can be created from that documentation."
I agree with this statement. If the specification were out there, then drivers would exist using all the functionality.
"And don't go carping out the trade secrets argument. Interfaces are specific to hardware, so if someone doesn't have that hardware already, the documentation of the interface to that hardware does them no good."
This one I don't agree with. Lets say Nvidia published the full spec for the hardware interface. That would then enable ATI and Intel to create close to identical chips at less cost, since they would not have the engineering involved in it. They no longer need to try and reverse engineer anything, as they were now handed what they need. Less cost means less profit, less profit means less jobs, etc.
Member since:
2006-08-17
Quote: kadymae
I would just like to be able to use the new laptop I bought without having to:
1) hand-edit a config file so that I can then
2) download & install a cobbled together open-source driver
3) and then edit yet another config file so that I can get aforementioned cobbled together driver to actually work.
Then you need to blame the manufacturer for not providing proper specifications so drivers can be made for that hardware. It's that simple. Manufacturers do *NOT* have to create drivers themselves, they *ONLY* need to document the interfaces to the hardware properly so drivers can be created from that documentation. And don't go carping out the trade secrets argument. Interfaces are specific to hardware, so if someone doesn't have that hardware already, the documentation of the interface to that hardware does them no good.