Linked by Thom Holwerda on Fri 14th Sep 2012 22:30 UTC
Intel You'd think this sort of stuff belonged to the past - but no. Apparently, Microsoft is afraid of Android on its Windows 8 tablets, because Intel has just announced that it will provide no support for Linux on its clover Trail processors. Supposedly, this chip is "designed for Windows 8". What?
Thread beginning with comment 535121
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Comment by stabbyjones
by stabbyjones on Fri 14th Sep 2012 23:10 UTC
stabbyjones
Member since:
2008-04-15

Is it the 90's again?

Proprietary software one again seeking to slow down free software just enough to keep the consumer annoyed.

Reply Score: 13

v RE: Comment by stabbyjones
by ilovebeer on Fri 14th Sep 2012 23:18 in reply to "Comment by stabbyjones"
RE[2]: Comment by stabbyjones
by winter skies on Fri 14th Sep 2012 23:52 in reply to "RE: Comment by stabbyjones"
winter skies Member since:
2009-08-21

Be careful with your proprietary software bashing. The world would be much worse off if proprietary systems and software disappeared. I hope you realize that, and then realize the grim reality of "be careful what you wish for" the all-software-should-be-free bible thumpers readily ignore.


Whoa, let's be careful with proprietary software bashing or we could cause society grat trouble!
Now "the world would be much worse" is an assumption you must be very insightful - almost omniscient - to make, as it's quite a demanding task to guess how a world without proprietary software would be. Anyway that hypoetical world has absolutely nothing to do with the topic here. It's so far-fetched you must have felt at least on the edge of bad faith writing your comment.
Nobody would freakin ever complain about proprietary software if there wasn't the suspicion - as in this case - that someone's trying to compete outside the boundaries of what's legitimate this way damaging other entities.
What the heck has this to do with hating proprietary software? All players should just play fair, but maybe that's outside the scope for some of them. The details aren't known yet, but I would get very annoyed by a hypotetical company making it more difficult for an open source OS to support a new processor. It sounds like a steer from the usual Intel policy and as such it does not seem to be happening just by chance.

If you think this shows how bad free software supporters are (the vast majority of which I'm sure don't want proprietary software to disappear but just like having more choice and the possibility to know what the code they're using really does) feel free to voice your personal reality, but be aware it sounds quite crazy.

Reply Parent Score: 9

RE[2]: Comment by stabbyjones
by Soulbender on Sat 15th Sep 2012 01:38 in reply to "RE: Comment by stabbyjones"
Soulbender Member since:
2005-08-18

Because the same is not true for free software....

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[2]: Comment by stabbyjones
by tidux on Sat 15th Sep 2012 12:56 in reply to "RE: Comment by stabbyjones"
tidux Member since:
2011-08-13

Please, name one thing that would disappear if all software was legally required to respect the FSF's four freedoms. Malware? Nagware like mIRC? Ten thousand shitty 99 cent fart buttons? Software patents?

Reply Parent Score: 1

v RE: Comment by stabbyjones
by atsureki on Sat 15th Sep 2012 00:59 in reply to "Comment by stabbyjones"
The 90s never left
by thesunnyk on Mon 17th Sep 2012 00:40 in reply to "Comment by stabbyjones"
thesunnyk Member since:
2010-05-21

The nineties never left. While the plethora of Apache / BSD style licenses have made life much better for developers, at the level of consumers you really need the GPL to improve the situation, and you need the demand to really come from the consumer. For various reasons, the GPL is not so popular, while BSD style licenses have gained and maintain traction -- because developers demand that sort of thing but users don't.

This basically means that it's business as usual for companies, and despite the fact the Microsoft still run an all-proprietary stack, they have to work in this ecosystem. In the past this would've meant bewildered lashing out, but it is now far more calculated. Google have a far more open source stack, but they still use tricks to get hardware makers to dance to their tune (e.g. the Alibaba Android fork).

In any case, BSD-style software went from being something that blindsided companies to one that is now actively part of their "strategy", whatever that may entail (even if it means precluding use). Linux might be GPLed, but it sits in an ecosystem of BSD-style licenses. The situation will not improve until "customers" demand freedom.

Reply Parent Score: 2