Subject: Re: [linux-audio-user] (OSS vs. RME) vs. (OSS + RME) [slightly OT]
From: Lee Revell (rlrevell_AT_joe-job.com)
Date: Fri Dec 17 2004 - 22:50:18 EET
On Fri, 2004-12-17 at 09:10 -0500, Dave Robillard wrote:
> So, you want to make companies support open-source operating systems by
> turning those systems into proprietary operating systems? Well then
> they wouldn't be supporting open-source operating systems would they?
Oh, please. This is just handwaving, and I don't buy it at all. The
binary Nvidia driver doesn't seem to be "turning Linux into a
proprietary OS". Many of the kernel developers run it. Look at VIA and
Intel. They are releasing specs and open Linux drivers for most of
their new stuff. Just the other day Intel posted a driver for their
ICH6 HDA codec to alsa-devel, with a link to the data sheet. Within a
week the ALSA developers had rewritten the driver and merged it. And an
Nvidia engineer of all people has contributed many patches.
Given the choice between open and closed Linux drivers I believe the
overwhelming majority of vendors will choose the former. The rest we
should try to convince otherwise - it has worked in the past. But
giving vendors the closed driver option is _certainly_ not going to
destroy Linux or make it proprietary. If you are convinced like I am
that open source is fundamentally technically better than the
alternative then you should not be worried about it. Either the vendor
will wise up or someone else will eventually come along with an open
alternative.
If you make outrageous claims like "allowing binary drivers will destroy
Linux" then you really need overwhelming evidence to back it up.
Lee
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b28 : Fri Dec 17 2004 - 22:54:44 EET