Fedora - DELL ?

[Jim Cornette]

Les Mikesell wrote:
> Jim Cornette wrote:
> 
>>> An attitude that can only be shared by people who think writing 
>>> software is an end in itself, as opposed to the people who try to use 
>>> it to do something useful or combine software from different sources 
>>> for new capabilities.  And once again - that is exactly what is 
>>> keeping Microsoft rich.
>>
>> It is simple to get those who do not release the source code to live 
>> with a message that the kernel is tainted. 
> 
> You seem to have confused the suppliers and consumers in this statement. 
>  The users seeing the message have nothing to do with releasing source 
> code that they don't own.

The consumer should realize that any problems with the kernel might 
relate to the module which is not open sourced. The message should give 
them a reminder that something is out of tree on their system and may 
substitute an OSS module for the same hardware before consuming 
developers time with problems caused by the closed source kernel modules.
> 
>> You have no idea what the dilution will do for stability of a system.
> 
> Please explain then.  Keep in mind that I have windows machines that 
> haven't crashed in years with hardware that Linux doesn't support and 
> Macs with 3rd party drivers that are equally stable so I won't believe 
> it if you say that can't happen.

If the closed source provider keeps up with problems triggered by kernel 
progressions, it is possible to combine both successfully. I ran items 
that were in need of closed source items and realize some things will be 
closed source with no hope for OSS components.

> 
>> Linux and Microsoft are not close to their goals. Functionality is key 
>> for hardware issues in Linux.
> 
> Except that it doesn't work with a lot of hardware.  And the engineers 
> designing the hardware and writing the drivers for other OS versions are 
> probably the best qualified to write and maintain the Linux drivers too. 
> They probably would also be the most motivated if the driver interface 
> was stable so they didn't have to re-do it all the time.

I agree that the provider would be the best source for providing the 
best driver for their product. I do think that input from actual users 
and coders outside the provider could improve performance of drivers to 
a greater degree than closing up the source since Linux changes so 
frequently.

> 
>  > DRM is key for Microsoft in my opinion.
> 
> Microsoft thinks there is a demand for DRM so they provide it - it isn't 
> something useful on its own.  Personally I think that demand will go 
> away by itself except for rental-type distribution models when customers 
> realize how limiting it is and the content suppliers that thought it 
> would sell find out otherwise - and customers should ultimately decide 
> these things.
> 

I hope your ideal that the consumer will prevail and Windows will back 
off from such practices. A user should not be so limited in using their 
own computers.

>> Functionality due to license restrictions and proprietary code exists 
>> in Linux. This is not due to technical capabilities of the developers 
>> though and is more for lawyers.
> 
> The practical issue is not the omission of the functional parts with 
> legal restrictions, it is the fact that the GPL prohibits others from 
> obtaining the legal rights to distribute these missing parts, combining 
> them and offering a fully functional product.

This probably needs addressed so the items would be more distributable 
and less in need of legal council after some arbitrary solution is 
reached. I see this battle going on for a long time and without 
resolution though.

> 
>> Why BG is so rich  and I am not are different issues. I do not feel it 
>> is because of technical innovation but due to strategies not 
>> straightforward.
> 
> The GPL has the opposite strategy.  It not only can't succeed in 
> providing anything that already has different distribution restrictions, 
> it prevents itself from being combined with such things.  So Microsoft 
> wins by default.
> 

I have no idea as to this issue. I just recall Netscape, WordPerfect, 
Stacker, Apple, PC tools and a host of other providers where their 
products were either absorbed or their market was eaten up Free 
alternatives that were introduced onto the market.
Of course their practice did help out by pushing Netscape and StarOffice 
into the open source market. Maybe the treats from greed will push more 
projects toward open source.

Jim


-- 
Humor in the Court:
Q: ...any suggestions as to what prevented this from being a murder trial
    instead of an attempted murder trial?
A: The victim lived.