Kernel source -- CASE IN POINT (does anyone remember the original thread?)
Bryan J. Smith
b.j.smith at ieee.org
Tue Apr 18 17:43:26 UTC 2006
Arjan van de Ven <arjan at fenrus.demon.nl> wrote:
> no you made the assumption that I was blaming nvidia for not
> keeping the other driver uptodate. I was blaming having a binary
> driver at all (or I could even go as far as having an external
> other driver) for causing users not to report errors or even
> wanting to help fix things. Different beasts.
Okay, I stand clarified.
But here's the deal. Users expect it to work "out-of-the-box," so
most users _do_ report the issue.
But don't shoot nVidia for offering another avenue. In fact, was it
not Intel that did the same with the e100/e1000 drivers, before it
was GPL? I remember a lot of transmitter problems that were solved.
;->
Same issue. And nVidia is quickly moving GPL as fast as they can,
just like Intel did. It doesn't happen overnight.
There's also the added issue that _unlike_ Intel, nVidia is *NOT* the
800lbs. gorilla that can force everyone to buy _only_ their Intel
product. Let's remember that not everyone out there can act like
Intel and Microsoft in forcing Tawainese vendors to only use their
MAC+PHY combination.
In fact, using only Intel's single combination of a MAC+PHY is really
more of a side effect of a near-monopoly (Intel) without competition.
So don't shoot nVidia for not being "big enough" to do what Intel
forces everyone else to do. ;->
--
Bryan J. Smith Professional, Technical Annoyance
b.j.smith at ieee.org http://thebs413.blogspot.com
--------------------------------------------------
I'm a Democrat. No wait, I'm a Republican. Hmm,
it seems I'm just whatever someone disagrees with.
More information about the amd64-list
mailing list