On Fri, 2004-05-21 at 00:36 +1000, Daniel Stonier wrote: > I for one appreciate that they do provide drivers for linux when linux > does > not figure in the mass market. They provide you with binary only software that has code whose only purpose is to restrict what you can do with your computer: MACROVISION They don't have to produce the drivers. Interested and capable developers only require information on how to talk to the hardware. > And since they are going out of their way to > do something they do not need to do to thrive as a business, then yes I > think > they do deserve some respect for that. Anyone who does a favour for you > when > they dont need to do it really does deserve some thanks. They're not doing you any favour, but that's still besides the point. They would spend far less resources by liberating info on how to talk to the hardware. > Sure it would be nice if it was open source, but it really is difficult to > jump on any bandwagon one way or another without knowing all the issues > regarding NVIDIA's business and legal position, it may simply be completely > impossible for them to survive as a business should they do so. It's very > rare > to find a business like RedHat which stands on those principles and > surivives. You're avoiding the issue. NVIDIA has already stated why they can't make the drivers free software: they have third party licensed software that they didn't do themselves. You're even giving them credit for something they don't do. Rui
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
