On Fri, 2004-06-04 at 21:57 +0800, Christopher Chan wrote: > What, may I ask, do the developers of Linux have to do with this? The > developers of Linux may get round to writing a driver they have specs > for. How am I ungrateful if there is nothing on which the developers can > work on and the company goes/has to go binary driver path? The devlopers of Linux, X, all GNU software and all the rest have to constantly cope with people whining "Linux" is not there. This doesn't work well. The proprietary drivers are good (and then when there is a compatibility problem the problem is always... from the Free Software). So that's your gratitude. As to the path the company followed... They don't have to follow it. They chose to do it. > Which planet do you live on? Like there is a lot of open hardware around > to pick from. I've done what I can as I am able/allowed to but I sure am > not turning down the only alternatives to non-existent 'open hardware' > and going around saying you should not buy/use them when there are no > alternatives. Oh, but then one comes here complaining about the 4K stack, about instability, 3 thousand posts asking how to get the binary driver when the only ones that can answer only say... "soon" (as NVIDIA has been answering). <sarcasm>This is surely much better than using Free Software drivers. Really!</sarcasm> *sigh* /me shuts up
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
