Mike McCarty wrote: >> The manufacturers accept such restrictions only because they know a >> binary-only distribution is acceptable, for example, in the Windows >> world. At the edges already Linux challenges this assumption (because >> the benefits using it brings outweigh the risk from loss of obfuscation >> of the code) and can bring about change. So it isn't enough to consider >> the situation as it is, one also needs to consider what Linux can make >> be by its policies towards closed source modules. >> >> I don't buy the story that certain classes of device can never have open >> source drivers regardless of all considerations. If Linux is desirable > > Who argued this? I haven't seen this argument. This is the explanation put forward by the binary-only wireless network companies, that regulatory requirements mean there can be no OSS wireless drivers because it would facilitate using the PLLs on the chip outside of the allowed frequencies for the countries it is sold in. There are many conflicting apologia why the manufacturer drivers for nVidia and ATI cards are binary, but usually patent licensing features, eg, http://www.linuxelectrons.com/article.php/20060108163615614 However if, for example, Windows suddenly required OSS drivers, there is no doubt these problems would just evaporate and source would be forthcoming in weeks since whatever is necessary to be able to continue to sell into where the volume is would be done. -Andy
Attachment:
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
