[lkml]   [2003]   [Nov]   [19]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: Announce: ndiswrapper

    Neil Brown wrote:

    >On Thursday November 20, wrote:
    >>You have to admit its good for end users though. And indirectly, what
    >>is good for them is good for us. Take the nvidia example: end users get
    >>either a binary driver or nothing. If we were somehow able to stop
    >>nvidia from distributing their binary driver, they would say "OK".
    >Is it good for end users? It allows them to buy a computer with an
    >nvidia graphics controller because "NVidia supply drivers", and then
    >discover that support is only as good as NVidia are willing to make
    >it. I'm still waiting for some sort of power management support for
    >the nvidia controller in my notebook. If the driver and the specs
    >were open, I could possibly do it myself. On the other hand if there
    >were no NVidia drivers, I never would have made the (arguable) mistake
    >of buying this notebook.

    I'm all for open specs, but in reality that doesn't always happen.
    (out of interest, are there any OS 3d drivers for any current cards?)

    I know what you mean, but I would find nvidia more at fault for not
    providing power management than no OS drivers.

    >Ofcourse we cannot and should not stop people from providing the
    >option of binary only drivers, but I'm not convinced that we should
    >acknowlege that people who provide binary-only drivers are doing a
    >useful service for anyone but themselves.

    No I wouldn't say that, I meant the Linux Kernel is doing the end users
    a favour by allowing binary modules.

    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to
    More majordomo info at
    Please read the FAQ at

     \ /
      Last update: 2005-03-22 13:58    [W:0.024 / U:56.172 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site