- Site menu:
- Latest Discussions
- Latest Newswire
- Archives
- Submit Story
- Story HOWTO
- Syndicate
- E-mail Alerts
Linspire CEO on opening up CNR: share the bread
|
|
|
Comments (35)
15 earlier comments in the full thread.
bigg,
What specifically do you fear? I read his blog occasionally and haven't noticed anything all that strange..... I have been taking part in the Ubuntu community via the forum for quite a while and my sense is that if Mark pulled a stunt a large number of long term community members would jump ship. I know I would. Since the community is the real strength of Ubuntu not Mark's big bucks my guess is he won't.
What specifically do you fear? I read his blog occasionally and haven't noticed anything all that strange..... I have been taking part in the Ubuntu community via the forum for quite a while and my sense is that if Mark pulled a stunt a large number of long term community members would jump ship. I know I would. Since the community is the real strength of Ubuntu not Mark's big bucks my guess is he won't.
> Since the community is the real strength of Ubuntu not Mark's big bucks my guess is he won't.
Yes, but Mark is the kind of guy that leaps before he thinks. C.f. the posting to the Novell mailing list.
Yes, but Mark is the kind of guy that leaps before he thinks. C.f. the posting to the Novell mailing list.
> the kind of guy that leaps before he thinks
Mark is, before all else, an entrepreneur, with all that implies. Not saying that is entirely bad, but it doesn't inspire much trust for me. Most extreme worst case, you can end up with the Gates foundation ;-).
Mark is, before all else, an entrepreneur, with all that implies. Not saying that is entirely bad, but it doesn't inspire much trust for me. Most extreme worst case, you can end up with the Gates foundation ;-).
It would be possible for him to pay nvidia for drivers for the latest video cards. They would be available only to Ubuntu users, with the message being that proprietary drivers for one distribution is better than nothing.
I don't think I have any special insights. It's not appropriate for me to make unfounded statements about him. It's just that his position on proprietary drivers and software + the parts of the CNR service that are not fully open + his desire to see other distributions disappear raise flags in my head.
I agree that some individuals, myself included and perhaps you as well, would leave the community. Given the focus on bug #1 within the community, and the obsession with beating Microsoft rather than the availability of free software, I am skeptical that anything he does short of a merger with Microsoft would get a reaction out of most of the community. Red flags go up when we get into all the proprietary stuff, that's all I'm saying.
I don't think I have any special insights. It's not appropriate for me to make unfounded statements about him. It's just that his position on proprietary drivers and software + the parts of the CNR service that are not fully open + his desire to see other distributions disappear raise flags in my head.
I agree that some individuals, myself included and perhaps you as well, would leave the community. Given the focus on bug #1 within the community, and the obsession with beating Microsoft rather than the availability of free software, I am skeptical that anything he does short of a merger with Microsoft would get a reaction out of most of the community. Red flags go up when we get into all the proprietary stuff, that's all I'm saying.
> Given the focus on bug #1 within the community, and the obsession with beating Microsoft rather than the availability of free software, I am skeptical that anything he does short of a merger with Microsoft would get a reaction out of most of the community. Red flags go up when we get into all the proprietary stuff, that's all I'm saying.
That's my take on it, too. Lots and lots of verbiage on the wonderfulness of proprietary crud, no talk about libre software.
That's my take on it, too. Lots and lots of verbiage on the wonderfulness of proprietary crud, no talk about libre software.
bigg:
> It would be possible for him to pay nvidia for drivers for the latest video cards.
Laughably. Ridiculous. Speculation. Yes, he could do that, but there's no good reason why he should.
>the parts of the CNR service that are not fully open Fair enough, but how is that Mark Shuttleworth's fault? I thought it was Linspire who came up with that and not Ubuntu.
> his position on proprietary drivers and software I've been reading planet ubuntu for months now and, apart from his rather pragmatic view on drivers, I have yet to find a statement that confirms Shuttleworth actually advocates non-free software. If he did, why did he ever start a free software project in the first place, huh? Fair enough, I don't particularly like his position on non-free drivers, either. Otoh, he's not the first one who takes a distro in that direction. Strange enough the outcry is so loud now.
> his desire to see other distributions disappear raise flags in my head Really, where and when did he say that? Quotes, please.
I don't mind you criticising Mark Shuttleworth. However, don't expect others to believe in your statements unless you actually can back them up solidly.
>the parts of the CNR service that are not fully open Fair enough, but how is that Mark Shuttleworth's fault? I thought it was Linspire who came up with that and not Ubuntu.
> his position on proprietary drivers and software I've been reading planet ubuntu for months now and, apart from his rather pragmatic view on drivers, I have yet to find a statement that confirms Shuttleworth actually advocates non-free software. If he did, why did he ever start a free software project in the first place, huh? Fair enough, I don't particularly like his position on non-free drivers, either. Otoh, he's not the first one who takes a distro in that direction. Strange enough the outcry is so loud now.
> his desire to see other distributions disappear raise flags in my head Really, where and when did he say that? Quotes, please.
I don't mind you criticising Mark Shuttleworth. However, don't expect others to believe in your statements unless you actually can back them up solidly.
Quoting:Otoh, he's not the first one who takes a distro in that direction.
But he's the first person to do so while claiming it is still 100% free software (except for the odd binary driver that is *essential*). 3D drivers are *not* essential for a functional desktop.
That said, the Feisty beta's still don't ship with the drivers and the accelerated-x spec that covers their default installation still hasn't been approved. See [url=https://blueprints.launchpad.net/ubuntu/ spec/accelerated-x]https://blueprints.launchpad.net/ubuntu/ spec/accelerated-x[/url]
I don't mind Ubuntu shipping non-free non-essential drivers (it would be a waste though). I mind them trying to pass it off as essential and claiming to be a free distro.
incinerator,
Sums up my impression and opinion on this as well.
sander,
According to the discussion on the Ubuntu development list there is a plan being kicked around to allow a simple choice on installation whether you want the proprietary drivers or not.
Sums up my impression and opinion on this as well.
sander,
According to the discussion on the Ubuntu development list there is a plan being kicked around to allow a simple choice on installation whether you want the proprietary drivers or not.
That's what most people commenting on the spec at the Ubuntu Blueprint wiki have said as well.
IMHO it would be even better to do it after the installation. Just install free by default, non-free for the very rare device that doesn't work at all with free drivers (some embedded ATI on laptops IIRC). Activate 3D if the free driver supports it.
Then, add an option somewhere under system >> preferences that allows you to toggle 3D effects on and off. If you toggle it on but your free driver doesn't support it, the driver education package kicks in telling you about the problem with non-free drivers. Below that two buttons:
1) Install closed drivers anyway and activate 3D effects 2) No thanks. I'd like to stay free and 2D
Popping the question at install-time means that people will still have trouble switching back-and-forth later on.
IMHO it would be even better to do it after the installation. Just install free by default, non-free for the very rare device that doesn't work at all with free drivers (some embedded ATI on laptops IIRC). Activate 3D if the free driver supports it.
Then, add an option somewhere under system >> preferences that allows you to toggle 3D effects on and off. If you toggle it on but your free driver doesn't support it, the driver education package kicks in telling you about the problem with non-free drivers. Below that two buttons:
1) Install closed drivers anyway and activate 3D effects 2) No thanks. I'd like to stay free and 2D
Popping the question at install-time means that people will still have trouble switching back-and-forth later on.
Sander,
I would agree with that. One other issue that came up on the list was that for quite some time Ubuntu has installed proprietary wireless network drivers as there has been really no alternative...
I'm not really up to the list, but weren't those binary firmware blobs (i.e. a blob that gets uploaded to the hardware) as opposed to kernel modules (that are linked to the kernel)? That's a big difference from the kernel's point of view. The former is just merely some data that's uploaded to a device. The later is a module sitting inside the kernel.
> Laughably. Ridiculous. Speculation. Yes, he could do that, but there's no good reason why he should.
Please define "no good reason". If his goal is market share, that is a very good reason. I don't understand how that is Laughably. Ridiculous. If you have not yet noticed, he wants to install binary drivers *by default* because that is the pragmatic thing to do.
My response: ?.
> don't expect others to believe in your statements unless you actually can back them up solidly.
Here's a good link for you:
http://www.m-w.com/
I'll even throw in a couple freebies.
Main Entry: spec·u·la·tive 1 : involving, based on, or constituting intellectual speculation; also : theoretical rather than demonstrable 2 : marked by questioning curiosity
Thus, when someone writes that something is speculative, it's not a good idea to respond by asking for a rigorous proof. You obviously have a warm love for Mark Shuttleworth. Nonetheless, you offered no reason why what I said can't happen. It would be legal, profitable, and very much acceptable to the "pragmatic" users.
Main Entry: red flag 1 : a warning signal
Now, when I talked about red flags, I didn't mean anything about a physical object. I don't have pictures on my blog or anything like that.
> pragmatic view on drivers
Okay, because he prefaces his actions by calling them pragmatic, that makes them right and good for Linux. Keep in mind the implications of using this term. It means not using proprietary software is impractical. It might also be called short-sighted, lazy, or unwilling to sacrifice. I do use proprietary software. I just don't claim to be holier than those who use only free software. I would never claim that RMS is hurting Linux because he doesn't use Flash.
Please define "no good reason". If his goal is market share, that is a very good reason. I don't understand how that is Laughably. Ridiculous. If you have not yet noticed, he wants to install binary drivers *by default* because that is the pragmatic thing to do.
My response: ?.
> don't expect others to believe in your statements unless you actually can back them up solidly.
Here's a good link for you:
http://www.m-w.com/
I'll even throw in a couple freebies.
Main Entry: spec·u·la·tive 1 : involving, based on, or constituting intellectual speculation; also : theoretical rather than demonstrable 2 : marked by questioning curiosity
Thus, when someone writes that something is speculative, it's not a good idea to respond by asking for a rigorous proof. You obviously have a warm love for Mark Shuttleworth. Nonetheless, you offered no reason why what I said can't happen. It would be legal, profitable, and very much acceptable to the "pragmatic" users.
Main Entry: red flag 1 : a warning signal
Now, when I talked about red flags, I didn't mean anything about a physical object. I don't have pictures on my blog or anything like that.
> pragmatic view on drivers
Okay, because he prefaces his actions by calling them pragmatic, that makes them right and good for Linux. Keep in mind the implications of using this term. It means not using proprietary software is impractical. It might also be called short-sighted, lazy, or unwilling to sacrifice. I do use proprietary software. I just don't claim to be holier than those who use only free software. I would never claim that RMS is hurting Linux because he doesn't use Flash.
Free software is pragmatic. Giving in to proprietary crud is expedient.
Thanks for that clarification, TC. I was about to point that out myself. We would not have Free Software if it was not pragmatic. The distinction is important.
sander,
As far as I understand it if you use an atheros based wifi card you need to use the madwifi wireless kernel driver. A component at least of this driver is covered by a proprietary license from Atheros. There are other examples too. Here is a good list of licenses courtesy of Freespire:
http://wiki.freespire.org/index.php/Summary_of_Proprietary_C...
As far as I understand it if you use an atheros based wifi card you need to use the madwifi wireless kernel driver. A component at least of this driver is covered by a proprietary license from Atheros. There are other examples too. Here is a good list of licenses courtesy of Freespire:
http://wiki.freespire.org/index.php/Summary_of_Proprietary_C...
The MadWiFi Atheros drivers include a binary kernel blob that supposedly is required to meet FCC rules about preventing users from changing the radio card's frequences. Intel uses a userspace daemon, Ralink and Realtek handle it in firmware. Kerneltrap has given this good coverage:
http://kerneltrap.org/node/6650 http://kerneltrap.org/node/4118
There is a reverse-engineered FOSS thingy to replace the Atheros binary blob, but I don't know if it's ready for prime-time.
BTW, ndiswrapper is not the same as running native Linux wireless drivers. Seems like a lot of folks think it is. ndiswrapper is a nasty kludge to use Windows drivers on a Linux box.
http://kerneltrap.org/node/6650 http://kerneltrap.org/node/4118
There is a reverse-engineered FOSS thingy to replace the Atheros binary blob, but I don't know if it's ready for prime-time.
BTW, ndiswrapper is not the same as running native Linux wireless drivers. Seems like a lot of folks think it is. ndiswrapper is a nasty kludge to use Windows drivers on a Linux box.
Thanks for the links tc. Your description of the madwifi situation accords with what I have read. My laptop uses that driver.
I use the Wistron CM9, which is Atheros 5213, to build nice stout Linux-based wireless access points. Prism chips can also be used in master mode, but Intersil is totally non-supportive of Linux, so fie on 'em. The only reason the Prism54 project exists is the devs are reverse-engineering fiends. :)
The binary kernel blob thingy is troubling, not only because it sounds like a dumb excuse, but because any problems in the blob can panic the kernel. A firmware or userspace flaw just means the device won't work. But at the moment Atheros seems the best option. MadWiFi + Hostapd + WPA2 + wpasupplicant = nice fast secure WLAN.
I've used both Realtek and Ralink-based cards on Linux wireless clients, and they work fine.
The binary kernel blob thingy is troubling, not only because it sounds like a dumb excuse, but because any problems in the blob can panic the kernel. A firmware or userspace flaw just means the device won't work. But at the moment Atheros seems the best option. MadWiFi + Hostapd + WPA2 + wpasupplicant = nice fast secure WLAN.
I've used both Realtek and Ralink-based cards on Linux wireless clients, and they work fine.
> The binary kernel blob thingy is troubling, not only because it sounds like a dumb excuse, but because any problems in the blob can panic the kernel.
Tell me about it. I have a nasty complete freeze every 2-3 weeks.
Tell me about it. I have a nasty complete freeze every 2-3 weeks.
Post a comment
A free account is needed to post. Write your comment here first: your text is kept in this browser while you sign up or log in, and is waiting for you when you come back.
Your message:Markdown: **bold**, *italic*, [text](https://link), - lists, > quotes, $x^2$ for math. Formatting help
Sign up and post (it is free) or Log in and post
Unfortunately, you're not the first one make that speculation... Not by a long shot.