Re: Hardware manufacturer lobbying
On Tue, Feb 02, 1999 at 11:51:06PM +0000, Dave Swegen wrote:
> As I mentioned in my mail I think it would be darned excellent if they
> would open up the specs to their old, obsolete hardware (ie V1 and Rush).
> AFAIKS they have nothing to lose and all to gain by doing this. If they did
> this it would set a great precedent for other companies. If you would like
> to work on reasons why they would want to do this get in touch and we'll
Umm this might give the impression that they have something to lose if
they give us newer specs as well.
> I firmly believe the model of binary-only drivers for the first 6-12
> months, followed by open specs should be acceptable to the vast
> majority of hardware vendors (at least on the graphics and sound
> side). Not the ideal solution, but better than nothing or binary
This is a bad solution, IMO. It will divide the Linux community, as
things such as KDE have done. Many of us are *not interested* in
non-free software, or at least want to limit our use of it. Using it
for critical drivers is a definite no. OTOH, there are people who
will get desperate for support for whatever hardwrae and use
> One idea I have had is to set up a hardware boycott site, which
> would basically list any companies which refuse to support linux in
> any way, shape or form (ie a blank NO to any question regarding
> drivers or specs). Not very subtle, but it would allow people to
> make an informed choice, and perhaps it would increase companies
> awareness of linux and other free OSs.
I used to run a linux incompatiblity list, which listed pieces of
hardware that weren't compatible with linux, and the reason, if any,
such as no driver, or the fact that the company wouldn't release
specs. This could be a useful and effective way of doing this. I
don't have a lot of time to do something like this right now, but if
you're interested, I could furnish further information.
David Welton http://www.efn.org/~davidw
Debian GNU/Linux - www.debian.org