Re: Intel policy wrt OSS [was: Re: cvs.openbsd.org: src]
On Sat, 30.09.2006 at 12:43:00 +0200, Maxim Bourmistrov <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> Why don't ignore them and don't buy their products?
this is easier said than done.
> I have already a list of vendors I'm not buying products from anymore,
> like Adaptec.
I also have such a list which eg. includes D-Link.
Wasn't there a site that named no-go vendors? Is it feasible to have
such a site w/o being buried in cease-and-desist letters (and
> I'm also encouraging people to buy products from OpenSource-friendly
> vendors, like RaLink.
That's also what I do, but this doesn't extend well into corporate
usage where people often purchase quantities of higher-priced hardware
and then realize only afterwards that the stuff doesn't work correctly.
OTOH, they want some vendor who can "support" their products, not Joe's
Garage who might go bust the next week, or hit a roadside tree.
I already had such a case where the planned OpenBSD usage had to be
changed to Linux because of hardware support. In the future, if this
trend continues, this might mean only
some-corporate-non-open-linux-with-binaries (NVidia, Intel, ATI, IBM
and some others come to mind), not to speak of *BSD.
So, we still need to convince more vendors to do the right thing, and
support things like opencores.org or the F-CPU project, if possible.
> > These issues affects ALL open operating systems, tell Intel you want
> > them to change their policies, tell them you aren't happy. It's your
> > money why should they get to screw you around by not supporting their
> > products?