[ Date Index ] [ Thread Index ] [ <= Previous by date / thread ] [ Next by date / thread => ]
On Thursday 07 December 2006 00:46, Neil Williams wrote: > Thereby lies the road to oblivion. Ben, you really ought to think > through what happens if there is no free alternative and proprietary is > all we have. > > By using non-free wireless networking drivers, you force those who > cannot access the non-free drivers to go without wireless. Say they > have the hardware pre-installed and they want to upgrade the OS - who > provides access to the updated non-free drivers? Isn't it obvious that > this provider has the user over a barrel? They can't upgrade the OS to > fix X security issue because they don't have the right access. It's > WRONG. > > My brother had a trivial example - his Lexmark printer worked fine with > Win98SE but when he had to upgrade to WinXP to fix problems with the > installation, WinXP refused to accept the printer because it was too > old for Lexmark to consider "certifying" it with XP. He could afford to > buy a new printer so that's what he did - my point is that it is WRONG > for any provider to force a user into such a situation. What happens to > another user who cannot afford or obtain a new printer? The printer > driver should have been free software so that someone else could have > tweaked the driver to work with the upgraded OS. It's about sharing. > I picked the above from Neils mail to illustrate what I consider to be the problem with the FSF type viewpoint. By using non-free software for a wireless driver, the user can at least get their wireless connection working in the first place. If they were limited to relying on free software only, there is a chance that they would be simply unable to use their connection - full stop. Yes, I would agree that it may be better - in an ideal world - to have a totally free system, but currently that is not always a choice for many users (the vast majority I suspect). Likewise the printer issue. No idea if the Lexmark is supported under Linux, but if it was supported only by a non-free driver supplied by Lexmark, then should the user be forced to dispose of the printer and buy a "GNU/Linux compatible" one? Because, lets face it, not many manufacturers even bother to inform us if their hardware is compatible with any other system than Windows. I am of a similar view to Ben - I want to be able to use my PC for a wide range of purposes. If that means I have to use non-free software to do so,then I do. Whilst I would love to see free software written to support my graphics card 3d acceleration or what have you, I need to use the system in the meantime. Once a viable free alternative is available, I shall use it - but I have no intention of crippling the functionality I require from my PC for the sake of "politics". Of course, each user of a system will have their own needs and views to which they are entitled. Mark -- The Mailing List for the Devon & Cornwall LUG http://mailman.dclug.org.uk/listinfo/list FAQ: http://www.dcglug.org.uk/linux_adm/list-faq.html