[ Date Index ] [ Thread Index ] [ <= Previous by date / thread ] [ Next by date / thread => ]
Quoting Mark Jose <kernowyon@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>: > 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 would avoid Lexmark like the plague. Although they have a driver development kit to assist developers write drivers they do not provide Linux drivers (either free or non-free). Add this to Lexmark charging the earth for ink cartridges and it starts to get expensive. HP and Epson seem to be much better supported. IIRC Canon are also a bit lacking on the support for some of the cheaper printers in the range. > 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". > I too run one or two non-free packages, mainly codecs to watch videos. I believe that surely to get people to consider Linux they should be able to do what they do on Windows otherwise they're less likely to switch. I had some feedback from one of the visitors to the Children In Need event, they said that their PC is much faster now since Ubuntu was installed. This was a default install of 6.06 from the CD. They're happy with Ubuntu and can now demonstrate it to their friends and family. This is one convertee from the MS monopoly. You know, while I think about it, hardware manufacturers must be bad if they don't release the instructions on how to build their hardware from scratch, and take KFC for instance, they are bad because they don't release the source for their special crispy coating that I oh so love. I'm going to stop eating KFC until they release the source for their crispy coating under a GPL licence. Rob > 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 > -- 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