Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 21 to 28 of 28

Thread: An Open-Source Intel GMA 500 Driver Appears

  1. #21
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    19

    Default insights

    Quote Originally Posted by pingufunkybeat View Post
    The vast majority of users DO have a working solution -- they use Windows with Windows closed drivers.

    It's the Linux users who do not have a working solution -- the reason for this is that some hardware manufacturers hate open source and hate Linux as a result. This is why we need open drivers, instead of hoping that Linux-haters will give us a working driver if we promise to abandon open source.
    mm it's a leeetle more complex than that in the case of the "upcoming" embedded GPUs, with their proprietary software, they are not only coping with a meteoric rise to fame from tens-to-hundreds of $100k licensees as customers suddenly into the limelight, but also with the feature of being ground into the bedrock of a patent lawsuit landslide from the "big boys", ATI, NVidia etc.

    add to that the fact that, for example in imgtec's case, that they have quite a significant SDK, which emphasises "how proud they are" of the "worthiness" of their GPU, and how, if you use that SDK, you can "get the most out of it", it's a real uphill battle that can (and has) sometimes only be broken by reverse-engineering efforts.

    this is a _really_ useful presentation to read, btw:
    https://wiki.linaro.org/ChristianRei...u-lca-2011.pdf

    but - really: regarding the rest of what you wrote (about how everyone else has "working" stuff and gnu/linux users "don't"), i think it's basically down to a combination of intelligence and integrity.

    intelligent people have the ability to live with gnu/linux quirks, but an intelligent person with no integrity will soon choose convenience over the ethical implications of what (for example) dr richard stallman writes at in his own unique way. the intelligent person, willing to stick to their chosen level of integrity, will go *out of their way* to research and purchase compatible hardware, or will simply live without the "features" or "benefits". period.

    technology and convenience is _not_ as important as principles, to these people. these are the people who view proprietary software in the same way that slavery is viewed, and child labour in life-threatening conditions and so on. once you've made that kind of intelligent and ethical connection, it's not a line you cross.

    a person with integrity but lacking the intelligence to cope with linux will either drive themselves nuts or drive other people nuts, or will get a mac as a compromise, until their intelligent integrous friend tells them about how apple bare-face rips off macs and runs cartelling iRings around their iWondrous iProducts.

    let's not describe the case with people that have no integrity and no intelligence.

  2. #22
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Posts
    23

    Default

    What I meant in the first place, is that the priority for most linux users is having a good acceleration, a lot of people are happy with nvidia and catalyst drivers, I would also prefer a open driver, but the thing I disagree about is that michael said that we all need open-source drivers, out of all computer users 1 or 2 % care about having a open-source OS, of that people, 90% cares more about the driver being good, rather than being open, so what most users need is a good driver be it open or not, so I disagreed with the asumption of "open-source driver is what is needed to please users", because I think that good drivers are needed to please that 90% of users and open-source is needed for the other 10%

  3. #23
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    319

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by damipereira View Post
    What I meant in the first place, is that the priority for most linux users is having a good acceleration, a lot of people are happy with nvidia and catalyst drivers, I would also prefer a open driver, but the thing I disagree about is that michael said that we all need open-source drivers, out of all computer users 1 or 2 % care about having a open-source OS, of that people, 90% cares more about the driver being good, rather than being open, so what most users need is a good driver be it open or not, so I disagreed with the asumption of "open-source driver is what is needed to please users", because I think that good drivers are needed to please that 90% of users and open-source is needed for the other 10%
    you aren't running an open-source OS if you include a large binary blob into it to run a piece of hardware.

  4. #24
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    somewhere at the edge of the Milky Way
    Posts
    98

    Lightbulb

    Quote Originally Posted by airlied View Post
    you aren't running an open-source OS if you include a large binary blob into it to run a piece of hardware.
    Exactly. Unfortunately, many people still don't get it because they just don't care - that's like being so hungry that they no longer care what their food is made of. In other words, way too many people are still used to adding unknown (possibly even lethal) ingredients in their food just to make it taste a little better.
    The fact that something is considered acceptable by the majority doesn't make it right, because that would be like saying "drinking poison is fine because most people do".

  5. #25
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    2,932

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by damipereira View Post
    What I meant in the first place, is that the priority for most linux users is having a good acceleration, a lot of people are happy with nvidia and catalyst drivers, I would also prefer a open driver, but the thing I disagree about is that michael said that we all need open-source drivers, out of all computer users 1 or 2 % care about having a open-source OS, of that people, 90% cares more about the driver being good, rather than being open, so what most users need is a good driver be it open or not, so I disagreed with the asumption of "open-source driver is what is needed to please users", because I think that good drivers are needed to please that 90% of users and open-source is needed for the other 10%
    where do you get these numbers from?

    Sure, there are Linux users who do not care, but I've never met one who wouldn't prefer an open driver to a closed one.

  6. #26
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    271

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by airlied View Post
    you aren't running an open-source OS if you include a large binary blob into it to run a piece of hardware.
    Huh. Hope none of your devices require firmware blobs, like every wireless card that exists.

  7. #27
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    319

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by locovaca View Post
    Huh. Hope none of your devices require firmware blobs, like every wireless card that exists.
    Huh never learned to read?

    I said linked into the kernel, all the other firmware runs on the device, devices have always had firmware, even the 3c590 network card had an arm in the chip, just back then they had ROMs.

  8. #28
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    271

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by airlied View Post
    Huh never learned to read?

    I said linked into the kernel, all the other firmware runs on the device, devices have always had firmware, even the 3c590 network card had an arm in the chip, just back then they had ROMs.
    No, actually, you never said "linked into the kernel". You said an Open Source OS, of which most distributions include a firmware loader and various version of firmware that are closed source blobs. Perhaps you meant to say linked into the kernel, but you did not say that.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •