No, I think the message is: The FSF will recommend your hardware as long as it can be properly supported by free distros.
Whether you wrote the driver yourself, or someone else did this for you, is less important.
I don't think any significant number of users would use Linux on Radeon graphics hardware today, if AMD had done nothing. Those who did would have been stuck with xf86-video-avivo and functionality comparable to the gma500 driver (or Catalyst and old kernels/X servers). ATI presence was not particularly strong on Linux, so the interest to reverse engineer their hardware/drivers would have been limited.
And I believe (but don't have proof, so feel free to disagree) that your employer totally underestimates the importance of winning the minds of the Linux nerds, who are often relied on in hardware purchasing questions. Poor Linux drivers (and the Catalyst Linux driver is deficient in many aspects) would have hurt AMD's Windows sales too.
Whether you wrote the driver yourself, or someone else did this for you, is less important.
Originally posted by bridgman
View Post
And I believe (but don't have proof, so feel free to disagree) that your employer totally underestimates the importance of winning the minds of the Linux nerds, who are often relied on in hardware purchasing questions. Poor Linux drivers (and the Catalyst Linux driver is deficient in many aspects) would have hurt AMD's Windows sales too.
Comment