[3366] in linux-net channel archive
Re: Binary Driver Issues
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Sean Utt)
Thu Jun 20 16:14:23 1996
Date: Thu, 20 Jun 1996 10:16:00 -0700 (PDT)
From: Sean Utt <sean@northwest.com>
To: linux-net@vger.rutgers.edu
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.3.91.960619102456.637I-100000@nerve.net>
On Wed, 19 Jun 1996, shaggenbunsenburner wrote:
> On Tue, 18 Jun 1996, Dennis wrote:
>
> > >I strongly belive companies which use Linux for a profit should give
> > >something back, this is one of the reasons for the GPL - prevent free software
> > >rape. In the example above the company has been able to use the kernel to
> >
> > What an idiot. How can you "steal" free software? So now your saying that
> > anyone that benefits financially from free software is stealing it? Thats the
>
> Dennis is right. We run our shell machine here on Linux, and we sell
> shell accounts on it. Does that mean we, too, are "raping" the FSF
> and/or Linus Torvalds? Okay, maybe we're just "pillaging"...
I also run an ISP using Linux, and host a web page and mailing list for
the portland (oregon) linux users group -- which I started even before I
started the ISP.
It may not always be obvious what a company is giving back by using Linux
to do real work in the real world. I also installed a web server for the
intranet at my previous job, and introduced Linux in an informal way to
the people there, and they in turn purchased a license for the Wingz
spreadsheet package for Linux because it ran faster on the 486 than on the
overloaded motorola 8800's they were using.
This was a very large company that sells a lot of software and hardware,
and does a lot of development. The many not use Linux themselves, but
many of the R&D people there are now using Linux at home, and this will
ultimately be a good thing for us.
The end result of this is that more people will use Linux to do real
work, and real play, and some of them will be able to contribute code,
some of them will give their employees time to develop for Linux so their
company can make better use of it, and some people will port programs
from other OS's to Linux because there are people who just plain use it,
and want programs.
If there are companies that make binary only releases that don't work
right, and they don't respond by fixing them, those companies will lose
out on a growing market segment. If a company makes a binary driver that
outperforms the available bundled-with-source driver/hardware
combination, and they are good at keeping the driver up to date, they
will do well, and more linux systems will be in use doing real work, and
all the benefits described above will continue to be reaped by us all.
Of course, I could be completely wrong.
sean
>
> > whole stupid point of it. Every one of you is "stealing" from Microsoft and
> > IBM by your definition, as you're using an operating system that you "didnt
> > spend a dime on" developing. Anyone who sells systems with linux installed
> > is in violation, because they're using the "free" software as bait to make money
> > on systems hardware.
>
> Well, this argument doesn't make much sense. Whoever runs DOS or Windows
> DID spend a lot more than a dime on it. The company spent the money
> developing, and then the people paid them back for that development. I
> agree with you on the free software issue, but MS/IBM/etc do NOT give
> away their software. The end users are, in one form or another, paying
> for the development of the software.
>
> > So you're saying that we should stop development of our ethernet bandwidth
> > limiter (now available for FreeBSD and BSD/OS) that all of the linux ISPs have
> > been asking for? Our current bandwidth limiter only acts on our hardware....
> > so it arguably fits your tiny mind's definitions.....but the ethernet
> > thing...well, do we have to manufacture a card now?
>
> You really have one of these things? And you're developing for Linux?
> Can you tell me where I can get some more info on this?
>
> I do see Dennis's point on not wanting to keep up with kernel-du-jour,
> and let me just add to what people have already said - If you don't like
> that policy, you don't have to do business with ET. That's your choice,
> but don't bitch about it here. I must ask one question of Dennis,
> however - Does ET plan to upgrade their driver to the 2.0 series kernel?
> It IS, ostensibly, a stable release. I'm not asking for a driver
> tomorrow, just a release schedule, if any.
>
> shag
>
> Judd Bourgeois | When we are planning for posterity,
> shagboy@thecia.net | we ought to remember that virtue is
> Finger for PGP key | not hereditary. Thomas Paine
>
>
>
>
>
