2 Dec
2004
2 Dec
'04
7:36 p.m.
On Thu, 2004-12-02 at 23:47, Dave Robillard wrote:
On Thu, 2004-02-12 at 23:23 +0100, Marek Peteraj
wrote:
Me too. But it seems as if they wouldn't do themselves. That was my
point. I think that at some point it has become disrespectful for
companies to ignore linux. So i can't really understand people(oss users
or even oss developers) who try to defend the position of companies that
make their lives harder for no reason.
I'm just trying to point out that they should be more proud of their
work which if wasn't oss, could be:
1. a well marketed proprietary money-machine
2. valuable IP, treated as tradesecret and protected under the terms of
business law and IP law.
So it would be the same thing basically. And i really tried to clarify
why there should be no fear in providing opensource drivers, providing a
brief analysis and concrete examples. Seems that i completely failed in
what i was trying to achieve.
Better luck next time. ;)
I'd give it one more chance and post a 'rme - take action' letter to lad
and lau which would encourage people to go to the rme forum, tell them
that their using their hw, what kind of hw they have purchased and that
they would continue to do so in the future. But i fear that a lot of
people would just ignore it, thinking to themselves 'my vote doesn't
count, they will ignore it anyway, it's a waste of time, there's just 5
of us' or similar. I might be wrong. If somebody wants to encourage me
in doing this i'd be glad to do it. I'd also encourage to write polite
letters if that's what suits the majority here ;)
If we'd achieve a fairly large number - say 100, the consequences would
be either:
- RME reconsidering their decision
- raising interest of all the RME customers in linux audio, because
virtually everyone there is able to try it out on a "professional
level". Except the fireface users(minority still, since it's a new
device). which if successful, would most likely bring RME to reconsider
their postion anyway.
Which seems that it should be in our interest to do so. It's not much
effort anyway. If not, tell me, and i'll shut up. ;)
Marek
On Thu, 2004-12-02 at 21:02, Fons Adriaensen
wrote:
Marek! Come on.. I'm sure you're trying to prove some point, but
nothing good can possibly come from suggesting people switch their
projects over to a proprietary licensing scheme.
I, for one, greatly appreciate the contributions of the above to the
world of free audio software - regardless of what opinions they may (or
may not) have about proprietary hardware drivers in Linux. On Thu, Dec 02, 2004 at 05:56:03PM +0100, Esben
Stien wrote:
which in case of an opensource driver would be to change a code here and
there to make it work...
Alfons Adriaensen
<fons.adriaensen(a)alcatel.be> writes:
> For the same reasons, there would be no need to upgrade your Linux
> version, and you don't need driver updates. The current closed-source
> driver will still work in 5 years.
Now, you're twisting everything to fit a twisted view. Software is
changed much more often than hardware.
Yes. And you can't expect a manufacturer of a e.g. soundcard to update
all drivers each time you or any other customer decide to upgrade his
system. If *you* modify your system and thereby make an existing driver
useless, then it's up to *you* to find a solution, maybe by providing a
compatibility interface in your new system. You can't expect others to
pay for the consequences of your decisions. A manufacturer will adapt
to a new system if that is in his interest, otherwise not.
Paul, Jan, Fons, and others. I believe that you should switch your
software to proprietary and make a living out of it. Because in that
case your reasoning would be perfectly valid.
Marek