Hi Mike,
> >Do you really think that M$ is right?
>
> I never said MS was right; you are extrapolating that from this
> discussion, which hasn't mentioned MS.
>
> To answer your question: No I don't, because what MS did was illegal
> (proven so in court, twice); they misused their monoply power
> (remember: in the US, it is *not* illegal to be a monoply; it is
> illegal to *misuse* the power you have as a result of being a
> monoply).
>
> What nVidia is doing is not illegal. There is no law that states they
> must issue source code, nor specifications.
>
> Now, if they took GPLed code and incorporated it into their closed
> source drivers, that might be an issue, since they would probably have
> to open the source code (since that's a provision you agree to, when
> you chose to use GPL code). However, that appears not to be the case.
Ok, I beg your pardon if you think that I put words in your mail.
You clearly showed agaisnt M$. However I'm not talking about M$ monopoly
issue, I'm talking about their policy of closed-software, which I see,
was the main instrument that they used, much more than the monopoly.
Who knows what's hidden in the windows code? Why did Netscape never work
fine with Windows, even having specs form M$? I could tell about the
story of the origin of MMX instructions from Intel, other day.
> You're only a hostage if they are no other options, or if the options
> available are not on a par with nVidia. Neither is true.
Ok, if you do not consider as a "ramson" the price paid for your
card I agree with you.
--
-----------------------
Alan Wilter S. da Silva
-----------------------
Laborat�rio de F�sica Biol�gica
Instituto de Biof�sica Carlos Chagas Filho
Universidade do Brasil/UFRJ
Rio de Janeiro, Brasil
Want to buy your Pack or Services from MandrakeSoft?
Go to http://www.mandrakestore.com
