On 5/13/05, Daniel Phillips <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Friday 13 May 2005 03:37, Hugh Fisher wrote: > > On 05/13/2005 02:43:12 PM, Daniel Phillips wrote: > > > Did you ask him? I did not ask Keith about this specifically, but > > > I get > > > the impression the only reason he does not complain is that he is > > > resigned to the status quo. I will ask him about your specific > > > point, if you like. > > > > Sure, go ahead. But what matters is not whether Keith would like > > to see a completely free hardware design, but whether he and the > > other X developers would refuse to work on it if it isn't. > > Should I also ask whether the enthusiasm would be less for a > not-quite-open design?
Who cares? Which do you think is better? A design that you're enthusiastic about but can't get build? Or a design that you're slightly less enthusiastic about but have in your hand? No. If you want to convince me of something here, stop trying to tell me how great it would be to do something I already agree with, and start addressing specific problems that are holding it all up! > > > > Mike Harris on the other hand is quite vocal about the depressing > > > situation of closed 3D hardware. I will ask him your specific > > > question too, if you like. > > > > Sure, go ahead. But my question is NOT "do you want the hardware > > design to be completely free, unlike nVidia or ATI?", but "do you > > want the information needed by a DRI developer to be free, unlike > > nVidia or ATI?" > > And may I also ask "would you like the hardware to be fully hackable, if > you could get that, would it increase your enthusiasm?" Obviously, the answer would be "yes." How does that answer help anything? > > > I'm emailing from a box that runs on Linux, please do not call me a > > > zealot. > > > > Which rather proves my point. We all know what a disaster Linux > > has been because it runs on un-free CPU/disk controller/Ethernet > > chip designs, and how few people are willing to contribute to > > Linux because of that. > > It destroys your point, Hugh. If Linux were not _completely_ open, it > would not be running my machine right now. His point is that your MACHINE is not completely open. _______________________________________________ Open-graphics mailing list [email protected] http://lists.duskglow.com/mailman/listinfo/open-graphics List service provided by Duskglow Consulting, LLC (www.duskglow.com)
