On 7/5/07, Dieter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Motivation- Security problems with binary-only drivers
Got it.
> - Hardware not interesting to big companies Huh? Do you really want to tell big companies to go away? Perhaps some mutually beneficial arrangement can be found?
We're not saying that hardware isn't interesting to big companies. We're saying that the FOSS way opens up opportunities for smaller companies to produce hardware products that aren't as interesting to the bigger companies. How can we say this better? How about: - Little guy can implement risky, radical concepts
The future is likely to bring us CPUs and GPUs on the same die. AMD bought ATI, Intel is doing their own. Perhaps some FLOSS-friendly company with a CPU, like Sun or IBM, would be interested in OGP?
Possibly, but not so far. We've had a number of established companies contact us, and we've even expressed interest in altering our path (slightly) to accomodate them. Perhaps we're doing something wrong. The pattern has become that some companies are willing to work with us by giving us access to resources and such, but none want to fund us directly. Our idea is perhaps just too radical and risky-looking for them. As long as their money isn't on the line, they're interested.
> - Greater self-sufficiency for FOSS community Again, this seems to be promoting us-vs-them thinking.
Good point, although I do often feel animosity towards "evil big companies." How can we express the idea that we're trying to give the FOSS community some of their own open designs to work with without alienating the big guys? -- Timothy Normand Miller http://www.cse.ohio-state.edu/~millerti Open Graphics Project _______________________________________________ Open-graphics mailing list [email protected] http://lists.duskglow.com/mailman/listinfo/open-graphics List service provided by Duskglow Consulting, LLC (www.duskglow.com)
