On 2013-05-01 03:09, [email protected] wrote: > so in term of suggesting / promoting non-free devices you Silicon Dust > devices are not "better" than using a TV adapter which relies on a > firmware blob.
I believe they are much better, yes. They give unlimited access to unencrypted streams in programmatic ways in addition to exposing the hardware to free open source drivers and software without touching the OS. They have achieved an abstraction layer that I consider a good design. Perfect, and compliant with my ethics and freedom objectives, no. I made that clear in several ways in my posts. Have you asked them to license their firmware freely? That is what came up after the discussion on this thread. I don't have timne to pursue this. Chris or someone else could strike a deal and work with them like he did with QCA, I previously discussed this device with him - I doubt there is market for it just by seing the negative comments about pricing on the USB wifi device that just came out. I think it's a smart business decision to wait. > Not to sound offensive but such a list is useless since most likely 90 > to 95% of the consumer devices available rely on firmware files. Actually that would be 100%. The HD Homerun device doesn't rely on firmware files on your PC, it already has them onboard. As such your system can be considered almost free (BIOS?..). Your use of "most likely" while citing statistics without sources is not useful, on the other hand. Please don't do that. > Devices without relying on blobs are like the needle in the haystack ;) > ...but I guess that is something which Chris could tell us more on his > search for a blob-free device. Please don't GUESS - ask him directly, or do the search yourself and report back here. F. -- Fabián Rodríguez http://fsf.magicfab.ca
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
