Conrad Knauer wrote: > There is no mystery (no "somehow") as to why NVIDIA drivers are > "rejected by the community"; they are closed-source. If you want to > argue that performance-ends justifies the licensing-means, then we > might as well all switch to Macs
This is like saying if you don't like the radio in your car, buy a different one. My system is open. My framework is open. I can hit all my hardware directly. And while I can not see inside the driver, I can also not see inside the BIOS, and the other chips on the video card and... There is a lot of "software" in every system that we can see totally. So you have to draw a line somewhere. I draw mine in a slightly different place than you. But do not think that you are not also choosing to accept some closed source code. > ... Also, NVIDIA could choose to > open source their drivers if they wanted (note that ATI also refused > to do that, but then they got bought by AMD and the story began to > change). Really the question you should be asking is 'Why are there > companies who show good support for [Linux] drivers but somehow reject > the community's principles?' Because the driver includes licensed software that they can not give away. -- Microsoft has a majority market share https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1 You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is a direct subscriber. -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list [email protected] https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
