[ Date Index ] [ Thread Index ] [ <= Previous by date / thread ] [ Next by date / thread => ]
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Neil Williams wrote: >Maybe we overestimate the actual number of GNU/Linux users out there - the >vast majority of Epson printers are connected to a Windows machine. That's only because the vast majority of *machines* are Windows machines. I'd be interested to know what make of printer (for example) is most common within Linux. >My point is that if those people with specific problematic hardware do not at >least contribute to the data set of the free software tool for that hardware, >that hardware will never be supported. There are simply too many devices out >there and they change too often (thanks mainly to patents). Simple example of that. I sold my Radeon All In Wonder (the TV part refused to work in Linux and ATI ignored my emails asking for help). After researching on the web I found the Pinnacle DC10+ *allegedly* worked in Linux, so I spent about £100 on one, only to find Pinnacle changed the design to a proprietary chip. I was in contact with the developer *and* Pinnacle for at least a month or so. The developer was quite happy to help *IF* Pinnacle would give the specs required for the chip. They ignored all requests. In the end after realising I was banging my head against a brick wall I gave up. So, despite my best efforts to contribute and loyalty to Linux, all I got was a £100 hole in my pocket and a video capture card I can only use in Windows. You can see why after that I was happy to pay the small amount Turbo-Print asked for, in order to get something that actually *works*. Don't forget that without Turbo-Print I would have another piece of hardware that only works properly in Windows. If I hit three then chances are that Linux would (regretfully) come off the system. Ethics and an ideology are fine in theory, but I don't see the point of being a martyr and denying myself the functionality of equipment I have bought just to be a purist. It's partially thanks to the Turbo-Print team that I support Linux at all. Free software *is* the best solution (which is why I persevered with MADWifi rather than take the easy route of using ndiswrapper for Wifi), but in the absence of free I'll take proprietary in Linux over being forced back to Windows. >It's one thing using proprietary, it's another to deprive the free software >team of the data they would need to provide a free software solution. There's >obviously something different about this particular Epson - my Epson worked >fine. Depends what you do with it and what performance level you will settle for. This printer is capable of 5760dpi in full photographic mode, borderless printing up to A4 and printing on CDs. To the best of my knowledge it is being worked on, but as I've said before *in the interim* I need something that works. > That indicates missing data and the only practical way for the CUPS >developers to GET that data is for users of that printer to contribute that >data to CUPS. If they aren't using CUPS, they can't provide the data. Fair comment, although the CUPS team do seem to have the data as suggested by the fact they are making *some* progress. >The problem is that this money isn't actually supporting the free software >community, neither is the code. Forgive me, but is that saying I should pay the developers? >GNU/Linux needs to have wider hardware support, it needs to have more robust >and flexible drivers,configuration tools and hardware utilities - especially >for peripherals and embedded devices. Agreed completely. >Not my intention. I do think we need to ensure that everyone is aware of the >compromises involved and how the community could be missing out. Unfortunately although not your intention, that was how the comments came over, at least to me. 'My way or no way' is the quickest way to lose support. >Strangely enough, I've learnt the exact opposite. It doesn't have to drive >people away - that isn't my intention - it does need to make sure people >understand how and why things are this way and how things can actually be >improved. > >Proprietary is not a good solution to any GNU/Linux problem. The community >loses out and it takes longer than ever to achieve hardware support parity. Hardware OEMs are in business to make money. You could argue the valid point that X OEM could give all the technical data to the Linux community, drop driver/module development entirely and then save all their development costs. The Linux community would use the data to produce working solutions for Linux. Come to think of it they'd also save whatever money they pay Microsoft for the privilege of getting the data from them they need to write the drivers. The problem with that is that the majority of hardware sales go to Windows users. Windows is closed (despite the best efforts of the EU thus far), so the OEMs spend all their time and effort on pleasing the majority of their customers. If MS were forced to open their source then the Windows *and* Linux communities would benefit because there would be less justification for the hardware drivers to remain closed. Until that happy state of affairs anyone using equipment where Linux has not caught up yet, or the OEM refuses to cooperate (such as Pinnacle) has two choices; stick to Windows, or use a proprietary interim solution until Linux catches up. OK there's a third option, spend money pursuing freedom to buy equipment that does work in Linux, but isn't that playing into the hands of the hardware OEMs? They don't get badgered to release the information, so they ignore the issue. > >GNU/Linux can have hardware parity with Windows (albeit with a time delay on >new products) but only if someone contributes the data from each type of >hardware. Only if that information is available. In the DC10+ example above it isn't. With the best will in the world I can't supply information I don't have, and nor can anyone else. >Any frustration that may give the impression of a rant is down to the >frustrations and problems of getting opaque hardware to work with free >software. I sympathise. I'd much rather use MythTV or a.n.other piece of Linux software, and a working capture card in Linux than dual boot with XP all the time, however unless I fork out for *another* capture card, that's not going to happen. >If that money went to further free software development it wouldn't be a >problem. Instead, CUPS is losing out. Simple question, how do you suggest 'that money [goes] to further free software development'? Do I send a cheque to the CUPS development team? Kind regards, Julian -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFERNpGjs/5IBdCO1ERArb2AJ9jN18IvYx/59cjY+eh19UbxdKv7QCfWQ6b heT8et+VXbusb+fzp5MnNzI= =w+x/ -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- - The Mailing List for the Devon & Cornwall LUG Mail majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with "unsubscribe list" in the message body to unsubscribe. FAQ: www.dcglug.org.uk/linux_adm/list-faq.html