[NTLUG:Discuss] CPU History

[terry]

Chris Cox wrote:

> David wrote:
>
>> I admit up front I have a rather absolutist, puritan attitude about
>> this point.  If I can't do "X" in the GPL/Free Software world, then I'm
>> just not interested in doing "X" at all.
>
>
> If it is a simple matter of doing "X", then Nvidia is an ideal
> choice since it has both free open drivers and full-on vendor
> supplied drivers.
>
> The fact that more an more vendors are supporting Linux is
> a testimony to its success.  If the only support was strictly
> in the "community", then I'd say that Linux was still a
> hobbiest OS.
>
> With that said, there is nothing wrong with not wanting to
> use boards (which btw, the hardware WAS NOT designed and built
> by the community... in case you missed that) without free
> open drivers.  Good news is that Nvidia has free open drivers.
>
> In fact, I believe the nv (free) driver supports the
> Rotate option, and I don't believe the commercial drivers
> support that.  So, sometimes free can have features that
> non-free drivers don't have.
>
> Another pro-point to free drivers, is that often times they
> can get around "software restrictions".  That is, a commercial
> vendor may have two boards and the only difference is a
> advisory locking "bit" which causes the driver to behave
> differently. The free drivers does not have to honor the bit
> (naturally causing some grief to the vendor... who doesn't
> care too much since most of their customers only run
> Windoze... but still the vendor will keep a watch to make
> sure it doesn't get out of hand, lest they be forced to
> support Linux with a closed source driver that honors
> the "bit").
>
> In the case of Nvidia, they chose to not expose enough
> information to allow folks to access the "advanced" features
> of their chipset.... thus preserving the "value" of their
> commercial drivers. However, unlike what most people would
> think... Nvidia chooses give away the driver (though closed
> source).  Nvidia is clearly VERY concerned that their
> competition would discover their "cheats" (it has to be
> something dirty and/or potentially damaging, Nvidia isn't
> a warehouse of absolutely unique tech knowledge after all).
> What Nvidia doesn't understand is that "joe" user doesn't
> care at all about Nvidia vs. Radeon, "joe", just buys what
> works the "fastest"... or just buys what is the "cheapest".
>
> Linux users are a bit different... we just want to buy
> something that WORKS.  Clearly having a vendor who supports
> Linux helps in the "just WORKS in Linux" department.
>
> The free drivers... for fun.  The commercially supported
> drivers... when it has to work.  Occasionally, there are
> feature differences that blur the lines of when you choose
> one or the other (apart from making the choice based
> on a purely ideological basis).
>
> My two cents,
> Chris

And a substantial two cents at that...  

It appears that the high end display adapter issue is getting a bit 
dicey for the discriminating Linux user and may also play a big part in 
the acceptance (or not) of Linux as a desktop platform for John Q. 
Public. The fact that Nvidia offers drivers for Linux tells me that they 
realize that we [Linux users] represent a potential market for their 
products and I consider that to be a good thing and a step forward for 
us, (and for them too for that matter).

As a Linux user I appreciate any form of Linux support from any hardware 
vendor and am wondering if the saying, "you shouldn't look a gift horse 
in the mouth," doesn't apply here.