Slashdot Mirror
More on OpenBSD 3.7 Release
putko writes "As previously reported, OpenBSD 3.7 is released. Here's some interviews with the people behind the release about the new features, including information about which companies are complying with requests for documentation and permission to freely distribute required firmware, and which are not. Ralink Tech and Realtek 'GOOD,'Intel 'BAD.'
The next time I build/buy a wireless product, I'll want Realtek or Ralink Tech inside -- because getting software to work with it will be easier. Ralink Tech and Realtek are Taiwanese, by the way."
Really, the problem is that Broadcom makes the most common 11g chipset, and they don't provide squat.
"An employee suggested to me that we load 3.7 on a few machines here as an evaluation. [...] I made the employee uninstall 3.7 from the machines and lets just say he's not with us anymore."
You kicked an employee out because an evaluation that he suggested didn't work out? That is, pardon my French, completely fucked. The whole reason you do evaluations is so that you don't end up in a position where new products put people's job on the line.
Apart from anything else, from now on if an employee suddenly discovers a product that at a stroke will double productivity, halve costs and save small kittens from drowning, do you think they're going to tell you about it? No, they're going to hide behind conformity, in the hope that that way they'll keep their jobs.
Congrats, you've singlehandedly halted improvement of your company's computing infrastructure. I'm sure it'll mean far less trouble for you, right up to the point where an innovative competitor buys you up and fires everyone.
For the love of God, please learn to spell "ridiculous"!!!
But an unreadable driver isn't as good, as that means that other people (such as BSD users) are left standing in the rain, even though they also pay for their hardware, and should be able to use it the way *they* see fit.
Documentation, that actually *tells* you how to program the hardware right, is much more valuable. Also, Linux drivers don't exactly have a reputation for great stability and readability, which is all the more reason to allow the BSD people to write their own, cleanly documented drivers.
The trade secret issue appears like utter nonsense to me. Since when are Intel's chips sooo f***ing great that opening documentation for them would give any competitor valuable information they couldn't already extract by reverse-engineering? On the contrary, those competitors have their own chips, and are constantly improving them. I don't think they'd have much to gain from an Intel chip.
The same argument also applied to graphics cards. I doubt that ATi could steal valuable information for their graphics cards by looking at an NVidia doc-sheet. After all, they use totally different architectures in their cards, and the new chips they are working on have been in the planning for years, so that information on the competitor's previous-generation chip won't do any good anyway.
It still costs very little to supply the information necessary to create a driver. According to the interview, they came up with a wireless driver within a week of getting specs. It is rough and work is ongoing but there is an OpenBSD Ralink driver now. There is little good reason to slather secret sauce over this information. The FOSS kernel projects are perfectly capable of developing their own drivers given a few sheets of info that costs little to provide.
Don't bitch about cheap fucks when the very license of the software encourages mass raping on a financial and IP scale.
What you don't seem to realize is that if the license says "hey, take this and do whatever you want" then it's not raping -- it's encouraged. Just because you think they should behave in a certain way doesn't mean they're obligated to, nor do the developers expect them to. Otherwise, the developers would have released the code under a different license. Now go read the GPL three times and say five hail Stallmans.
Want to improve your Karma? Instead of "Post Anonymously", try the "Post Humously" option.
There is an open source project which is developing the ralink drivers further, see http://rt2x00.serialmonkey.com/wiki/index.php/Main _Page. And yes, the driver works on 2.6 too, although it's not merged.
I recently bought an A-link WL54H PCI card (about 30 EUR), which has the rt2500 chip. See http://ralink.rapla.net/ for a big list of devices with the rt2500 chip.
Except that there are some of us who do not use OpenBSD but consider it as probably the best indicator of hardware quality and the quality of what the support will be for Linux and even Windows. Even to the point of using OpenBSD support as a litmus test for Windows hardware.
Put it this way. If the hardware gives OpenBSD troubles, how much do you want to risk that the troubles affect ONLY OpenBSD? Conversely, if OpenBSD has no troubles supporting the hardware, any troubles elsewhere are at least fixable. OpenBSD may be a small niche, but it is a niche that carries a lot more weight than its numbers would suggest.
Depends who you buy from and if they want to increase sales. In many cases, if they don't have drivers on the CD-ROM, they're sometimes downloadable from the manufacturer's web site. If the manufacturer hasn't made a driver, a Google search on the product code can often turn one up.
Many of the hardware pieces I've bought recently have had a little Tux symbol on the box indicating they are Linux friendly. Guess who I'll be going back to next time.
IMO they are simply doing Linux work as a lever against MS. If the Linux folks are content with the status of the drivers as is, there is no need to change things. OpenBSD folks care more about openness and good licensing then Linux folks.