Slashdot Mirror
'Razer Doesn't Care About Linux' (gnome.org)
An anonymous reader shares a blog post: Razer is a vendor that makes high-end gaming hardware, including laptops, keyboards and mice. I opened a ticket with Razor a few days ago asking them if they wanted to support the LVFS project by uploading firmware and sharing the firmware update protocol used. I offered to upstream any example code they could share under a free license, or to write the code from scratch given enough specifications to do so. This is something I've done for other vendors, and doesn't take long as most vendor firmware updaters all do the same kind of thing; there are only so many ways to send a few kb of data to USB devices. The fwupd project provides high-level code for accessing USB devices, so yet-another-update-protocol is no big deal. I explained all about the LVFS, and the benefits it provided to a userbase that is normally happy to vote using their wallet to get hardware that's supported on the OS of their choice. I just received this note on the ticket, which was escalated appropriately: "I have discussed your offer with the dedicated team and we are thankful for your enthusiasm and for your good idea. I am afraid I have also to let you know that at this moment in time our support for software is only focused on Windows and Mac." The post, written by Richard -- who has long been a maintainer of GNOME Software, PackageKit, GNOME Packagekit, points out that Razer executive Min-Liang Tan last year invited Linux enthusiasts to suggest ideas to help the company make the best notebook that supports Linux.
I would like to learn to read music this year, and welcome suggestions on how to do so, but I'm a bit busy this month, and my focus is not on that task at the moment.
I remember when it was first suggested that Unity3d be ported to Linux... the request garnered a large following on their requested features forum, and by all indications it seemed like it was never going to happen, but then about three years after the request had been proposed on their feature request website, it materialized. While it still hasn't evolved to the point of being an officially supported platform, it's still a welcome addition for doing unity development.
File under 'M' for 'Manic ranting'
Honestly none of them have to "support" Linux aside from coughing up some documentation. Sending an email to claim they don't have the man power to send an email is a pretty obnoxious way to lie about it.
Is this the same Razer that requires you create an account on their site just to use a mouse? If so who cares? This company is total shit anyway.
In other news, gaming gear company reliant for profits on people not circumventing it's proprietary registration tools, makes machines that work with the sorts of OS that the vast vast majority of Gamers actually use, and doesn't see advantage in making it easy to circumvent it's proprietary tools.
tl;dr: Ignoring this issue is not a good way to get repeat purchases and referrals from their core demographic.
Hilarious. Their core demographic is l33t gamerz. Very few (popular) AAA games live outside the Windows camp. Not just because you can't install the latest GTX 1080 cards in iMacs and Macbooks.
Exactly. They exist to sell hardware to people willing to pay for overpriced stuff (i.e., gamers, the new audiophool). Practically all of them run Windows and knows nothing else, and they probably get their sales from people who see their boxes at Best Buy, go "ooh shiny" and whip out their credit card.
Serving Linux might work if there's a sufficient business case for them to well, sell more hardware, but if the community does what it usually does and says just buy a Model M and be done with it for keyboards or buy a cheaper mouse rather than buying the overpriced stuff, well, that's something they'd rather do without.
That's the problem - the article was about an engineer doing an engineering solution, but the company didn't get the part where it would benefit them. Yadda yadda yadda software does this, blah blah blah. Nowhere does it say "Your hardware is awesome, and there a huge untapped market if you would sell it to Linux users but we need Linux software".
Most of it is pure business decisions - if you can make a cogent case that Linux would help them sell more of their stuff, enough to outweigh the risks and costs, then they'll do it.
It doesn't surprise me at all. PC Gaming is basically a Windows thing. Razer know that.
echo -e 'global _start\n _start:\n mov eax, 2\n int 80h\n jmp _start' > a.asm; nasm a.asm -f elf; ld a.o -o a;
6) Lennart Poettering
Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
You assume the docs exist. You assume the docs are in distributable form. You assume the docs are written in a readable manner. You assume the docs don't contain important secret stuff.
Just validating those assumptions takes up the time of skilled experienced staff that the companies have already committed to to delivering other work.
So are you willing to pay $200k to cover the cost, opportunity cost and losses due to disruption that diverting this resource would require?
Just that, you seem willing for the companies involved to incur those costs.
Linux (the OS not the kernel, as opposed to Android which is a different is with a Linux kernel) isn’t really setup for the consumer market. It works as a server OS and a workstation OS. But it never caught on for the general public.
This makes Linux a waste of resources for gaming companies.
Say 5% uses Linux at home. 85% of this group will be willing to use non-open source software. 50% of this group is interested in serious gaming. 25% of this group may be interested in their products...
For gaming it is a tough business model to be Linux friendly. Not impossible but it takes a lot of effort and resources for a small return.
It isn’t that Linux can’t do it, it is that not enough people are using it to make it with the effort.
Razor employees may love Linux. But they can not justify the expense in supporting it. And digging all the legal to make things open enough for the community to do something about it.
If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
Are you one of those developers who never write documentation?
Or how do you come to the idea that writing documentation (and dealing with questions) requires no man power?
Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
But Linux IS setup for the consumer market. Yes, I am talking about the OS, be it XFCE, Gnome, KDE or whatever you want to throw at it. What it is not ready for is the consumer do the installation. That is the same with Windows. Give a person a PC without anything and give them a link to a URL on how to install Windows. See how many users you end up with. The majority will have no idea on how to do it. OK, give them a CD or USB and see how many are able to do it then. Let them do the same with :Linux and see who will able to rpint out a letter with the least frustration.
No, not the Windows CD that comes with the computer. The generic one from the shelf.
The issue is pre-installing. Give them a Linux PC and they will use it. Just as they will use Android or anything else.
Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
I think society will survive just fine without Razer Drivers for Linux.
-=This sig has nothing to do with my comment. Move along now=-
One point that should be obvious to anyone who has worked in a business is that getting someone's services like this "for free" is anything but.
First, there's the straight up cost: Lawyers vetting contracts, employees gathering and then vetting information, etc.
Then there's the small possibility that somehow, somewhere, this turns out to cost Razer big time - they accidentally expose a competitive secret, the person puts out malware in the Linux Razer driver, the person uses the information to build targeted malware for the Windows side, the service provider turns out to be a Russian spy and it's linked with Razer.... It doesn't matter how ridiculous the scenario, there is some chance of a very bad thing happening.
And then think of the benefit. Zero. (Okay, maybe they sell another 2-3.)
So, in which world can this be justified as a rational business decision?
In most situations like this (unusual disclosures, not business as usual, no going forward as a line of business), a medium-sized company might want perhaps $50K up front, a larger company might demand 3-4 times that. Anything less than that is simply too little return for the risk.
You are far more likely to get the kind of support you want from a small company for which the gain of supporting Linux has *real* marketing value to them and thus the company they're putting at (small) risk isn't *that* valuable compared to the benefit.
And what if the process of "putting the bloody firmware into the bloody device" involves decrypting, or otherwise authenticating with some form of secret that is kept close?
Then they're doing it wrong.
It's a trade secret, or it contains third-party licensed specs, or it has a few security flaws... or there's just a slim chance of any of those, so the whole proposal requires review by at least 15 engineers and a small army of lawyers, plus all the senior management.
I'm as much a fan of Linux as the next guy, but even discussing something outside the original scope is an unexpected cost. At least they were open about that and provided a response.
You do not have a moral or legal right to do absolutely anything you want.
$200k is tiny cost compare to cost to society of what cost to not have Linux Drivers. I find it sickening and short sighted that you did not come to same conclusion. Rethink your statement and post below.
So a private company must burn $200K out of its own pocket to reduce a cost to society, a cost members of society does not want to pay itself.
Got it.
Either the hardware designers designed it and documented it for the software guys, or the other way around. The document already exists, so it really does take the same expertise and effort at this point.
APK quotes people (including myself) without context and should not be trusted. Just thought you should know.
The article is about a reply from a support ticket, not any sort of official statement by Razer.
Someone in media should contact them officially.