Move everything to userspace, and use an existing driver, or a very small open driver, to access the card. There should be no reason, even if they're crying "trade secrets" for this to happen. If nouveau can do it, and they're not crying trade secrets over it, then nvidia proper can do it too.
Everyone is free to keep secrets, even you. If you have a problem with their actions then use other chipsets.
What? Intel has their drivers in the main tree. They work great. NVIDIA provides a binary blob that does not play well with others.
Great for Intel, I guess that's their way of doing business. It would be great if Nvidia did the same thing but they don't have to, that's their right. Nothing wrong with that, just use something else if that bothers you.
Intel needs to buy Nvidia, with all that cash it has, and put and put some sense into Nvidia and stop biting the hand that feeds it (no more binary blobs).
I meet people all the time that have "control" over their computer. Random files all over the desktop, no clue of what is going on, a web browser with 10+ toolbars which they have no idea how they got there, and so on. Ordinary people don't have control over their own hardware and/or software. It doesn't matter if it's Windows or Linux. Ordinary people want it to work, and 30 years of personal computing have not made that happen. The closest thing so far is an iPad.
There will of course always be some people that want control over their hardware. Some people.
I don't understand why Apple can't release some simple command-line dev tools for multiple platforms, what do they have to lose, really? If they require users to install a compiler and an interface driver to put new software on the phone, surely that should be enough to protect naive users against themselves.
They can but it's hard enough to maintain a single development stack on one platform. They would not gain much by repeating a lot of work on just by porting things to other platforms. One platform makes it simpler for them to keep things going forward.
Do apple ban redistribution of sourcecode? No. VLC for iPhone's source code was available for download. (before VLC was pulled on request of one of the authors of VLC)
They don't exclude GPL. It's GPL which is incompatible. GPL puts many requirements of the distributor, which is Apple. However Apple does not want to take more responsible over third party software than what is absolutely necessary and does not allow developers to require such things from Apple. Therefore it's not specifically GPL, but all GPL like licenses that are incompatible. Apple's App Store is agnostic toward license, as long as the license is compatible.
You're absolutely right in that they don't cooperate. I agree there. However, when it comes to the question of what is fair I don't agree with you. It is not fair to demand that Nvidia should give you a driver or documentation. What is fair is that they sell a product, if you want it you buy it. If you don't want their product you buy something else. Vote with your wallet.
I would of course be very happy if they cooperated. I would be very happy if they released documentation or even an open driver. But I think that it would be very unfair of me to require any such actions.
Of course, but the point it still there. No one owes anyone anything. Nvidia has absolutely zero responsibility to make their chips work with Linux. They are free to decide exactly which platforms they want to support. Some people in the Linux community is however so used to getting everything they want for free that they for some reason think that they should have everything for free and that companies that don't do that are somehow evil. No they are not evil, it just happens that they are not especially friendly either. It is fair.
Does it though? I am discouraged by the number of CS graduates who cannot explain basic, fundamental questions like the P vs. NP problem. A lot of schools seem to only require that their CS graduates be able to write a few moderately challenging programs, and even then, only in a particular programming language or class of languages.
I think that the problem here is that "computer science" is very loosely defined and not exactly the same thing depending on where and who you ask. It's also a very broad topic, which is probably why it differs so much. The problem of P vs. NP is fundamental in some places, others may focus on other topics. Computer science have simply become too big.
Physics is a good example where they have already done this. They often differentiate between technical physics, theoretical physics, radiation physics and so on. The same thing will likely happen in the field of computer science as well. Either that or we mysteriously manage to decide what constitute a fundamental understanding of what computer science is, which I don't think will happen.
Honest question: So what were the BSDs (Open,Free,Net) using to compile and run on x86 and amd64 before llvm/clang was around? GCC ?
GCC.
GCC had its share of problems but this sounds a little ungrateful for what GCC has allowed hackers to do.
I'm only familiar with FreeBSD but I guess the situation is similar at NetBSD and OpenBSD. They are not ungrateful. They have found another compiler that they think is better for their needs. That simple. Makes good headlines though.
An open source "good enough" compiler is better then a high priced closed source compiler that may or may not be available for your hardware.
The advantages to Linux over BSD licensed operating systems is that improvements are reinvested in the code base, by mandate. This accelerates development at a much faster rate than we've seen with any of the BSDs since it is a positive feedback loop. Contrary to this, companies take BSD code, improve it, and tend to release nothing back. Because they don't have to. Look at OSX.
Such as libdispatch, WebKit and LLVM/Clang? Just to mention a few.
Maybe I missed your point but just because Apple doesn't release their entire operating system as open source doesn't mean that they don't invest and contribute to open source.
BSD is a glamour license. The small number of devs that love it want their names in source and help panels. Don't worry about it. OpenBSD has very few users, bitrig will have even less. Don't like it, just avoid any products that use it. Oh wait, you can't tell with BSD liftware.
A fair number of gizmos in your house probably runs it, or a similar flavor of it.
I admit that last time I compared them was in Android 2.x so if it is better in Android 4.0 then that's great. At least back then I was fairly disappointed and felt that it was more or less just text-to-speach functionality. That guide was great to read even if it was a bit short, thanks. If you have an updated comparison of how well Android and iOS handles accessibility I would like to read it, haven't been able to find one.
Patents are a bitch and sideloading would be nice, but what's the alternative? Apple is pretty serious about accessibility and I assume they understand just as well that it's a problem in this particular case.
We are being told that Android is about freedom, that it's for people by people and so on. If Apple is so evil why do they deliver so much better on average in this field?
I love Linux, heck even my username is the name of that thing. Fortunately I don't need anything of that, but if I did I don't know if I could actually use Android.
As a general rule of thumb, new Macs never ever supports older versions of the OS than the version they shipped with. This goes down to the dot-version, so if it shipped with 10.7.4 it probably doesn't even boot 10.7.3.
Slashdot Mirror
Move everything to userspace, and use an existing driver, or a very small open driver, to access the card. There should be no reason, even if they're crying "trade secrets" for this to happen. If nouveau can do it, and they're not crying trade secrets over it, then nvidia proper can do it too.
Everyone is free to keep secrets, even you. If you have a problem with their actions then use other chipsets.
[...] we'd also start helping out some core area of the kernel too? Would that kind of thing help our image even if we didn't open up our HW?
You seem to care more about NVIDIA's image than about what the Linux community actually needs.
I truly don't understand what the big deal is. Just open up your damn specifications already.
It is a public company, not charity. It is supposed to care more about itself rather than some open source project. By law.
What?
Intel has their drivers in the main tree. They work great. NVIDIA provides a binary blob that does not play well with others.
Great for Intel, I guess that's their way of doing business. It would be great if Nvidia did the same thing but they don't have to, that's their right. Nothing wrong with that, just use something else if that bothers you.
Intel needs to buy Nvidia, with all that cash it has, and put and put some sense into Nvidia and stop biting the hand that feeds it (no more binary blobs).
Then there would be no more driver.
Linux is for fags.
Of course, everyone is free to use Linux. Even you.
I meet people all the time that have "control" over their computer. Random files all over the desktop, no clue of what is going on, a web browser with 10+ toolbars which they have no idea how they got there, and so on. Ordinary people don't have control over their own hardware and/or software. It doesn't matter if it's Windows or Linux. Ordinary people want it to work, and 30 years of personal computing have not made that happen. The closest thing so far is an iPad.
There will of course always be some people that want control over their hardware. Some people.
I don't understand why Apple can't release some simple command-line dev tools for multiple platforms, what do they have to lose, really? If they require users to install a compiler and an interface driver to put new software on the phone, surely that should be enough to protect naive users against themselves.
They can but it's hard enough to maintain a single development stack on one platform. They would not gain much by repeating a lot of work on just by porting things to other platforms. One platform makes it simpler for them to keep things going forward.
Or just Flash.
+1 informative.
Do apple ban redistribution of sourcecode? No. VLC for iPhone's source code was available for download. (before VLC was pulled on request of one of the authors of VLC)
Actually, it's still available. You just have to build it yourself.
http://www.videolan.org/vlc/download-ios.html
They don't exclude GPL. It's GPL which is incompatible. GPL puts many requirements of the distributor, which is Apple. However Apple does not want to take more responsible over third party software than what is absolutely necessary and does not allow developers to require such things from Apple. Therefore it's not specifically GPL, but all GPL like licenses that are incompatible. Apple's App Store is agnostic toward license, as long as the license is compatible.
You're absolutely right in that they don't cooperate. I agree there. However, when it comes to the question of what is fair I don't agree with you. It is not fair to demand that Nvidia should give you a driver or documentation. What is fair is that they sell a product, if you want it you buy it. If you don't want their product you buy something else. Vote with your wallet.
I would of course be very happy if they cooperated. I would be very happy if they released documentation or even an open driver. But I think that it would be very unfair of me to require any such actions.
Right now Intel is probably your best option.
Of course, but the point it still there. No one owes anyone anything. Nvidia has absolutely zero responsibility to make their chips work with Linux. They are free to decide exactly which platforms they want to support. Some people in the Linux community is however so used to getting everything they want for free that they for some reason think that they should have everything for free and that companies that don't do that are somehow evil. No they are not evil, it just happens that they are not especially friendly either. It is fair.
my country has FREE education on all levels for all citizens, you can be a doctor, engineer, etc for 0 $ ... yay for socialism
Well, good for you I guess. Have fun.
Does it though? I am discouraged by the number of CS graduates who cannot explain basic, fundamental questions like the P vs. NP problem. A lot of schools seem to only require that their CS graduates be able to write a few moderately challenging programs, and even then, only in a particular programming language or class of languages.
I think that the problem here is that "computer science" is very loosely defined and not exactly the same thing depending on where and who you ask. It's also a very broad topic, which is probably why it differs so much. The problem of P vs. NP is fundamental in some places, others may focus on other topics. Computer science have simply become too big.
Physics is a good example where they have already done this. They often differentiate between technical physics, theoretical physics, radiation physics and so on. The same thing will likely happen in the field of computer science as well. Either that or we mysteriously manage to decide what constitute a fundamental understanding of what computer science is, which I don't think will happen.
OK. I missed your point then. I thought that you pointed out Apples as an example of an organization that doesn't contribute back.
Anyway, they do contribute to fair amount of projects. Libdispatch even originated from Apple if I remember correctly.
Honest question: So what were the BSDs (Open,Free,Net) using to compile and run on x86 and amd64 before llvm/clang was around? GCC ?
GCC.
GCC had its share of problems but this sounds a little ungrateful for what GCC has allowed hackers to do.
I'm only familiar with FreeBSD but I guess the situation is similar at NetBSD and OpenBSD. They are not ungrateful. They have found another compiler that they think is better for their needs. That simple. Makes good headlines though.
An open source "good enough" compiler is better then a high priced closed source compiler that may or may not be available for your hardware.
I agree, but isn't Clang open source?
The advantages to Linux over BSD licensed operating systems is that improvements are reinvested in the code base, by mandate. This accelerates development at a much faster rate than we've seen with any of the BSDs since it is a positive feedback loop. Contrary to this, companies take BSD code, improve it, and tend to release nothing back. Because they don't have to. Look at OSX.
Such as libdispatch, WebKit and LLVM/Clang? Just to mention a few.
Maybe I missed your point but just because Apple doesn't release their entire operating system as open source doesn't mean that they don't invest and contribute to open source.
The difference is that unlike those projects this one does not scuk
Scuk?
BSD is a glamour license. The small number of devs that love it want their names in source and help panels. Don't worry about it. OpenBSD has very few users, bitrig will have even less. Don't like it, just avoid any products that use it. Oh wait, you can't tell with BSD liftware.
A fair number of gizmos in your house probably runs it, or a similar flavor of it.
For how many users is the GNU userland important anymore? I bet Google Chrome is much more used these days. GNU is irrelevant.
I admit that last time I compared them was in Android 2.x so if it is better in Android 4.0 then that's great. At least back then I was fairly disappointed and felt that it was more or less just text-to-speach functionality. That guide was great to read even if it was a bit short, thanks. If you have an updated comparison of how well Android and iOS handles accessibility I would like to read it, haven't been able to find one.
Patents are a bitch and sideloading would be nice, but what's the alternative? Apple is pretty serious about accessibility and I assume they understand just as well that it's a problem in this particular case.
We are being told that Android is about freedom, that it's for people by people and so on. If Apple is so evil why do they deliver so much better on average in this field?
I love Linux, heck even my username is the name of that thing. Fortunately I don't need anything of that, but if I did I don't know if I could actually use Android.
As a general rule of thumb, new Macs never ever supports older versions of the OS than the version they shipped with. This goes down to the dot-version, so if it shipped with 10.7.4 it probably doesn't even boot 10.7.3.
I've heard of both C and C++, but never C/C++. What is this supposed language?
For every iPhone sold there is at least one package. Absolutely THEIR fault.