They want to, but can't. Hardware manufacturers aren't cooperating by releasing hardware specifications or driver source code. As a user who values your ability to use wireless in Ubuntu, this means that you have a responsibility to buy products where the manufacturer is cooperating.
This support isn't going to happen any other way. If you think it's simple to write drivers for your black-box wireless card, go for it! I think you'll find that it's not. We get the cooperation of all hardware manufacturers by only buying from those that cooperate. The ball is in your court.
Ubuntu is morphing into another distro/community that tries to whip desktop users into hackers.
I don't think that's the case. I think they'd take these bugs seriously if you can file a detailed bug report. It's not as though every single problem that occurs for you also occurs for the Ubuntu developers. Help them out. File bug reports.
I agree that it doesn't make commercial sense for Microsoft to open up their file formats, but it is something that they would do if they were a "good citizen" company. It's not nice to lock people in like that, and since they are a company with a monopoly conviction, their current behaviour isn't really appropriate.
We all (including Microsoft) know that if OpenOffice had 100% compatibility with MS Office, Microsoft would then be in an extremely vulnerable position. It's understandable that they don't want to open up their file formats because of the position it would put them in, but not doing so is a type of "cheating". It's anti-competitive.
Hopefully ODF will become popular, but it's going to be a struggle. People who care about this need to start refusing to use the proprietary formats and only accept/send documents in ODF. Sending those silly "powerpoint" chain emails with stupid cartoons/jokes as ODF would probably be a good way to get home users to download OpenOffice. Spreading CDs and the like would also be good.
Indeed. I'm far from being a professional office user. I'm very much a casual user, so my opinion is a bit limited, but I can tell you that there isn't a single feature that I could pick out and say "Word has this, and OpenOffice doesn't."
I suppose the one difference that has mattered to me at times was the file formats. Sometimes taking a proprietary doc file from OpenOffice to Word (or vice-versa) will stuff it up, somehow. This is more of a bug than a missing feature, and the bug is due to Microsoft's file format being secret.
Hey, $3 for 3 months isn't too bad, either! That's only $1 per month!
What about $2 per month? Pretty good, too, right? In fact, I bet that anyone willing to pay $2 per month for it is willing to pay $4 instead.
If the price went up to just $5 a month, would that $1 difference really make you change your mind? Besides, by that time, you would have several documents written in the proprietary Office file formats and you wouldn't want to lose access to those documents, would you? In fact, I reckon you would be hurt enough by losing access to those documents that you'd probably pay $10 a month for it.
P.S. Unfortunately, due to rising costs, the price will rise to $12 per month, next year.
I disagree with him on this one, too. From his explanation, I can see that he clearly understands this, but we have a difference in opinion about what companies should be allowed to do.
What is the point of having the source code if there are restrictions purposely put in place to prevent you from using it? Furthermore, what if they use my code, and I buy one of these devices? All of a sudden I can't modify the code running on a device that I own, despite the fact that I wrote the code that's already running on it?! Screw that!
I wish GPLv3 would come out NOW so that I could put code that I'm currently writing under it. I understand that they can't rush it, though.
a scale model of Stonehenge built from office chairs
Stonehenge goes modern! I like it! Although, nothing else gets me quite as excited as when he does that monkey dance and jumps around on stage, screaming. Even the "developers" chant isn't quite the same as that one.
Anyway, I'm kinda busy for the next couple of months. When's the DVD?
No, I'm suggesting that there are practicality reasons for using Windows, but MacOS and Free operating systems like Ubuntu are very similar in terms of what they can do and how easy they are to use, so there is no reason why someone who values Free Software would use MacOS.
Not entirely true. I use os x and value free software, I like the idea of being able to change the source and being able to download and install cvs versions but am never going to write kernel drivers so that aspect does not concern me as much. I still use linux daily but when on os x i want to be able to use all the software I already know and enjoy using.
Yeah, okay, you like Free Software. Who doesn't? I think you misunderstood me when I mentioned valuing Free Software, though. Not just the ability to use the source code whenever you want, but also the freedom to share the software with whoever you want without breaking the law, and the freedom to see how any part of the system works.
You like Free Software, but you do not value it, otherwise you would not be so willing to discard your freedom and use yet another "alternative" proprietary operating system.
The reason for this project failing is simple. MacOS is an "alternative operating system". If people value Free Software, it does not make sense to go from Windows to another proprietary operating system like MacOS. People who value Free Software either use Windows (because they have to or are pressured into doing so), or they use a Free Software operating system like Linux.
The only people who use MacOS are those who want an alternative operating system and don't care about whether it is Free Software or not.
The cases might as well be the same, though. You should be just as angry about this one being dismissed as you would be about the EFF one being dismissed.
Three ways of doing this come to mind. Take your pick: - Synergy (more or less a software KVM, minus the V) - QEMU (processor emulator, similar to VMware, but Free Software) - Hardware KVM switch
There's a slight chance that AMD might be smart and release hardware specs for ATI cards, or make the drivers Free Software. If either of those things happen, this would be a very good thing, in my opinion.
Slashdot Mirror
They want to, but can't. Hardware manufacturers aren't cooperating by releasing hardware specifications or driver source code. As a user who values your ability to use wireless in Ubuntu, this means that you have a responsibility to buy products where the manufacturer is cooperating.
This support isn't going to happen any other way. If you think it's simple to write drivers for your black-box wireless card, go for it! I think you'll find that it's not. We get the cooperation of all hardware manufacturers by only buying from those that cooperate. The ball is in your court.
Ubuntu is morphing into another distro/community that tries to whip desktop users into hackers.
I don't think that's the case. I think they'd take these bugs seriously if you can file a detailed bug report. It's not as though every single problem that occurs for you also occurs for the Ubuntu developers. Help them out. File bug reports.
I agree that it doesn't make commercial sense for Microsoft to open up their file formats, but it is something that they would do if they were a "good citizen" company. It's not nice to lock people in like that, and since they are a company with a monopoly conviction, their current behaviour isn't really appropriate.
We all (including Microsoft) know that if OpenOffice had 100% compatibility with MS Office, Microsoft would then be in an extremely vulnerable position. It's understandable that they don't want to open up their file formats because of the position it would put them in, but not doing so is a type of "cheating". It's anti-competitive.
Hopefully ODF will become popular, but it's going to be a struggle. People who care about this need to start refusing to use the proprietary formats and only accept/send documents in ODF. Sending those silly "powerpoint" chain emails with stupid cartoons/jokes as ODF would probably be a good way to get home users to download OpenOffice. Spreading CDs and the like would also be good.
Let's set so double the killer delete select all.
Indeed. I'm far from being a professional office user. I'm very much a casual user, so my opinion is a bit limited, but I can tell you that there isn't a single feature that I could pick out and say "Word has this, and OpenOffice doesn't."
I suppose the one difference that has mattered to me at times was the file formats. Sometimes taking a proprietary doc file from OpenOffice to Word (or vice-versa) will stuff it up, somehow. This is more of a bug than a missing feature, and the bug is due to Microsoft's file format being secret.
Hey, $3 for 3 months isn't too bad, either! That's only $1 per month!
What about $2 per month? Pretty good, too, right? In fact, I bet that anyone willing to pay $2 per month for it is willing to pay $4 instead.
If the price went up to just $5 a month, would that $1 difference really make you change your mind? Besides, by that time, you would have several documents written in the proprietary Office file formats and you wouldn't want to lose access to those documents, would you? In fact, I reckon you would be hurt enough by losing access to those documents that you'd probably pay $10 a month for it.
P.S. Unfortunately, due to rising costs, the price will rise to $12 per month, next year.
I disagree with him on this one, too. From his explanation, I can see that he clearly understands this, but we have a difference in opinion about what companies should be allowed to do.
What is the point of having the source code if there are restrictions purposely put in place to prevent you from using it? Furthermore, what if they use my code, and I buy one of these devices? All of a sudden I can't modify the code running on a device that I own, despite the fact that I wrote the code that's already running on it?! Screw that!
I wish GPLv3 would come out NOW so that I could put code that I'm currently writing under it. I understand that they can't rush it, though.
a scale model of Stonehenge built from office chairs
Stonehenge goes modern! I like it! Although, nothing else gets me quite as excited as when he does that monkey dance and jumps around on stage, screaming. Even the "developers" chant isn't quite the same as that one.
Anyway, I'm kinda busy for the next couple of months. When's the DVD?
I think he meant for it to be taken as "we haven't started yet".
No, I'm suggesting that there are practicality reasons for using Windows, but MacOS and Free operating systems like Ubuntu are very similar in terms of what they can do and how easy they are to use, so there is no reason why someone who values Free Software would use MacOS.
In that case you don't particularly value Free Software, do you? If you did, then that would be reason enough to switch away from it.
Not entirely true. I use os x and value free software, I like the idea of being able to change the source and being able to download and install cvs versions but am never going to write kernel drivers so that aspect does not concern me as much. I still use linux daily but when on os x i want to be able to use all the software I already know and enjoy using.
Yeah, okay, you like Free Software. Who doesn't? I think you misunderstood me when I mentioned valuing Free Software, though. Not just the ability to use the source code whenever you want, but also the freedom to share the software with whoever you want without breaking the law, and the freedom to see how any part of the system works.
You like Free Software, but you do not value it, otherwise you would not be so willing to discard your freedom and use yet another "alternative" proprietary operating system.
Apple are bastards. They'd be considered "worse than Microsoft" if only they were half as successful as Microsoft.
Apple:
- Proprietary software.
- Pushing DRM onto unsuspecting mainstream customers.
- Shitty hardware that has defects or frequent failures.
The reason for this project failing is simple. MacOS is an "alternative operating system". If people value Free Software, it does not make sense to go from Windows to another proprietary operating system like MacOS. People who value Free Software either use Windows (because they have to or are pressured into doing so), or they use a Free Software operating system like Linux.
The only people who use MacOS are those who want an alternative operating system and don't care about whether it is Free Software or not.
The cases might as well be the same, though. You should be just as angry about this one being dismissed as you would be about the EFF one being dismissed.
So they leave that out of the Free Software driver they release. Big deal.
Three ways of doing this come to mind. Take your pick:
- Synergy (more or less a software KVM, minus the V)
- QEMU (processor emulator, similar to VMware, but Free Software)
- Hardware KVM switch
There's a slight chance that AMD might be smart and release hardware specs for ATI cards, or make the drivers Free Software. If either of those things happen, this would be a very good thing, in my opinion.
I reckon they'll probably have trouble adapting the Unreal 3 engine into a MMOG.
$10 says this game project:
- Doesn't get finished, or
- Ends up not using the Unreal 3 engine, or
- Ends up not being a MMOG.
I'd quit because I could probably find a better job that doesn't involve using PowerPoint.
I'm glad they're doing it. I don't use Windows, and I never will.
I think of this as a lesson about freedom for the masses. There is no better way to teach people about freedom than by taking it away from them.
My thoughts are similar to yours, except I'm hoping that they do screw up that badly.
It happens all the time. It happened on LiveJournal only a month or two ago.
In your post, which company is which?