On Wed, Nov 15, 2006 at 06:39:35PM +0000, David Morley wrote: > On 15/11/06, Rob Beard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Hi folks, > > > > I was wondering if I could get peoples general opinion on free vs > > non-free drivers etc. > > >
I have a pragmatic view. In a utopian world all software would be free and we could all be safe in the knowledge that we could do what we like with the software. This isn't the case though, and not just for computers. There's proprietary software all around you - in the Cisco IP phone on my desk at work, in the printer, the photocopier, my mobile phone, the PDA I use, the ECM in my car and so on. If I was beating the big "everything must be free" drum then surely I would object to using ALL of those devices on the grounds that they contain non-free code? I therefore see it as somewhat unpractical in the real world right now to expect people to use totally free software everywhere, all the time, in all situations. Don't get me wrong though, I'd *like* that to be the case, but as I say, I am pragmatic, that's not the state right now, so we live with it and try to change as best we can. An example that springs to mind is the whole screencasing thing. I have been using QEMU (and I know some people use VMWARE - non-free) with the non-free kqemu kernel accelerator module, to provide a platform to record my videos. However I recently heard about a product called kvm which enables qemu to use the hardware virtualisation techniques in modern CPUs to accelerate the emulation.. [plug]http://popey.com/Compiling_kvm_Under_Ubuntu_Edgy_i386[/plug] Does it make me a bad person to use kqemu (the non-free accelerator)? Possibly in the eyes of some die-hard GNU/Linux "everything must be free" zealots. In my mind, no, but I'll tell you I feel a hell of a lot better now I'm using kvm (the free thing) instead of kqemu! > I have two views on this number one I play games on my machine so I > want 3d, which is only available via non-free drivers. Further to which you probably also run non-free games! So the whole "non-free drivers are evil *because* they're non-free" point is somewhat moot when you have a 3GB game which is entirely non-free. > Flash is software not hardware and so yes it is bad. They own all the > rights to it and could therefore open source it and make the world a > better place plus 64 bit versions would suddenly appear. > This is why projects such as gnash http://www.gnu.org/software/gnash/ and the like are important. > I am in the same boat as you I believe that Ubuntu has the right idea > include as little proprietary stuff as possible but enough that > hardware words properly. This is one of the reasons why I am happy > that Feisty may well include binary nvidia/ati graphics drivers. Why > I hear you shout? No one complains about the fact that wireless works > out of the box but most of those drivers are binary (non-free) so what > difference does it make if they include binary graphics too. Are the wireless drivers really included or is it just the firmware? If so I'm not sure that you can directly compare the firmware for a wireless card with the big unknown binary blob inserted into the kernel by the nvidia driver. Is the binary wireless firmware a vector for taking over a machine in the same way the Nvidia binary blob has shown to be vulnerable? I am aware there have been vulnerabilities in windows wireless *drivers* that may have been used under madwifi and/or ndiswrapper, but I don't know if the firmware is vulnerable or not. > There > are very few Distros out there that are completely devoid of non-free > packages but if flame wars continue the way they are you will lose > users from a lack of understanding. Lets keep the users and educate > them to understand the correct view point so when free (as in speech) > hardware becomes available it is purchased over the non-free versions. > "correct view point". That's a contradiction in terms. Your view point is correct from where you are standing, it might be "wrong" from Devon :) We can but give them the information. It's up to them to do what they will with it. > Software that isn't open is bad the same can not be said for hardware. That is purely your opinion. Nothing wrong with it, I may or may not hold the same opinion, I don't plan to argue with you on that point. I'll just say "voting machines" and leave it at that. > We may all wish it was open but until that day comes you will need to > use something in order to get an image on the screen or wireless to > work. Let's no flail the new comers for not knowing any better and > instead educate them so the end result is right. > Hear hear. Cheers, Al. -- ubuntu-uk@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-uk https://wiki.kubuntu.org/UKTeam/
