On Mon, Jun 23, 2008 at 07:29:34AM -0400, Greg Louis wrote:The problem is exactly what you describe in your last sentence. Hardware manufacturers are well aware of that and make no effort to provide correct drivers when they (think they) have a monopoly in certain areas. What would be needed would be a public list of alternative hardware for known existing hardware. When big manufacturers will see their hardware listed there in the "bad" column, with their small competitors on the same line in the "good" column and with a lower price, they may start to think a little bit. Also, small manufacturers could use this for marketting purposes, because they would be listed as direct competitors for other well-established products. It should be made with notebooks too. It's a shame to see how you're nearly forced to have an nvidia graphics card in a notebook nowadays. It is needed to put a bad reputation to products which embed closed hardware, and to give a good one to other ones. If such a list is exhaustive and public, it may become a reference for new buyers. Willy --
| Tarkan Erimer | Re: Dual-Licensing Linux Kernel with GPL V2 and GPL V3 |
| Stephen Rothwell | Re: Announce: Linux-next (Or Andrew's dream :-)) |
| Vladislav Bolkhovitin | Re: Integration of SCST in the mainstream Linux kernel |
| Greg KH | [GIT PATCH] driver core patches against 2.6.24 |
git: | |
| Arjan van de Ven | Re: [GIT]: Networking |
| Jarek Poplawski | [PATCH] pkt_sched: Destroy gen estimators under rtnl_lock(). |
| Gerrit Renker | [PATCH 33/37] dccp: Initialisation framework for feature negotiation |
| Christoph Lameter | Network latency regressions from 2.6.22 to 2.6.29 |
