DISCUSSION: Free and Non-Free, Developers and Users
LQ Articles DiscussionThis forum is for the discussion of content posted to the Articles and Editorials section.
Notices
Welcome to LinuxQuestions.org, a friendly and active Linux Community.
You are currently viewing LQ as a guest. By joining our community you will have the ability to post topics, receive our newsletter, use the advanced search, subscribe to threads and access many other special features. Registration is quick, simple and absolutely free. Join our community today!
Note that registered members see fewer ads, and ContentLink is completely disabled once you log in.
Free and Non-Free, Developers and Users What do Linux users want? What do Linux developers want? What do all Linux distributions want? Let's examine the first question. What does any user of any technology product want? They want it to do what everyone else's will do: play music whether it's streaming or on their local hard disk, play videos in the same manner as music, read email, browse the web, generate photo albums and so on. And they don't want to read a book or search for hours on the web about how to install the software, deal with dependencies and all of the other things we frequently see when trying to get an application to work.
What does any user of any technology product want? They want it to do what everyone else's will do
I just wanted to point out that developers, often want the product to do whatever they need it to do. Stability and user-friendliness is sometimes secondary.
Another thing I’d like to point out is that we are developing completely free/open and easy methods for most of was previously is in the “non-free software arena” (e.g., codecs: wmv9, mp4; drivers: nvidia-3d is in infancy, ntfs write is reliable/stable, open drivers for loads of wireless chipsets, including atheros, conextant, broadcom, intel, and others have either been reversed engineered or petitioned for or both). The primary job of the distro is to implement these in an unobtrusive way. That said, as new patent-encumbered technologies arise, free/reverse-engineered implementations will always be at least a small step behind.
I wish there was a way to force distributions which include prepackaged non-free modules to pay the owners of that code.
Distros like Xandros and Linspire should have no problem with that since they can pass the cost on to their customers. End users should be able to install them if the owners are willing to grant them free (as in beer).
The "free" distros should concentrate on making it easy for end users to insert them, but they should not be including them in their packages.
I just wanted to point out that developers, often want the product to do whatever they need it to do. Stability and user-friendliness is sometimes secondary.
Another thing I’d like to point out is that we are developing completely free/open and easy methods for most of was previously is in the “non-free software arena” (e.g., codecs: wmv9, mp4; drivers: nvidia-3d is in infancy, ntfs write is reliable/stable, open drivers for loads of wireless chipsets, including atheros, conextant, broadcom, intel, and others have either been reversed engineered or petitioned for or both). The primary job of the distro is to implement these in an unobtrusive way. That said, as new patent-encumbered technologies arise, free/reverse-engineered implementations will always be at least a small step behind.
You are correct-things are much easier in many ways than what they used to be. A heartfelt thanks to the maintainers and the people who setup the repositories so that most and in many cases all of the dependencies are readily available. However finding or knowing what you need sometimes is not so easy. The ipw2200 driver is a good example of this. There are two pieces to this-a module and firmware. The module is included in the kernel. I've read several posts though where users were frustrated at trying to figure out what was missing and how to get it.
I did not mean to imply the Linux developers are in any way behind with the development of drivers free or non-free. Frankly I think that they do an execellent job of staying up with newly released hardware.
I wish there was a way to force distributions which include prepackaged non-free modules to pay the owners of that code.
Distros like Xandros and Linspire should have no problem with that since they can pass the cost on to their customers. End users should be able to install them if the owners are willing to grant them free (as in beer).
The "free" distros should concentrate on making it easy for end users to insert them, but they should not be including them in their packages.
Your last paragraph was and is the whole intent of my post. I think Linux distributions in general would gain many users which in turn would push hardware vendors to open their drivers to the community.
LinuxQuestions.org is looking for people interested in writing
Editorials, Articles, Reviews, and more. If you'd like to contribute
content, let us know.