Date: Fri, 12 Dec 2008 20:32:59 +0100 (CET) From: Wojciech Puchar <wojtek@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl> To: Michael Powell <nightrecon@verizon.net> Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Why FreeBSD not popular on hardware vendors Message-ID: <20081212203202.H4803@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl> In-Reply-To: <ghuau9$juk$1@ger.gmane.org> References: <1228733482.4495.14.camel@laptop1.herveybayaustralia.com.au> <20081211103742.21621a6d@gom.home> <20081211190951.GB845@comcast.net> <20081211113257.405a082c@gom.home> <20081211202023.GC845@comcast.net> <20081211134622.15c81ecd@gom.home> <20081212002813.GD32300@kokopelli.hydra> <20081211170011.777236f8@gom.home> <20081212015814.GB32982@kokopelli.hydra> <20081212120437.B3687@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl> <20081212181258.GE36348@kokopelli.hydra> <ghuau9$juk$1@ger.gmane.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
>> I disagree. I believe, rather, that support for closed hardware specs >> isn't *as* important -- but is still at least somewhat important. >> > > My reservation to the 3D driver thing is it is setting a very dangerous > precedent if the solution involves allowing a third party commercial > enterprise to dictate features FreeBSD "must include" before they will > support it. NVidia MUST INCLUDE full documentation of their hardware. this is normal - hardware manufacturer produces hardware, programmers do make support for it. what is common today isn't normal.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20081212203202.H4803>