[NCLUG] Re: Ubuntu sound problems--Installfest question

[Bob Proulx]

Brian Wood wrote:
> Bob Proulx wrote:
> >In summary, it is all the same if you are using free drivers and if
> >you are not then you should.
> 
> That's certainly a good attitude, but it's often not possible. Try  
> getting decent 3D video acceleration using only the free video drivers  
> for example.

I wasn't specifically thinking about graphics when I wrote that.  I
was specifically thinking sound and networking.

I guess I should list out the four types of drivers that concern me
because they are different and I do actually treat them differently.
(Yes, I am inconsistent.)  Any other problem drivers outside this list?

  RAID
  Networking
  Sound
  Graphics

RAID -- If the free drivers work, such as in the cciss compaq smart
array controller, then I am okay with using it.  If the card requires
closed drivers then I will stay clear and use software raid in that
case.

Networking & Sound -- I won't mess around with unyielding hardware.
Both are so easy and cost effective to replace that it isn't worth the
hassle factor of hitting the problem head on.  Sound cards and network
cards are readily available with good drivers.  This was specifically
what I was commenting upon.

Graphics -- I have to agree is a problem spot for free drivers.  Even
though I advocate using only free drivers I do frequently load up the
closed nvidia driver to enable some games.  (Fortunately StarCraft
doesn't require it.  :-) I feel we are between a rock and a hard place
on this one.  I wasn't really thinking about graphics drivers with my
first response which was targeting sound drivers.  Hopefully it will
improve in the future.

> I've heard rumblings of the kernel refusing to load non-free drivers  
> in the future, which seems to me to go against the "freedom of choice"  
> concept in Linux.

The politics behind this are more than I think anyone wants to read
through here.  But suffice to say that there was always a price
associated with GPL free software and that price was that other
software linked with it must also be free software.  This is why it is
described as a freedom license and not free-beer license.  If this
price is too high then alternatives such as BSD are available with a
different license and allows more proprietary use of it.

> If I choose to use nVidia's proprietary video driver I should not be
> penalized,

The GPL allows free use but requires the same.  It is very much a
symetrical license in this regard.  Anyone wishing to share the
freedom of being able to see, learn, compile the code can all pool
their code together.  This freedom to use the code isn't extended to
those that want to keep their code closed.  If someone doesn't want to
share then they are not licensed to take but not give.  Effectively
closed drivers are trying to get benefit from GPL code but not
providing a return symetrical benefit by making their code available.

The practical consequences of this are that when 64-bit amd64 arrived
on the scene almost everything worked out of the box for it.  Anything
that didn't was quickly fixed.  Within weeks fully working
distributions were available for it.  Everything worked, except, what?
Right.  All of those closed applications.  And along with drivers it
was also Flash, Java, Acrobat, 32bit multimedia codecs, and others
such as OpenOffice which had dependencies upon the above.  It is still
a problem.

> and if I decide to purchase a commercial X server in order to get a
> laptop's display working properly I should be able to do that.

There really isn't problem with running nonfree applications.  I
actually did buy a commercial X server to get a laptop running X years
ago.  Frankly it wasn't a good experience and in the end was a waste
of money.  Very quickly it became outdated and without updates I had
to abandon it.  And I have definitely made a good living by writing,
supporting, debugging commercial applications on GNU/Linux.

> Different distros seem to have differing attitudes towards even free  
> software that  might be of questionable legality in some  
> jurisdictions.

Usually legal from where they are distributed however.  The classic
old encryption may be imported but not exported and other issues have
forced geographically targeted development.  Now it is other issues.

> MP3 code and the decss DVD decrypter are good examples.  
> The attitude of the distro makers probably reflects their country of  
> origin to an extent, nobody wants to get sued even if they feel they  
> are morally in the right.

Full agreement.

> I'll use free drivers if they suit my needs, but I certainly have no  
> problem with purchasing or using commercial software if it does what I  
> need it to do for a reasonable price (note: no Microsoft product falls  
> into that category).

A lot of people have paid for World of Warcraft and are running it
just fine.  :-)

> The different distros all seem to have different target audiences,
> and a major difference is what packaging scheme they have
> chosen. Ubuntu, at least initially, appealed to folks moving from
> Windows, CentOS to people wanting stability and security, Sabayon to
> people hooked on eye candy, Gentoo to do-it-yourselfers and FC
> appealing to chronic upgraders :-)

CentOS targeted people who wanted to run Red Hat but didn't want to
pay for it.  It is as close as you can get to it without legally
infringing upon it.

Debian Sid is also for those same for those people who want to
constantly track the latest bleeding edge bits.

Bob