[MPlayer-users] NVidia will be bannished

[Alan Wilter Sousa da Silva]

Hi Jan Sacharuk,

> @>	To save words, I haven't been specific in some points.  I mean, if
> @>you satisfied with good closed-driver (or software solution) why do you
> @>use GNU/Linux (most much better solution for a lot of applications).  Use
> @>Win2k so! (I use it, and we have PPC - Apple and IBM - here in our Lab
> @>too, also SGI).
>
> Why would you blindly follow a dogma to the exclusion of all other
> things? Why wouldn't you use the absolute best system that you could?
> Do you feel that using something like FreeBSD is beneath you because
> it uses the BSD license instead of the GPL?

	Hey, I'm not imposing exclusivity.  We try here to use the best
available we can and money counts a lot and access to source code too.

> I'm actually finding myself switching BACK to Apple because their
> product is so superior in many ways. It works, it's pretty, it runs
> Open Source software, and it allows me to EASILY program in
> Objective-C (my favorite OO language ever).

	Ok, I like Mac very much, but I'd hardly get back to it.  Well, I
accept donations (a G4 600MHz at least please), only for personal use.

> @>	GNU/Linux main objective is fully described at www.gun.org, don't
> @>try to figure out.  If you are a GPL developer you have you own reasons,
> @>but, remember, you accept the GPL terms ...
>
> I may publish my software under the GPL, but nowhere in the license
> does it say that I have to believe the rhetoric.

	Which could be your reasons to publish your software under the
GPL?  But I'd suggest you to believe in rhetoric.

> @>	What I see in the near future for the closed-software (and
> @>hardware too) is what happen to Apple: wonderful hardware/software, but
> @>expensive and a very low percentage of users.  That's what I see to
> @>Winblows and to any closed-hardware solution, and that's what I mean about
> @>"will be banished".  If nVidia has patent issues? well, it's their
> @>problem, and probably will affect us someday, and I wouldn't be an hostage
> @>of them more than necessary (since I bought a nVidia card).
>
> The thing that will kill Microsoft, if anything does, is the cost of
> ownership of their software. It's not about being open, it's about
> being affordable. You'd be surprised at how few people care how
> restrictive a license is to a developer, as long as the software is
> cheap.

	Yes, I have to agree with you about the question "cheap software",
I'm not one of the "few people".  The same happens to GPL, who cares about
the GPL as long as it's possibly no charge?  But look, if we still have
two option: a GPL programme (usually no charge, but not necessarily) and a
cheap one.  Both do the job. Which one would you prefer?

> @>	I'm not promoting nVidia banishment at all.  Simply I won't buy
> @>nVidia cards for my future Linux box any longer.  Maybe for Apple or
> @>Winblows box.  I have just one Linux box (the last one at least by now)
> @>running nVidia card and it rocks, but I feel like a sinner as I'll explain
> @>later.
>
> Well, this is fair enough. If you feel bad about using the card,
> don't. And I respect your right to have this opinion, for sure. But I
> still think your reasons are a little thin.

	Hey, not bad about using the card! It's about using a proprietary
driver in a main GPL system.  Otherwise, I can use my nVidia card as a
simple svga card.

> @>	What I don't like is seeing people that uses GNU/Linux and thinks
> @>that's fine to use proprietary solution together as long as no charge.
> @>Maybe it's a question of philosophy but if you use GNU/Linux only because
> @>it's free of charge so the minimum retribution you can give back is to be
> @>loyal to the idea of using only GPL programmes (at least try it, since I'm
> @>not a Saint as Saint IGNUcius :-).  If you don't try to follow the GNU
> @>philosophy you are, at least, giving support to ideas like of nVidia
> @>proprietary driver solution for Linux.
>
> I use proprietary solutions every day, because that's what it takes to
> get the job done. I refuse to sit around and wait for software to
> materialize to save me, or to use poor software because it's the only
> GPL solution. I have my own projects to work on, and I don't have time
> for everything.

	That's the kernel's question. To use or not to use.  Look, I don't
buy any software that *promise* me to do the job and I try to avoid piracy,
so what's option left? GNU.  But there's no GPL similar?  Then we have to
buy it.  I bought Maple 5 to run in my Linux Box, what else should I do?
But I don't think the same about drivers, which are only supposed to make
the communication between hardware (am I right about the drivers
function?).

> nvidia's solution isn't so heinous, anyway. They're acknowledging that
> linux is something to be noticed, and they don't discriminate against
> us just because we chose a different OS. Pretty nice of them. And if
> you think in the long term, this gives credibility to Linux as an
> alternate platform. Game programmers might be willing to take on
> Linux, because nvidia is willing to take on Linux. And maybe, one day,
> when the majority of people are using linux, they'll start opening up
> their drivers.

	Ok, point to you here too.  The same IBM and Compaq do.  Even SGI
played in the Linux field with their proprietary OpenGL cards and drivers.
But is it need to do the way that nVidia (and others) does?

> @>	Maybe I'm not so fool believing that nVidia won't last forever but
> @>GNU philosophy will.

	Right, only time.  But we can deny that our scientific progress
were mainly done based on *open ideas*.

-----------------------
Alan Wilter S. da Silva
-----------------------
 Laboratório de Física Biológica
  Instituto de Biofísica Carlos Chagas Filho
   Universidade do Brasil/UFRJ
    Rio de Janeiro, Brasil