And Terry Warner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> gave word to the following thoughts:
-|Has anyone stopped to think that maybe nvidia can't open source their drivers? I know for a fact they can't because of certain things, that if anyone has paid attention to game boards or interviews, restrict them from open sourcing their code. -| -|I personally would love to see their 4.0 drivers released as open source, and I know they are trying to one day reach that goal, but for right now like I said. They can't open source them. -| I don't want to sound too rude on that, but, it already has been written here today, and it's same this way, my $0.02 on that: It is not acceptable, anyhow, to find excuses for why the software can't be GPL'ed. Following this point of view, we're pretty close to the day of having more and more closed-sourced applications because people will then find reasons (like this *really* threatening software patents) to say, like "It's not our fault, we're not *allowed* to put this stuff open-source." Again I want to emphasize that I'm at some point understanding NVidia's difficulties, right now, but, being a Debian-user because of the "GNU" in the name, I *still* think it is a --*bad*-- situation this way, same as the fact that NVidia workers spent quite some time to remove the open-sourced components from the drivers before they released their 'final' own proprietary drivers (the open version obviously is what is still inside utah-glx). Why to waste time making software closed-source again? Sorry, but I think that 'being-not-allowed-to-go-GPL' excuse is making things a little *too* easy for NVidia. Regards, Kris -- Kristian Rink paper: +49 180 5052 5560 8162 phone: +49 174 5360871 icq : 48874445 (Krishna) irc : #metal on IRCNet (Kawazu)
