Resisting the binary blob [LWN.net]

Resisting the binary blob

Posted Nov 15, 2006 14:57 UTC (Wed) by pbardet (guest, #22762)
In reply to: Resisting the binary blob by khim
Parent article: Resisting the binary blob

MS had control because the had Windows and they could break any API easily to fail other software for unknown reasons...
I just hope Linux will prove it's better without using those tactics. That's why I'm opposed to any MS contributions to the Linux world as they're currently trying through Novell.

I don't see why because one distribution uses a binary blob, development will stop on the free version for all other distributions, especially the hard code open-source ones. You can't compare commercial and open-source software development.

The only reason people don't want binary drivers, is because they fear it will actually win in the end. It's up to the open-source programmers to prove them wrong. But it's so much easier to try to prevent things from happening than creating.

(Log in to post comments)

Resisting the binary blob

Posted Nov 15, 2006 15:25 UTC (Wed) by tjc (guest, #137) [Link]

I don't see why because one distribution uses a binary blob, development will stop on the free version for all other distributions, especially the hard code open-source ones.

On the other hand, just because one distribution doesn't include binary blobs doesn't mean that development will stop on all the not-so-free distributions. I don't see that you have made any compelling arguments why FC should include them, other than you seem want them.

In your original post you mentioned that FC is one of the more popular distributions, and then go on to assume that they would be even more popular if they were to include binary blobs. Could it be that they would become less popular if they included them?