On 21 Mar 2006 at 16:18, houghi wrote:
On Tue, Mar 21, 2006 at 04:00:17PM +0100, Ulrich Windl wrote:
I disagree: developing a driver for Linux is a significant amount of work, and you get something (the driver). You don't get the sources, but you didn't pay for. I'm sure you could get the sources if you are paying for them.
By buying the hardware, you inderectly pay for the software. If the hardwareseller decides to not use OSS, then he should also play buy the rules and either open the source or place them in such a way that it does not infringe the rights of others.
Actually if I need the hardware, I prefer having a closed source driver very much over having no driver at all. For example: My Polaroid SprintScan 120 (discontinued product) is not supported by Linux, the vendor did not give away any programming information (not made by Polaroid), and there is a danger that "wild programming" will damage the hardware. So I have to use MS-Windows to use the scanner. The price you are paying for the hardware is hardly worth a few weeks work of some engineer. The real problem is the Chinese marketing: The build hardware for half of the costs and distribute the software they haven't developed for free. So the original vendor of hard- and software will not earn money. Regards, Ulrich