What is Digg?Sponsored by Travelzoo
Take Advantage of Ridiculously Low Holiday Airfares view!
travelzoo.com - Flights $52 and up for Thanksgiving, Christmas & New Year. But move on it now.
60 Comments
- michaelpinto, on 01/06/2009, -5/+46Is SGI still in business? Now that's a real story!
- inactive, on 01/07/2009, -15/+39Linux is the best thing to ever happen to computers
- directedition, on 01/07/2009, -2/+25I would say random access memory, but what do I know.
- Tigerdaz, on 01/07/2009, -1/+15You do not seem to understand the implications of the various licenses. The licenses do matter in that they empower developers to do some of the things you bitching they are not doing.
Kernel deveopers have offered to write drivers for hardware vendors for free, but they are unable to do this when said vendors refuse to release specs for the hardware or required documentation. Also them vendors maybe hindered and denied the option to provide the specs even if they wanted to by thrid party license agreements which they do not hold the rights to themselves.
So when people are bitching it complaining about vendors crappy drivers or no drivers at all sometimes it is purley down to the vendor because they cant be assed to code the drivers if they were closed source due to licensing restrictions forced upon them.
If they are not restricted by thrid parties and just cant be assed that is also the vendors fault. If they are notrestricted and just plain refuse to release specs thats all their fault and they cannot use cost as an excuse as their is an offer on the table to have the drivers coded for free.
In the US you also have a completely decronian piece of crap called the DMCA which in many cases prevents or at best severly hinders and restricts the ability of developers to be able to code the drivers required, so when a vendor releases something with a license that removes these restrictions it is a big deal and it something that is required.
You also seem to have a thin grasp of the various relationships of all the various elements of the complete opertating system and how the implications of various licenses have major effects on the complete system.
So your comment that "that none of this stuff matters, unless your a fanboy" is complete and utter gibberish crap on your part...you went off on a rant without even knowing if what you was saying was feasable. - TiMMY8765, on 01/07/2009, -0/+13Xorg doesn't use GPL, they have their own license
- inactive, on 01/07/2009, -2/+15I kinda like not having to use punch cards for everything these days.
- HamNCheese, on 01/07/2009, -1/+12It's SGI you douche....
- directedition, on 01/07/2009, -0/+10Bad move buddy. I'm an SGI collector. Now I'll have to hound you till you give me all your SGI shirts, mugs, stickers, fridge magnets, stress relief balls, posters, pens, clocks, paper weights, watches, etc etc etc
Viva La IRIX!
Viva La MIPS!
All glory to the Tezro! - RedneckRandy, on 01/07/2009, -0/+9I used to work at SGI. Good to see they still exist
- MattS, on 01/07/2009, -0/+8I dont get it. The FSF site makes it sound like something happened in January, but the SGI PR and the quote from Steve Neuner is dated September 2008, "...SUNNYVALE, Calif. (Sept. 19, 2008) — As software developers the world over prepare..."
Dugg because I didnt know about it, but i think this is old... - joebaloney, on 01/07/2009, -0/+8FTA: The Free Software Foundation (FSF) Free Software Compliance Lab's Brett Smith explained, "We discovered that these licenses covered contributions that SGI had made to the X.Org Project and the Mesa 3D Graphics Library. These projects, including SGI's code, are an important and familiar part of modern GNU/Linux desktop systems. The FSF Compliance Lab then worked with SGI towards today's announcement."
I don't understand this. I thought if someone made contributions to a project that is GPL'd their contributions are automatically GPL'd as well. You can't make GPL'd code non GPL'd by modifying it.
I don't understand licensing. - Ninnux, on 01/07/2009, -0/+7A lot of protein and NMR research is still done on SGI machines.
At the NMR lab at my grad school, the spectroscopists all learned to view and study proteins in 3D space using SGI machines. When these Ph.D's are hired by Pharma and biotech, they demand the companies purchase these machines because they are familiar to the scientists. Kind of like Apple's school plan back in the day.
I tell you what though, I had to administrate an IRIX network as a summer job once in that lab. ...shudders... - dagr8tim, on 01/07/2009, -3/+10Graphics Hard??????
- javaroast, on 01/07/2009, -0/+7http://www.google.com/search?ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8 ...
Results 1 - 10 of about 2,330,000 for vista driver problems.
You were saying??? - inactive, on 01/07/2009, -0/+6Stupid irony fail.
- neilschelly, on 01/07/2009, -1/+7I'm being sucked in by flamebait, but what the hell...
You have a fundamental misunderstanding of several aspects of free and open source software. It's not some trivial task to make drivers work for all hardware out there. Manufacturers are often the only ones with the necessary hardware knowledge to draw up good drivers for the equipment. Generally speaking, if they release the appropriate specifications, there's always plenty of willing developers to create those drivers in the various FOSS operating systems.
And those developers that make the drivers are likely a completely different set from the developers who are doing graphical desktop widgets and improvements. They may certainly work together on some things, especially around video drivers and interfaces, but ultimately, people contribute where it's useful to them. Lots of people use Linux for example, and when there's something that it doesn't do something the way they want, most developers will put their efforts there, where it's important to them. Just because the development is not happening in the places most useful to you does not mean that development is not happening in a useful place.
Linux doesn't have to "win" by any measure you'd see. It's already preferred for those who use it. And there are countless services you probably use that depend heavily on FOSS as well, but since you don't know it, you don't recognize how you benefit from it already.
-N - bowens44, on 01/07/2009, -0/+6Ignorance is not your friend, I suggest you stop flaunting it.
- inactive, on 01/07/2009, -0/+6"user friendly"? You mean more like Windows? Just because something is different from Windows doesn't mean it's "user friendly."
- AtomicTheory, on 01/07/2009, -2/+8Aw, what a disappointment. I thought it said SG1.
- tempusrob, on 01/07/2009, -1/+6I could be off, but from what I understand a project can have code covered by multiple licenses as long as those licenses are compatible ... the SGI Free License B and GLX Public License weren't GPL-compatible, but SGI modified them to make it so. Big news if you're a GNU zealot ... good news still, even if you're not.
- djdavetrouble, on 01/07/2009, -0/+4I plugged in one of the old Origins and blew the circuit out at a tech company. Everybody was PISSED.
That thing was as big as a small fridge. I just wanted to mess around with irix and maya.... - Culyt, on 01/07/2009, -0/+4Everyone knows Compiz was build using reverse engineered Goa'uld technology.
- Tigerdaz, on 01/07/2009, -0/+3Once again you show your complete ignorance. With a comment like "Works as well as windows" Windows on the desktop isnt reliabe how many times a week does it lock up or crash or a piece of software stop responding where a reboot is required.
All of the above are reasons why GNU/Linux & *BSDs for that matter over Microsoft because when drivers are able to be written without licensing rectrictions they are almost alwasy superior to windows drivers and much more rigorously tested.
The original article and comments were relating to licensing issues which you have cearly shown you havnt got the slightest ***** CLUE what your talking about. As you can see from all the replies to your comments pretty much everyone thinks you are a complete IGNORANT DUMB IDIOT.
I run both windows and *nix so i am not writing this as an out & out *nix zelout tho i do prefer & most of time when i am in position of choice to use what i choose.
Your below comment once again proves you just take a quote from somewhere and open your mouth without thinking or caring whether you its true or not. Where the difference between (say ubuntu as you used that" & windows is that when you install *nix on a desktop or laptop everything works including thousands of available applications. You might have maybe 1 thing that doesnt work and you need to go a manufacturers website or google to find a driver but thats it. With windows do a standard install with that and then have a look in Device manager to see what needs drivers it will most be likely be around the 6 to 8 devices and you wont be able to use the OS for anything at all apart from maybe surf the web or use messenger there will be no apps available from the off.
As for user friendly i have to agree most people define this by what they already know and not how useable something actually it. Because its different it doent means it not user friendly. This applies to going from windows to mac or linux to windows or whatever combo.
You were obviously flamebaiting but you didnt even realyl manage yoru goal with that you just made yourself look a ***** as every reply to your post has proved.
But the main point was a Licensing and and even under windows if someone is NOT given the specs then they will not be able to write drivers. - TheHerk, on 01/07/2009, -0/+3I don't know but I just sold my last two(Indigo2 and O2) to an online dealer. I miss them, and good riddance at the same time.
- computershack, on 01/07/2009, -0/+3WTF are you on about? You on drugs or something?
- mleh, on 01/07/2009, -0/+2I'd just like an O2 to complete my collection.
- CarzorStelatis, on 01/07/2009, -1/+3Pointless article. Since no information was given about what the problematic terms were, reading the article provided no additional information beyond that contained in the headline. Great news, buried article.
- DarkerMaster, on 01/08/2009, -0/+2What the hell do you think Carter uses to determine where the gate is going...SGI for SG1
- directedition, on 01/08/2009, -0/+2@xaxxon
You wouldn't happen to have a VW540 motherboard you're willing to sell would you? The NVRAM on mine is fried and it just scrolls boot test errors complaining about the clock being corrupt. - MichiganJeep, on 01/08/2009, -0/+2I always liked SGI machines. Used to have a huge NT workstation. It sounded like a jet engine when powering up. I still have a Indigo2 for old legacy Catia data.
- CCmachined, on 01/07/2009, -0/+2technology always improves. movement against closed source proprietary software that advocates DRM and stupid formats is definitely a step in the right direction if you ask me.
- xaxxon, on 01/08/2009, -0/+2I was working for Silicon Graphics (Before they were "SGI") when those workstations came out. They were pretty impressive for the time (though ridiculously expensive).
We were all pretty stoked to play quake on them in the office :)
They couldn't compete with the horsepower of an Octane with dedicated graphics hardware, though. - HonoredMule, on 01/07/2009, -0/+2What? Whatever did he say that implies his mind is in the gutter? How do...ooohhhh, YOUR mind is in the gutter.
...as verified by your profile picture. - HonoredMule, on 01/07/2009, -0/+2Damn straight I do.
- esc27, on 01/07/2009, -1/+3So the previous "free" license wasn't the right kind of "free"? Almost makes Microsoft's licensing make sense...
- javaroast, on 01/07/2009, -0/+2Netgear sucks on any OS or even all on their own!
- netant, on 01/07/2009, -0/+2As I thought I understood it, you can make modifications to GPL code and NOT distribute it publicly, provided that you aren't selling it or distributing the executable outside of one's company.
But I'm a virtual decade behind on licensing issues. The legal stuff just isn't that interesting. - CCmachined, on 01/07/2009, -0/+2it's perfect for a PC or laptop with hardware from vendors that give a ***** about software freedom instead of just making money (aka hardware with drivers that work under Linux.)
Get an Ubuntu Dell or even an eeePC and you'll be pleasantly surprised at how well it just works on hardware that doesnt ***** the OS around. "Spend money, linux is Free"? yes it is, but no hardware is free and you don't have linux-friendly hardware. its the hardware vendors fault, nobody elses. As you need a change of hardware might as well get Linux with it, and support too. Someone like you probably isn't capable of working out what is wrong and tweaking it to work yourself, just go the easy way.
Oh yeah, and my girlfriend uses my Ubuntu laptop no problem and no help from me either - Firefox, use MSN with aMSN, take pictures with the webcam with Cheese, it's all great and easy to find and use. - AmbyR00, on 08/27/2009, -0/+1Yes, but its license is compatible with GPL.
- DarkerMaster, on 01/08/2009, -0/+1For Crying out loud...WHAT?
- ethana2, on 01/07/2009, -2/+3GnewSense users are the jewish vegans of Free Software.
..Just don't worry about it. - SteveMax, on 01/07/2009, -3/+3"Last modified 2008-09-19"
They could easily have gone out of business in the months that passed since this article. - Eaststand, on 01/07/2009, -2/+2I know. Linux demonstrates this perfectly.
- drgmdp, on 01/07/2009, -2/+2damn, those free license fonts really suck...
- YaroMan22, on 06/12/2009, -0/+0Actually, it ONLY matters to the Stallmanists. Most Linux users I know don't give a damn if OpenGL was actually Stallman compliant or not.
- YaroMan22, on 06/12/2009, -0/+0None of which OpenGL had, but whatever.
My take on this is simple, and I'll probably get buried for this, but I never felt OpenGL was non-free purely because Richard Stallman had a personal problem with it or because he said so.
It's because of that I gladly used a nice pretty non-free desktop before SGI decided to make the "smart" move of bowing to Lord Stallman's demands.
I also use proprietary drivers, and until "nv" gets something more than pathetic 2D support, you can't pry it even from my cold, dead hands.
Most Linux users actually don't care as much about how "free" things are in their distros. They'll get as much FOSS as they can, but if they want something the FOSS-alternative sucks at (Flash? 3D Drivers?), they'll use that instead of blubbering and saying, "Oh... but Richard Stallman believes I shouldn't."
A lot of the Stallmanists (The ones who think Linux is GNU, but that's a whole other argument.) like to act like the presence of a proprietary driver will cause your house to burn down and all the women in your family to be raped. Here's a small chunk of reality for the Stallmanists: Not all proprietary software is evil. Try to judge a company for their REAL evil acts, not for the fact they don't release their source code. Try not to be sheep like RMS wants you to be. - YaroMan22, on 06/12/2009, -1/+0This is typical of Stallmanists, trust me. They still act like anyone who uses proprietary software and those who develop it poison children's drinking water and rape kittens.
The actual Linux users, the ones who call it Linux and don't obsess over something being "free," actually accepted OpenGL as free software long before His Self-Proclaimed Highness of Free Software Richard Stallman did.
You wanna know the difference between Stallmanists and Real Linux users?
Real Linux users use what works and is practical. They wanna use their computers, so if they have, say, a GeForce, they'll just use the god-damn proprietary driver and not even lose sleep over it
Stallmanists would like to think they use their computers, but because they'd rather be a bunch of pussies who can't think beyond GPL and GPL-compatible software, they can't get the real meat of a lot of their hardware. They'll use the "nv" driver which has ***** 2D support and absolutely zilch, none, nada, 3D. Oh, and Flash is basically a no-go, since Gnash is a horrendously bad joke.
Another annoying thing about Stallmanists is they like to think all Linux users really agree with them. - Eaststand, on 01/07/2009, -3/+2its fine for servers I know, and preferred at that, but that wasnt the point. heres a quote from ubuntus site:
"Ubuntu is a community developed, Linux-based operating system that is perfect for laptops, desktops"
No its not. Why lie to people?? its fiddly and a bitch to get things to work properly, and then once you've got something to work, something else stops working. To lie on a scale that suggests that normal non-teched up people can use this "OS" easily is almost criminal. Just say, "we can do servers fantastically, but for a desktop environment even your girlfriend can use, we fail spectacularly". At least thats honest. -
Show 51 - 62 of 62 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is