jejik.com — Last week at the Ubuntu Developer Summit the release goals for Feisty Fawn—scheduled to appear April 2007—were discussed and drawn up. Ubuntu's next version is aiming for some pretty good features such as a bullet proof X.org and network roaming. There's one change that bothers me to no end though: composite by default.
Nov 13, 2006 View in Crawl 4
invar9Nov 13, 2006
"A 3D desktop?while great eye candy?will not solve some of the major problems new Ubuntu recruits have" Are they insane? The 3D desktop is the reason I have converted as many windows users to Linux using Sabayon. Yes it is eye candy but it is also something Microsoft has been promising for a LONG time and the Linux community accomplished it in a matter on months. I think that says the most.
skizotdNov 14, 2006
The problem is that these companies are forcing their views upon linux. It's pretty hard to produce an OS that can stand up to big guys. Linux has survived because it has adopted certain ideologies and has tried to stand its ground. Threes nothing more that some of these companies want than to take advantage of linux for their own benefit. These ideologies led to its creation and has been built on these since. This leads to companies working with linux in more productive ways as time goes on. There needs to be some pull towards an example of freedom to make sure it doesn't get slipped out from underneath us, and every little step you make against this makes the next budge a little easier.That being said this is really a lose lose situation with graphics drivers because 1) There's no way nvidia and ati are going to open source their drivers and 2) These drivers are probably the most complex in the system with all the advancements of the graphics card industry.. so it's doubtful equal substitutes could be created.
aprecheNov 14, 2006
Good. Ubuntu should be non-free. For Linux to compete, they have to have the GPU drivers and they have to have the eye candy. I don't care for eye-candy, but I do care for GPU drivers. If there were a FOS GPU driver, I would use it. I previously used a binary driver for my network card, but then forcedeth came into existence. In the absence of an open source driver, you have to include the binary one to be competetive. The only people who don't want the binary drivers are a vocal minority of crazed zealots. I'd say just about every Ubuntu user goes through the effort of manually installing these drivers. It's just silly. Make a legal deal with Ati and Nvidia to get this s**t in there by default. Zealots can continue to use Debian and keep the giant sticks in their collective posteriors.
ddukNov 14, 2006
@ Intangir: You're being dugg down because you are missing the point of the article, which is about proprietary drivers being included by default. Beryl requires official drivers to perform efficiently, this is why they are required. The inclusion of proprietary drivers from the likes of nVidea and ATI is against the principles of Open Source, hence the debate.
dukeinlondonNov 14, 2006
amazing how all of this still gets people talking. Blogger 101 : The free vs non-free article posted on digg.
dukeinlondonNov 14, 2006
Of course, that didn't happen in windows 98.
carzorstelatisNov 15, 2006
'The last time I tried linux was several years ago when just getting mp3s to play was an ordeal. Needless to say my linux install didn´t last long'Newsflash. Getting any media format to play is still an ordeal thanks to the f**king zealots.
lawmakerNov 16, 2006
"Once we will have big enough market share then get AMD and Nvidia on the table to make them open source their drivers"How exactly are you going to make Nvidia or ATI release the source once we practicly "approve" using binary drivers by including them by default? But I'm afraid that won't be the problem. This approval will result in many many more binary-only drivers, making Linux effectively non-free.