Lunix users can't even BE khajiit WTF
-
So, if I were to mention the windows console being updated....
Use the same word in 46 different ways and you can never lose a debate.
-
Linux developers call the very notion of a stable driver interface "nonsense".
Bonus quote:
(remember we are talking about GPL released drivers here, if your code doesn't fall under this category, good luck, you are on your own here, you leech .)
That's a fucked up way to do business. No wonder linux driver support is a mess.
-
I tried ubuntu once when I was younger, more foolish and hadn't realised that I'd never get those hours of my life back.
I used Windows for years (Windows 1 up to Windows 7), and needed to re-install it every other year. Between the endless cycle of update/reboot, I've lost countless hours with it and realized I would never get those thousand of hours of my life back. Now I just setup Linux on my laptop and use it until the hardware dies.
@DogsB said:I was half tempted to leave it on my sister's laptop and claim ignorance when it came to tech support. Unfortunately she needed a decent office suite so back to windows with her. She has a mac now and I don't have to do tech support. So some stories have a happy ending.
I see that even you realized Windows is a constant support nightmare and moved her to Unix so you are now freed of supporting her. Your sister must love you for it
-
and needed to re-install it every other year.
You needed to.
Why did you need to? Was there a man with a gun threatening you?
-
Now I just setup Linux on my laptop and use it until the hardware dies.
And then you have a slow and shitty machine for half it's life, but you saved a few hundred bucks for that lack of performance. Awesome!
-
You needed to.
Why did you need to? Was there a man with a gun threatening you?
Windows goes slower and slower as time goes by.
Don't deny it, you liar !
-
And then you have a slow and shitty machine for half it's life, but you saved a few hundred bucks for that lack of performance. Awesome!
I said a "Linux" machine, not a Windows one
-
Windows goes slower and slower as time goes by.
Windows 2000/XP shutdowns take longer as time goes by.
That bug was fixed in Vista. Your list included Vista and Windows 7, so you obviously are aware of this.
Don't deny it, you liar !
The shutdown took slightly longer, so you "needed" to reinstall the OS? This is a new definition of the word "needed" I wasn't previously aware of.
-
-
This is a new definition of the word "needed" I wasn't previously aware of
There is a lot of words you don't know the definition of
-
You should think of it as Blakeybait
-
I've lost countless hours with it and realized I would never get those thousand of hours of my life back
And that's the story of how you became a time bandit.
-
I see that even you realized Windows is a constant support nightmare and moved her to Unix so you are now freed of supporting her. Your sister must love you for it
It's worked out brilliantly for both of us thank you. She doesn't have an OS that shits the bed all the time. She gets to be trendy. She can use tools that aren't complete garbage and I don't have to do tech support. That's what you get when you use an OS that isn't a shit copy cat of Unix.Now I just setup Linux on my laptop and use it until the hardware dies.
Or until it shits the bed which it will do all the time. Or until the person you have inflicted it upon realizes they don't have the software they need and force you to install Windows again. I imagine that's where the thousands of hours of your life have gone installing windows.Also enjoy the shit battery life and driver support that linux will bestow upon you.
*edit : need better grammar...
-
Wow...
:disgunbegood.kmz:
also
, etc
-
Also enjoy the shit battery life and driver support that linux will bestow upon you.
Don't forget the awesome(ly bad) frame rates you'll get in video games when using GPL-approved video drivers!
-
Don't forget the awesome(ly bad) frame rates you'll get in video games when using GPL-approved video drivers!
If you are using an Intel video chipset, the driver is actually GPL approved and maintained by Intel. Of course, the framerate is terrible since Intel video is pretty much crap at 3D rendering.I buy Nvidia video card and use the official Nvidia driver, because they have the best driver support under Linux.
When I want to play video games, I turn on my PlayStation.
-
framerate is terrible
Isn't that what I said?
official Nvidia driver
Somewhere, a tear rolls down Linus Torvalds' face.
When I want to play video games, I turn on my PlayStation.
Minecraft PE still doesn't have redstone. Nor mods.
-
Windows is a constant support nightmare and moved her to Unix so you are now freed of supporting her.
Of course, since she's not touching her computer again with a ten-foot pole until someone gets Windows back on it.
I've seen lots of stupid arguments from people with Torvalds' dick up their ass, but claiming Unix and derivatives are easy to support yourself makes you either a very persistent troll or a total idiot.
Your sister must love you for it.
I humbly refer you to my cactus analogy. And yes, in case you are a total idiot, Linux is the cactus.
-
You must be a total idiot to not realize I was talking about her Mac
-
When I want to play video games, I turn on my PlayStation.
1995 called. They want their shit back. Incidently there was an OS available at that time that was miles better than linux even then. However the name eludes me for some reason.
-
Windows goes slower and slower as time goes by.
I haven't had that problem since 98.
-
I see a thread where people are competing about Birds, Doors, and Fruits. I think each of them needs to go buy Release!, a wacky fun game that will prove them all right* That is all.
* ... in wanting to kill the guy who suggested it.
-
This post is deleted!
-
That is about internal api, between kernel devs for kernel devs. If you think about it you cannot and should not make too much stability there or the next person cannot add a new field for a new feature on some new architecture. Still, it is stable enough that some people start to rely on some parts mostly for
perfreasons, but the link explains why they should not.On the other hand the Linux/userspace API is the most sacred of the contracts and almost never breaks. If anyone tries to sneak in such a change (even if it is to fix a previously relied upon bug) Linus will show his famous finger :)
-
Also if it is GPL why is it not in-tree, that is the point if was up-streamed it would have evolved along with the rest of the kernel. Problem is vendors, even those who care to make GPL do not know a code dump will be trash unless it gets reviewed and becomes part of the stable kernel.
thanks to the vendor including some GPL code
what does this exactly mean? like they have few lines GPL and the rest is what? half arsed licenses are worse than binary blobs.
-
That is about internal api, between kernel devs for kernel devs. If you think about it you cannot and should not make too much stability there or the next person cannot add a new field for a new feature on some new architecture. Still, it is stable enough that some people start to rely on some parts mostly for perf reasons, but the link explains why they should not.
Bottom line is, in order for Nvidia to create good GPU drivers for Linux, they need to reveal their source code, with potential trade secrets, to a bunch of disinterested corporation-hating hippies, and hope they do a good job maintaining the software. Also, when something goes wrong with the drivers and people rush to the forums to complain, bad PR goes to Nvidia, not the kernel maintainers. And all that, for like 1% of the market share.
It seems to me this solution not only doesn't scale, but is actively hostile towards bleeding edge consumer hardware manufacturers. If Linux people want this kind of hardware on their platform, they need to do much better than this empty ideological "our way or the highway" crap from the article.
-
what does this exactly mean? like they have few lines GPL and the rest is what?
The rest got infected with GPL too. There's a reason why they call it virus license.Oh, and you fucked up the quote attribution.
-
Bottom line is, in order for Nvidia to create good GPU drivers for Linux, they need to reveal their source code
Nvidia release very good Linux drivers and they never released their source code.
The driver is a binary blob and there is a GPLed wrapper around it to interface between the blob and the kernel.It's been working pretty good so far, even if some people don't like the binary blob part.
-
Nvidia release very good Linux drivers and they never released their source code.The driver is a binary blob and there is a GPLed wrapper around it to interface between the blob and the kernel.
It's been working pretty good so far, even if some people don't like the binary blob part.
So basically, Nvidia made the kind of thing Linux should provide out of the box. Got it.
-
Yup, and they probably spend 3 times more resources maintaining it for 1% of the market than they do their (say) OS X driver which covers like 12% of the market.
BUT GUYZ LINUX IS SO EFFICIENT AND CHEAP!!! No.
-
LINUX IS SO EFFICIENT AND CHEAP
According to Microsoft, you get what you pay for.Then, they made Windows 10 Free.
-
"Mac is easier to do things for than Linux"
"MICROSOFT IS HITLERSATAN!"
-
Hi, you are stating the reason your concern is not met along with your concern, right here, (including quoted text), which is kinda neat.
Distros or users need to sort out a separate relationship to have blobs - the GPL codebases simply can't absorb them due to licensing issues. So the blob you want is not likely to be in the box, unless some distro goes blob-mad.
You have a wide choice of boxes, including those with WIndows in them - if you don't really need to do work with a machine, Windows is fine.
-
-
Nvidia release very good Linux drivers and they never released their source code.The driver is a binary blob and there is a GPLed wrapper around it to interface between the blob and the kernel.
And they participate in improving nouveau.
The rest got infected with GPL too. There's a reason why they call it virus license.
That is perhaps the result of some zealot enforcing GPL then, no wonder they got a code dump that does not compile now.Oh, and you fucked up the quote attribution.
I quoted you quoting TwelveBaud (to avoid having to scroll all the way back up) thinking the forum software is smart enough to disentangle it, and did not double check.
And all that, for like 1% of the market share.
Except that it is not 1% if you want your device to be competitive in the mobile market you sure as hell need to support Android. Now if nvidia only cares about desktop's bulky graphics cards then yes you could be right, but they will die along with the rest of the desktop market (even if steam was not a thing).
in order for Nvidia to create good GPU drivers for Linux, they need to reveal their source code, with potential trade secrets, to a bunch of disinterested corporation-hating hippies, and hope they do a good job maintaining the software
Nvidia already makes good drivers for Linux (they are smart), and participates in open source nouveau (see above). So there is no trade secret in a fucking driver, if you really believe so you have never looked inside the code of drivers. They are usually shit and I suspect nvidia is just afraid of open sourcing it (perhaps
treasure trove for us, plus there is FUD). It could be also that their driver code base (which should be huge) is so entangled with Windows driver model that they are afraid of inadvertently distributing some MS header or something.
-
That is perhaps the result of some zealot enforcing GPL then
Are you saying that the only people who respect software licenses are zealots?
-
I think he's saying that people who make money from software are implicitly allowed to not respect software licenses.
-
No, but if all enforcement achieves is a core dump
and some disgruntled vendor what is the point other than zealots getting happy to prove a point? If they made a driver for Linux but did not go through the due diligence, they already have done better than most.P.S.
I do not know if this is the case for this 100MBit NIC, but all the same
-
...Are you arguing that publishing the source had an effect on quality of code, or maintenance support?
-
Wow...
:disgunbegood.kmz:
also
, etcI actually ate popcorn while during the reading of this topic. Unfortunately, I have since run out.
-
...Are you arguing that publishing the source had an effect on quality of code, or maintenance support?
Open sourcing is a business strategy, and needs support and maintenance; i.e. you have to allocate resources to up-stream the code (to avoid further maintenance cost), or maintaining it while the underlying platform changes (if it remains out of tree). In a way it needs more effort than closed source, because you do not want your dirty laundry in the full sight, while you can hide all sort of
in binary blobs.A code dump is just leaving an un-maintained dump around. If the original software author/owner does not care about his/her creation no one else will. Now if enforcement goes after custody of some GPL-infected code, they should at least do that up-streaming/maintenance job themselves (heh)
-
@sloosecannon said:
Wow...
:disgunbegood.kmz:
also
, etcI actually ate popcorn while during the reading of this topic. Unfortunately, I have since run out.
@TimeBandit has proven to be a most disappointing troll =(
-
Open sourcing is a business strategy, and needs support and maintenance; i.e. you have to allocate resources to up-stream the code (to avoid further maintenance cost), or maintaining it while the underlying platform changes (if it remains out of tree). In a way it needs more effort than closed source, because you do not want your dirty laundry in the full sight, while you can hide all sort of
in binary blobs.
So your argument is that open source isn't inherently more shitty than closed source, but that publishing the code somehow obliges the owner to care more about code quality?A code dump is just leaving an un-maintained dump around. If the original software author/owner does not care about his/her creation no one else will.
But of course it doesn't work like that if you don't publish the source.
-
@TimeBandit has proven to be a most disappointing troll =(
The popcorn wasn't all that impressive either.
-
That is about internal api, between kernel devs for kernel devs. If you think about it you cannot and should not make too much stability there or the next person cannot add a new field for a new feature on some new architecture. Still, it is stable enough that some people start to rely on some parts mostly for perf reasons, but the link explains why they should not.
Yes, the fundamental problem here is that the kernel devs, likely Linus himself, made the bad assumption that drivers will always be written and maintained by kernel devs then intentionally never bothered to change how they treated this interface when that assumption was proven false.
-
So your argument is that open source isn't inherently more shitty than closed source, but that publishing the code somehow obliges the owner to care more about code quality?
Yes, maintained OSS is better than closed source. Closed source is like homeschooling, it only makes sense if you live in a boat or in the middle of corns.
it doesn't work like that if you don't publish the source.
Publishing the source to some random driver garbage will never help, instead of squeezing the source it might make more sense to educate them on the business advantages.
-
No they do not write drivers, vendors do. But if it is in-tree when the platform changes, it will be changed for them and tested. It is like having a dynamic platform, you write your site in django but tomorrow it might have changed slightly, as long as the changes are gradual it will be Ok if over time the entire platform has changed to Flask. If you have the code out of tree, you should keep up with the fast and crazy pace Linux kernel is developed and that is not cheap or easy, so it only makes sense to GPL and up-stream.
That said, if the driver is not using obscure or fancy features it will be Ok, I have complied a 10 year-old driver and I had to just change something likeget_pci_..tofind_pci_..if your driver starts poking around in different subsystems (like a graphics driver or even network driver) then yes, it will be harder. Ah, one more reason perhaps nvidia keeps a shim around their binary driver is perhaps that they can maintain the small shim to always use the latest API while keeping their core the same, it works well up to a point.
-
The popcorn wasn't all that impressive either.
A story with a decidely unhappy ending. =/Yes, maintained OSS is better than closed source. Closed source is like homeschooling, it only makes sense if you live in a boat or in the middle of corns.
Like fuck it is. A well maintained codebase with or without your OSS stickers is prefereable to a badly maintained one. That stupid slogan "With enough eyes all bugs are shallow" nonsense is nonsense. This forum embodies it perfectly aswell as most of the high profile security issues last year.
People keep bandied that open source nonsense like it will ward off vampires. "Oh but we can review the source". A: Nobody fucking wants too. B: If you have to look at the source of a third party library while tracking a bug you're so far up shit creek that you may as well use the paddle to beat yourself unconcioius. C: Commerical reality is that for 99% of companies advocating the use of OSS is an attempt to cut costs and pawn work off to some other unfortunate in the hope they fix the problem without it affecting your bottom line.
-
Yes, the fundamental problem here is that the kernel devs, likely Linus himself, made the bad assumption that drivers will always be written and maintained by kernel devs then intentionally never bothered to change how they treated this interface when that assumption was proven false.
Let's expand on that:
-
Having a strong philosophy of software development "GPL is great! We love GPL!" - fine
-
Doubling-down on that philosophy even when it's obvious it's holding your product back and harming users - fine
-
Trying to convince other people to use your product, even though you know they don't care about your philosophy and they would be harmed by switching to it - not ok
If the Linux community would just stop preaching about how great Linux is and telling people to switch to it, we'd probably get along just fine. I still wouldn't use it, but my attitude would be more like, "eh whatever, if that's how you like your bread buttered so be it," rather than "why the fuck are you constantly telling me to use your broken shit?!"
-
-
B: If you have to look at the source of a third party library while tracking a bug you're so far up shit creek that you may as well use the paddle to beat yourself unconcioius.
well, all I can say is when I had to track a nasty bug in a binary blob (that restarted some SoC maybe once a day) I had to track registers in a non-volatile memory and investigate them after each boot, this took months and of course the bug was in the binary driver. Tracking bugs are difficult, choose your tools/libraries wisely.
C: Commerical reality is that for 99% of companies advocating the use of OSS is an attempt to cut costs and pawn work off to some other unfortunate in the hope they fix the problem without it affecting your bottom line.
Do they even have a community? what problem do you want to solve, what is the market size and who is the target, is it just another JS platform or something really interesting for geeks. Open sourcing your software will be disappointing if you do it out of desperation with no plans (you will gain nothing). Open sourcing can help bottom-line, but not immediately and certainly not if you do not make a community around it that have their own selfish reasons to use your product (there are not many selfless hippies around). At first perhaps it will be even more expensive, to get things right and going, set up conferences and forums and ML, ... but when it gets rolling it helps growth and brings money.
