From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Oct 30 14:29:46 2011 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 00524106566B for ; Sun, 30 Oct 2011 14:29:45 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from freebsd@edvax.de) Received: from mx01.qsc.de (mx01.qsc.de [213.148.129.14]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A03588FC13 for ; Sun, 30 Oct 2011 14:29:45 +0000 (UTC) Received: from r56.edvax.de (port-92-195-104-16.dynamic.qsc.de [92.195.104.16]) by mx01.qsc.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id E37703F80A for ; Sun, 30 Oct 2011 15:29:43 +0100 (CET) Received: from r56.edvax.de (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by r56.edvax.de (8.14.5/8.14.5) with SMTP id p9UEThJP001908 for ; Sun, 30 Oct 2011 15:29:43 +0100 (CET) (envelope-from freebsd@edvax.de) Date: Sun, 30 Oct 2011 15:29:43 +0100 From: Polytropon To: FreeBSD Message-Id: <20111030152943.79ee2103.freebsd@edvax.de> In-Reply-To: <20111030094808.2ab6b9fa@scorpio> References: <20111028175401.17906e52@scorpio> <201110282227.p9SMR3HY075510@mail.r-bonomi.com> <20111029072824.76540c54@scorpio> <20111030082511.GA70628@orange.esperance-linux.co.uk> <20111030081349.603d9ecf@scorpio> <20111030094808.2ab6b9fa@scorpio> Organization: EDVAX X-Mailer: Sylpheed 3.1.1 (GTK+ 2.24.5; i386-portbld-freebsd8.2) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: Fast personal printing _without_ CUPS X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list Reply-To: Polytropon List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 30 Oct 2011 14:29:46 -0000 On Sun, 30 Oct 2011 09:48:08 -0400, Jerry wrote: > On Sun, 30 Oct 2011 13:59:58 +0100 > C. P. Ghost articulated: > > > On Sun, Oct 30, 2011 at 1:13 PM, Jerry wrote: > > > The biggest loser in this is FreeBSD itself. Virtually any new PC or > > > laptop, with the exception of the bargain basement brands, and even > > > some of them are exempt, now come with "N" protocol wireless > > > devices. > > > > Instead of devoting so much time and energy whining about the > > problem here on-list, even though you know full well that we can't > > do anything about it for known reasons... why won't you lobby the > > manufacturers of "N" devices, so that they either open their specs, > > so we can write a driver, or at least release binary blobs compatible > > with FreeBSD? Wouldn't that be more productive? You're very > > outspoken on some aspects, so put that rhetorical skill to good use > > and contact the major wireless chipset vendors; and then follow up > > with them if you don't get the reply you want, just as you do here > > on-list. > > Seriously, are you so naive that you believe that his is the only > venue I use to express my feeling on these matters? I have been > pestering several corporations for over two years now. I have even > spoken to several of their representatives, including a developer from > Brother recently in regards to making drivers easily available to > operating systems other than Microsoft, and usually a few flavors of > Linux. The contact I had at Brother was actually a Linux user himself. Actually, Jerry has a point here. The N networking devices have similarities with "modern" printers in this regards. While developing compatible "intelligency" in the devices itself is a cost factor of O(n), moving this "intelligency" to software is O(1). For those not familiar with my abuse of the O notation: O(n) means linear: The more devices are produced, the more chips need to be made. In case of printers, those chips control paper feed and ink pee, as well as scanner, imaging, local buffer storage, data transfer and so on. O(1) means constant: Only one set of driver will have to be developed, one for each "Windows" product line and architecture that's intended to be supported. The whole "intelligence" is in there, and data transfered to the device will control it directly, maybe even unbuffered. >From a business point of view, investing O(1) in development vs. getting O(n) revenue sounds very interesting. What I said regarding printer devices seems to apply to wireless networking too. The cheaper the better. There is no intention of continued use in there, as this does not benefit sales. If hardware could be re-used, what reason would home consumers (main target area!) have to buy something new that basically provides the same functionality? The more unit sales, the lower the price, and therefore a wider-spread product spectrum. Of course, the downside is that the possibilities of use are limited, but again, that's what customers have been trained to require. > One company, I believe it was Cisco, told me that FreeBSD > does not support the system calls it needs to make its devices work > correctly. I am not a system engineer and since he was talking above my > head I just let it go. It _may_ be possible that Cisco depends on "Linuxisms" here, maybe things like *64() calls, like fstat64() vs. fstat(). I'm not a Cisco engineer, so this is just a very wild guess. "Doesn't have it" may refer to advanced technology as well as to legacy one. > As for releasing technical details, etcetera, I was told point blank > that such information was confidential and would not be released. Now > that I can at least agree with. Of course, it is their right to do so, will all the implications. The confidentiality could also be a means to hide the fact that devices come with planned obsolescence or are intended to spy at users (such as it is quite easily possible with "Windows" and a webcam). Other reasons could be secret contracts with companies or governments for a "data exchange", you're getting the idea. But as this cannot be proven properly at the moment, just leave this point mentioned as is. > Unlike many socialists, I don't believe > in working my ass off, spending X amount of dollars and then just giving > my work away freely to every dirt bag to clone. If this is not your attitude, well, fine, and fully okay. However this is not everyones attitude as some want to improve computers and operating systems for free, as they see it a chance to do something FOR the society. The possibility to "make money" with tools provided for free is a thing of licensing. You know that FreeBSD allows its users to create own products with it, even turn _them_ into something proprietary and then sell them. This is a good idea from a CAPITALIST point of view, i. e. take it for 0, sell it for $$$. And why not? Because the licensing terms don't prohibit it. This is also a chance for innovation, for individuals finding their future on a free market. If this way of working has a moral downside is a consideration to be taken by every individual on his own. > I write several major vendors on a monthly basic. Sometimes even using > different names so they might falsely believe that there is a larger > base than actually exists to request support. Now, suppose you were to > join me. Perhaps a few thousand other users, in other words all the > FreeBSD base, and wrote on a bi-weekly schedule to a targeted vendor > base requesting support. I will be happy to supply my own personal list > and compile other pertinent vendor's names & address's as well. This woudn't be interesting, as FreeBSD has no market share. Why "no"? Because it's not a company like the big software vendors or the OEMs. No market share - no intention to support. It is that simple. The logical conclusion: The majority of free projects, no matter how advanced they are, get no attention as the predicted unit sales won't justify further activity. > The only problem I see with this approach is maintaining continued group > support. The tendency of people to just give up and quite is self > evident. If there's a backup for professional work (i. e. payment), _this_ is what keeps people at work. Only few exceptions have the time and will to code for free. Their revenue is the knowledge they gain, the popularity of their software, and the idea that they actually have improved something. Of course, this is not what you can buy food for. > It is the primary difference between an Alpha male and one who just > bends over and takes it. As I said: Adoption is the strength of the weak. :-) -- Polytropon Magdeburg, Germany Happy FreeBSD user since 4.0 Andra moi ennepe, Mousa, ...