Comments on: My stance on Ubuntu and the Bad Vista campaign http://blogs.gnome.org/desrt/2006/12/30/my-stance-on-ubuntu-and-the-bad-vista-campaign/ a lowercase manifesto Thu, 15 Oct 2009 09:25:50 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.5.2 hourly 1 By: Pavel http://blogs.gnome.org/desrt/2006/12/30/my-stance-on-ubuntu-and-the-bad-vista-campaign/comment-page-1/#comment-133 Pavel Tue, 30 Nov 1999 00:00:00 +0000 http://blogs.gnome.org/desrt/2006/12/30/my-stance-on-ubuntu-and-the-bad-vista-campaign/#comment-133 > Without users, we can't make demands.<p/>this was exactly the stance of some ubuntu dev protecting the binary-drivers-by-default spec.<br/>He could not hold up, since even if you get new users by offering non-free software, you still wont have more influence than before.<br/>Sure you can abck up your demand for open sourcing the software with a larger user base, but if the company say no, you can simply stop your support for their non-free software, since you would lose many of your users now.<p/>Yes I know you cant paint this black/white, but I think you were overgeneralizing in this paragraph.<p/>I for one think that if ubuntu ships nvidia binary drivers by default, it should not be recommended. > Without users, we can’t make demands.

this was exactly the stance of some ubuntu dev protecting the binary-drivers-by-default spec.
He could not hold up, since even if you get new users by offering non-free software, you still wont have more influence than before.
Sure you can abck up your demand for open sourcing the software with a larger user base, but if the company say no, you can simply stop your support for their non-free software, since you would lose many of your users now.

Yes I know you cant paint this black/white, but I think you were overgeneralizing in this paragraph.

I for one think that if ubuntu ships nvidia binary drivers by default, it should not be recommended.

]]> By: Adam Williamson http://blogs.gnome.org/desrt/2006/12/30/my-stance-on-ubuntu-and-the-bad-vista-campaign/comment-page-1/#comment-134 Adam Williamson Tue, 30 Nov 1999 00:00:00 +0000 http://blogs.gnome.org/desrt/2006/12/30/my-stance-on-ubuntu-and-the-bad-vista-campaign/#comment-134 Your implication that machines with NVIDIA and ATI graphics cards need proprietary software to work is simply not correct. Except for the very latest models (sometimes), they require proprietary software _in order for 3D acceleration to work_. This is not the same thing at all.<p/>Your derivation that 'the overwhelming majority of computer users have some hardware that requires some sort of binary-only code to operate' is also not true. Your implication that machines with NVIDIA and ATI graphics cards need proprietary software to work is simply not correct. Except for the very latest models (sometimes), they require proprietary software _in order for 3D acceleration to work_. This is not the same thing at all.

Your derivation that ‘the overwhelming majority of computer users have some hardware that requires some sort of binary-only code to operate’ is also not true.

]]> By: Brian http://blogs.gnome.org/desrt/2006/12/30/my-stance-on-ubuntu-and-the-bad-vista-campaign/comment-page-1/#comment-135 Brian Tue, 30 Nov 1999 00:00:00 +0000 http://blogs.gnome.org/desrt/2006/12/30/my-stance-on-ubuntu-and-the-bad-vista-campaign/#comment-135 Fedora or some other distro would be a better choice than Ubuntu. Ubuntu's stance on video drivers is totally counter-productive to the FSF's mission. Fedora or some other distro would be a better choice than Ubuntu. Ubuntu’s stance on video drivers is totally counter-productive to the FSF’s mission.

]]> By: desrt http://blogs.gnome.org/desrt/2006/12/30/my-stance-on-ubuntu-and-the-bad-vista-campaign/comment-page-1/#comment-136 desrt Tue, 30 Nov 1999 00:00:00 +0000 http://blogs.gnome.org/desrt/2006/12/30/my-stance-on-ubuntu-and-the-bad-vista-campaign/#comment-136 Brian: Fedora would be fine too.<p/>Adam: You could also just use your laptop with wired ethernet instead of wifi. If you want to actually _use_ your hardware (and use all of it) then you need binaries.<p/>Pavel: only time will tell.... my wager is on the Ubuntu side (clearly). Brian: Fedora would be fine too.

Adam: You could also just use your laptop with wired ethernet instead of wifi. If you want to actually _use_ your hardware (and use all of it) then you need binaries.

Pavel: only time will tell…. my wager is on the Ubuntu side (clearly).

]]> By: Gabriel Hurley http://blogs.gnome.org/desrt/2006/12/30/my-stance-on-ubuntu-and-the-bad-vista-campaign/comment-page-1/#comment-137 Gabriel Hurley Tue, 30 Nov 1999 00:00:00 +0000 http://blogs.gnome.org/desrt/2006/12/30/my-stance-on-ubuntu-and-the-bad-vista-campaign/#comment-137 Not to mention that gNewSense's artwork isn't very appealing. Not to mention that gNewSense’s artwork isn’t very appealing.

]]> By: Robert http://blogs.gnome.org/desrt/2006/12/30/my-stance-on-ubuntu-and-the-bad-vista-campaign/comment-page-1/#comment-138 Robert Tue, 30 Nov 1999 00:00:00 +0000 http://blogs.gnome.org/desrt/2006/12/30/my-stance-on-ubuntu-and-the-bad-vista-campaign/#comment-138 "rather than harping about ideology,"<p/>Having Free drivers is purely practical. Stop throwing the i-word about. People who make vague accusations of idealism in the Free software world are usually just not thinking ahead as many steps.<p/>"except that it doesn't work on most people's computers. People have ATI and nVidia video cards."<p/>Well no, that's misrepresenting things. Most machines will work fine in general, just with some occasional missing functionality. And functionality isn't an all-or-nothing thing: I bet with all the non-Free drivers in the world, most laptops will have some functionality missing under linux.<p/>"One of the real practical problems with closed source software is that if there's a bug then you can't fix the bug and this might prevent you from using your hardware."<p/>No - proprietary code running in kernel space can and does bring down entire systems. It causes otherwise normal errors to be undebuggable. Kiss goodbye to useful kernel panics and X crashes from 'most' users.<p/>"Ubuntu is more or less 99% free."<p/>Then this time next year it's 'more or less 97% free.' then '94%' once you all decide to put DVD support in, then MP3... good enough, no?<p/>"Is your BIOS open source? The ROM firmware on all your devices? Your CPU's microcode?"<p/>Yes yes, the whole 'everyone has to draw a line somewhere' thing. Your examples however are all ones where there is a tightly defined interface between them and the software. In fact your examples should never have to be changed on a machine - should never have to adapt to remain compatible - and mostly should never even be executed after a machine has been taken over by the kernel.<p/>Now, just so you know, I'm not really a supporter of gnewsense. While it would be nice, I doubt it will ever get the traction required to be a useful and well maintained distribution (and it has a stupid name), but I felt I had to point out that your argument doesn't really hold water. Maybe rather than pointing the finger you should be looking in the mirror and asking yourselves why the FSF doesn't feel it can endorse you. “rather than harping about ideology,”

Having Free drivers is purely practical. Stop throwing the i-word about. People who make vague accusations of idealism in the Free software world are usually just not thinking ahead as many steps.

“except that it doesn’t work on most people’s computers. People have ATI and nVidia video cards.”

Well no, that’s misrepresenting things. Most machines will work fine in general, just with some occasional missing functionality. And functionality isn’t an all-or-nothing thing: I bet with all the non-Free drivers in the world, most laptops will have some functionality missing under linux.

“One of the real practical problems with closed source software is that if there’s a bug then you can’t fix the bug and this might prevent you from using your hardware.”

No – proprietary code running in kernel space can and does bring down entire systems. It causes otherwise normal errors to be undebuggable. Kiss goodbye to useful kernel panics and X crashes from ‘most’ users.

“Ubuntu is more or less 99% free.”

Then this time next year it’s ‘more or less 97% free.’ then ‘94%’ once you all decide to put DVD support in, then MP3… good enough, no?

“Is your BIOS open source? The ROM firmware on all your devices? Your CPU’s microcode?”

Yes yes, the whole ‘everyone has to draw a line somewhere’ thing. Your examples however are all ones where there is a tightly defined interface between them and the software. In fact your examples should never have to be changed on a machine – should never have to adapt to remain compatible – and mostly should never even be executed after a machine has been taken over by the kernel.

Now, just so you know, I’m not really a supporter of gnewsense. While it would be nice, I doubt it will ever get the traction required to be a useful and well maintained distribution (and it has a stupid name), but I felt I had to point out that your argument doesn’t really hold water. Maybe rather than pointing the finger you should be looking in the mirror and asking yourselves why the FSF doesn’t feel it can endorse you.

]]> By: Adam Williamson http://blogs.gnome.org/desrt/2006/12/30/my-stance-on-ubuntu-and-the-bad-vista-campaign/comment-page-1/#comment-139 Adam Williamson Tue, 30 Nov 1999 00:00:00 +0000 http://blogs.gnome.org/desrt/2006/12/30/my-stance-on-ubuntu-and-the-bad-vista-campaign/#comment-139 desrt: the two really aren't comparable. 3D acceleration to most users is a toy for either playing games or playing with the 3D desktop. It's not essential to any kind of productive use of the computer (well, except for people who work in 3D animation, but they're hardly a majority of anything). Wireless is far more important, I'll grant you, but even there you can't claim a vast majority of computer users, or even a bare majority. Maybe a slim majority of new computer purchasers. desrt: the two really aren’t comparable. 3D acceleration to most users is a toy for either playing games or playing with the 3D desktop. It’s not essential to any kind of productive use of the computer (well, except for people who work in 3D animation, but they’re hardly a majority of anything). Wireless is far more important, I’ll grant you, but even there you can’t claim a vast majority of computer users, or even a bare majority. Maybe a slim majority of new computer purchasers.

]]> By: Anonymous http://blogs.gnome.org/desrt/2006/12/30/my-stance-on-ubuntu-and-the-bad-vista-campaign/comment-page-1/#comment-140 Anonymous Tue, 30 Nov 1999 00:00:00 +0000 http://blogs.gnome.org/desrt/2006/12/30/my-stance-on-ubuntu-and-the-bad-vista-campaign/#comment-140 "I know people who still pass judgement on Linux as a whole based on experiences from 5 years ago."<p/>Ouch! You really haven't investigated FSF:s standpoint, have you? “I know people who still pass judgement on Linux as a whole based on experiences from 5 years ago.”

Ouch! You really haven’t investigated FSF:s standpoint, have you?

]]> By: Francesco Tapparo http://blogs.gnome.org/desrt/2006/12/30/my-stance-on-ubuntu-and-the-bad-vista-campaign/comment-page-1/#comment-141 Francesco Tapparo Tue, 30 Nov 1999 00:00:00 +0000 http://blogs.gnome.org/desrt/2006/12/30/my-stance-on-ubuntu-and-the-bad-vista-campaign/#comment-141 it is actually very simple: one cannot explain that software has to be free and then recommend proprietary software. It would only sound hypocrite. I only use free software and it is very easy: when I buy a pc I'm attentive that it works with free software. *And* my user experience is better: the free drivers are better integrated, I never had to tweak Xin a long time for example.<p/>best regards<br/>Francesco it is actually very simple: one cannot explain that software has to be free and then recommend proprietary software. It would only sound hypocrite. I only use free software and it is very easy: when I buy a pc I’m attentive that it works with free software. *And* my user experience is better: the free drivers are better integrated, I never had to tweak Xin a long time for example.

best regards
Francesco

]]> By: pinky http://blogs.gnome.org/desrt/2006/12/30/my-stance-on-ubuntu-and-the-bad-vista-campaign/comment-page-1/#comment-142 pinky Tue, 30 Nov 1999 00:00:00 +0000 http://blogs.gnome.org/desrt/2006/12/30/my-stance-on-ubuntu-and-the-bad-vista-campaign/#comment-142 i agree with most of the comments here.<p/>Ubuntu just isn't free, it is even less free than Debian, face it.<p/>About graphic cards. I have a ATI card for my laptop and for my desktop and both run with free software (even 3D). There are a lot of 3D cards which run with free software (especially for laptops) and even if not most of them will run in 2D mode which will be enough for most "normal users"<p/>Wireless may be a problem but again most "normal" computer user i know have a computer somewhere in the room connected to the internet and that's it. No big network, no wlan,... so i think the wlan problem isn't a big problem for the majority of the targeted group. Also there are wlan devices which work with free software: <a href="https://www.fsf.org/resources/hw/net/wireless/cards.html">https://www.fsf.org/resources/hw/net/wireless/cards.html</a><p/>So i think you overact while defending non-free software.<p/>You say you need non-free software to be popular and get users. But look at Fedora no non-free software and a very good and widly known and used distribution. I agree that Gnewsense and Ututo are not distributions which will reach many people. This distribution don't have a large community which can help you, they have not many developers so you don't know how long it will exist and how reliable you will get updates, bugfixes etc. and they are just not well know.<p/>I think Fedora would be the right distribution to recommand:<br/>100% free. well known, large community, stable development,...<p/>At the end you just have to face it. Ubuntu is not that kind of distribution what the FSF needs. You install non-free driver, you maintain non-free software (restricted), you even mix it up with free software (multiverse) and you use a bugtracking system (launchpad) which is non-free. i agree with most of the comments here.

Ubuntu just isn’t free, it is even less free than Debian, face it.

About graphic cards. I have a ATI card for my laptop and for my desktop and both run with free software (even 3D). There are a lot of 3D cards which run with free software (especially for laptops) and even if not most of them will run in 2D mode which will be enough for most “normal users”

Wireless may be a problem but again most “normal” computer user i know have a computer somewhere in the room connected to the internet and that’s it. No big network, no wlan,… so i think the wlan problem isn’t a big problem for the majority of the targeted group. Also there are wlan devices which work with free software: https://www.fsf.org/resources/hw/net/wireless/cards.html

So i think you overact while defending non-free software.

You say you need non-free software to be popular and get users. But look at Fedora no non-free software and a very good and widly known and used distribution. I agree that Gnewsense and Ututo are not distributions which will reach many people. This distribution don’t have a large community which can help you, they have not many developers so you don’t know how long it will exist and how reliable you will get updates, bugfixes etc. and they are just not well know.

I think Fedora would be the right distribution to recommand:
100% free. well known, large community, stable development,…

At the end you just have to face it. Ubuntu is not that kind of distribution what the FSF needs. You install non-free driver, you maintain non-free software (restricted), you even mix it up with free software (multiverse) and you use a bugtracking system (launchpad) which is non-free.

]]>