Poll: Binary NVidia/ATI Drivers in Ubuntu?

[aysiu]

I think you're making up a context that doesn't exist. I do not answer to Mark Shuttleworth, and I am not an employee of Ubuntu or Canonical.

I am a volunteer on these forums, and I speak for myself.

I also suggest that you read the developer discussions about the issue that someone linked to before. I'll link to it again:
https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ub...ead.html#22586

[Henry Rayker]

Well, Sony got in loads of trouble for the rootkit fiasco.

Additionally, I think it is hardly a "one man's toy" as this decision was made BECAUSE of the community. Ubuntu has had proprietary bits for a long time (since the beginning?) in the form of hardware support.

This isn't new. Personally, I don't like it. Personally, I'd prefer to have a setup dialogue where it asks, "Do you want proprietary wireless drivers installed?" "Do you want proprietary video drivers installed?" "Do you want proprietary whatever else drivers installed?"

However, this isn't my decision. The community has been demanding this step (take a look at all the "WAHHH!! My video card only works if I install a driver! Linux isn't ready for the desktop because you have to install drivers! OMGWTFBEANS") I'll go along for the ride, at least for now.

[The Grum]

Come on, with the due respect, how can someone still trust on Mark Shuttleworth??

Today he says it will be trivially but who assures you this will be true tomorrow??

Oh, come on! Mark, NVidia and ATI are not part of some evil plot to get rootkits on your system.

Solution to your problem:

$>sudo apt-get remove tinfoil-hat

[rplantz]

aysiu said:
To me it seems Ubuntu has became more a one man's toy (servicing his obsession against Microsoft) than a community endeavour.

One of the reasons I went with Ubuntu is that I think his spending his money this way helps the general community. I do not know the numbers, but I suspect that Ubuntu has converted more people to Linux than Debian. On the other hand, I prefer a community endeavor.

Meanwhile, all distros are getting better. I first tried to install Debian a year and a half ago. The installer did not like my SATA disk, and Ubuntu gave no complaints.

At this moment I'm already downloading Debian Etch. But I'm very new to Linux, I only use Linux for 5 ou 6 weeks, and so I don't know if I have the knowledge to use Debian. But as things are know it seems that using Ubuntu is out of question.
zetetic

I installed Debian Etch yesterday. I installed it on the same disk with my Ubuntu so I can compare them before switching. It may be my imagination (I have not done any timing), but Debian seems much faster.

I did a net install. It was very easy. The only slightly tricky part was modifying my /boot/grub/menu.lst file for dual boot.

I would describe myself as a knowledgeable user, but not a Linux guru.

[aysiu]

By the way, I never said

To me it seems Ubuntu has became more a one man's toy (servicing his obsession against Microsoft) than a community endeavour.

I believe that was zetetic saying that.

[maniacmusician]

lol who cares? if you're part of the minority that doesn't want these, then do a sudo aptitude remove whatever. For most people this will provide increased functionality, and thats what Canonical is after.

[jr.gotti]

Open-source zealots won't like this, but at the end of the day I think most people want a computer that "just works." If including proprietary drivers helps Ubuntu work better for more people, then I'm all for it.

Amen. I have installed linux on plenty of peoples computers for them. Only around 20% keep it. Why? Here's there response to that question;

"Nothing works."

At first more experienced users will laugh at that statement. With linux, and time, you can make everything work. But not everyone is like us. They don't want to do that.

When you install windows, what do you get? For the most part, a completely working system. (MP3's play, Flash is a click away, Shockwave is available, Graphics drivers preinstalled.)

I don't like Windows, and I don't use it. Not because it's closed source. I couldn't care less. If it was closed source without security holes, large pricetag, and viruses out the ****, I would use windows. But it's not. It's expensive, and cheap.

You have to understand people coming to linux are coming from Windows. (For the most part) They are used to having everything work. And when it doesn't, they get scared and run away.

If having more things work "right out of the box" can be achieved through the use of preinstalled proprietary drivers, then as the quoted poster, I am all for it.

As for the OP, I believe you are being slightly ridiculous. It's nice to have an OS built around a healthy ideal such as "Linux For Humans" and "Free Software For All!!!," but when following that regiment to the "T" means denying the advancment of the OS as a whole, then it's ridiculous. I'd rather have a working linux install then a non-working, but completely open source linux install.

Compare it to an ancient civilization if you will. They don't use electronics, cars, or anything like that. Outside this civilization everyone is going through a "technological boom," and advancing themselves through this technology. Eventually, out ancient civilization will die off due to there refusal to accept the oppurtunity to advance.

When will I stop using Ubuntu? Either when it starts charging, or when it becomes that "ancient civilization," and becomes rustic in comparison with other distros.

Let's not let petty convictions keep us from advancement.

EDIT: I just saw this:

At this moment I'm already downloading Debian Etch. But I'm very new to Linux, I only use Linux for 5 ou 6 weeks, and so I don't know if I have the knowledge to use Debian. But as things are know it seems that using Ubuntu is out of question.
zetetic

My response: See in you back in two weeks. Ubuntu will still be here

[Brunellus]

The distro market is open (unlike other sectors of OS life). If the OP is concerned about binary-blob drivers to the extent of bomb-throwing rage, then he would be best served by moving to another, freer distribution--perhaps the FSF-blessed GNU-buntu derivative, or a rigorously pure install of Debian, or perhaps a new, utterly Free build of Linux From Scratch.

I'm not happy about binary-blob drivers either, but they make the difference to me between a usable, flexible system and having several kilos of scrap lying about the house.

My general line--and one that seems to be the Ubuntu consensus--is Free wherever possible, non-Free only when necessary.

Also, in response to jr.gotti, above:

There are many ways to progress. Binary-blob drivers help us here and now. Free drivers help us eventually. The latter is preferable to the former. Most of us tend to install Linux on the hardware we already have, so we gravitate towards binary drivers. New purchases can be directed towards suitably-Free alternatives.

It's not worth throwing bombs over. There are more important things to worry about in life.

[jr.gotti]

Also, in response to jr.gotti, above:

There are many ways to progress. Binary-blob drivers help us here and now. Free drivers help us eventually. The latter is preferable to the former. Most of us tend to install Linux on the hardware we already have, so we gravitate towards binary drivers. New purchases can be directed towards suitably-Free alternatives.

It's not worth throwing bombs over. There are more important things to worry about in life.

Undoubtedly. But as you said, right now...binary drivers are the best choice. To refuse to use them would be foolish. If and when free drivers are released, I would install them.

And to clarify, I don't mean to "throw bombs," I'm just sharing my views.

[aysiu]

Ubuntu is in an awkward and unique position.

There are other distributions that allow you a completely open source distribution. Debian, Gentoo, LFS, and Slackware come to mind (though Mark says even Debian has some proprietary firmware), but none of those has as its primary goal making inroads into the Windows-dominated desktop market.

Then, there are other distributions that seek to be genuine alternatives to Windows--PCLinuxOS, Linspire, Mepis, Blag--and have no qualms about including non-free software and, in fact, pride themselves on using proprietary software that will give new users the impression things "just work."

Ubuntu is caught in the middle. It wants to be open source but also wants to entice ex-Windows users. If this tension bothers you, I think you should go to one of the other sides. If you want something completely free, build it from the ground up using something like Gentoo. If you want something that "just works" and even Automatix seems inconvenient to you, use PCLinuxOS or Mepis.

I'll tell you the truth: I didn't come to Ubuntu for its technical superiority over other distros (in fact, I don't believe it is technically superior to other distros), nor did I come to it for its commitment (however fickle it appears now) to Free software. I came to Ubuntu for its community, and that's why I stay with it. The support here is incredible while also being friendly. Conventional wisdom says Gentoo forums have much better support and documentation but are also relatively unfriendly to new users, and my experience with Mepis users is that they're on the whole very friendly but unknowledgeable.

To those who use Free software exclusively (and if you've been using Ubuntu up until now, you don't belong in this group, as Mark pointed out on his webpage that Ubuntu has included non-free firmware since Warty), you don't have to use Ubuntu. You're free to leave at any time.

And this is why I don't care what direction Ubuntu heads. If it heads in a direction I can't morally abide by, I'll just switch to another distribution. There is no vendor lock-in in Linux.

I'll keep saying that until you get it: There is no vendor lock-in in Linux.