PDA

View Full Version : i heard some ubuntu news that i think might be misinformation.



graigsmith
December 6th, 2006, 08:31 AM
i heard that ubuntu was going to start including proprietary video drivers as default? i know it's not default in the current one. And i doubt they would ever do it. i read this on slashdot, from someones comments. so I'm sure it's just that person just making up stuff. But i was just curious if anyone else heard anything about including the video drivers by default?

Personally i am content with the open source drivers for my ati 9200.

wieman01
December 6th, 2006, 08:38 AM
Isn't that the plan for Feisty Fawn? Have also heard something along these lines...

aysiu
December 6th, 2006, 08:38 AM
Read this:
http://www.markshuttleworth.com/archives/84

darkninja
December 6th, 2006, 09:55 AM
Read this:
http://www.markshuttleworth.com/archives/84

From what I understand:

Wireless drivers w/ binary blob firmware: Yes, as they have always been.
Nvidia/ATi proprietary drivers: Rather unlikely. (I guess, Shuttleworth's answer was rather vague)
Flash: No.
Java: Maybe.
Proprietary codecs: No.

Installation of non-free stuff should be made a bit easier then it is now.

ago
December 6th, 2006, 11:43 AM
I think that a better alternative would have been to activate acceleratedX by default if it can be done with FOSS drivers, otherwise have a shortcut on the desktop that reads something like "Activate 3D desktop", which when pressed explains why the 3D desktop is not enabled by default, why closed drivers are bad, invites not to purchase hardware from manufacturers that do not have a friendly attitude, and then if the user wants to proceed, it installs the closed drivers and enables acceleratedX. This would address the issue of pre-installing closed drivers, while moving acceleratedX only 1 click away (for some users).

rubinstein
December 6th, 2006, 01:26 PM
Read this: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/AcceleratedX and the comments at https://wiki.ubuntu.com/AcceleratedX/Comments

This is the intended specification.

Sef
December 6th, 2006, 01:53 PM
Java: Maybe.

Java is being released under the GPL, so soon there will be no problem with it at all.

darkninja
December 6th, 2006, 02:42 PM
Java is being released under the GPL, so soon there will be no problem with it at all.

I thought that some parts still had yet to GPLed. Obviously not.

prizrak
December 6th, 2006, 03:05 PM
I thought that some parts still had yet to GPLed. Obviously not.
It's not completely GPL'ed as of yet but by the time Feisty comes it will be :)

RChickenMan
December 6th, 2006, 04:22 PM
I think that proprietary software should be included as an option, i.e. during the install, a dialog box would come up and give a brief overview of what the drivers are, the ethics behind it, and ask the user whether or not they would like to install them. I think we all agree that Linux is about freedom--the discussion here is whether we consider freedom of choice, or freedom from proprietary software to be more fundamental. My opinion is that the user already has the freedom to decide to install proprietary software by enabling extra repositories. Therefor, simply making it easier would attract more users to the platform while maintaining the same ethical standards.

ago
December 6th, 2006, 05:10 PM
The discussion so far, including Mark's posts, seem to be focused on a black or white choice to whether to enable hardware or not enable hardware using closed drivers if necessary out of the box. It makes it look like if you do not enable the hardware by default, you are doomed to use a crippled machine forever and that in turns makes the market appeal go down the drain.

But this is deceiving. The alternative is not black or white.

The real question is whether it is desirable to have the user take ONE MORE VERY SIMPLE STEP to "enable" hardware that requires closed drivers. This allows us to inform him about closed driver EX-ANTE and give him the option to use free alternatives even if less capable. It can be implemented in several ways (shortcut on the desktop, extra step in the installation wizard...).

All this mess is because people (including Mark) want warnings ex-post as opposed to ex-ante. I think they made the wrong decision here. I am firmly in the ex-ante camp and I really fail to see how pre-installing vs easy-installing makes such a huge difference in terms of market appeal to justify compromising on freedom.

zetetic
December 17th, 2006, 05:09 AM
ago: very well said.

You are right. This means that there are hidden reasons why binary drivers will be shipped by default...
People should think about this...

zetetic