Re: [OT] RE: UDI and Free Software (fwd)

david parsons (o.r.c@p.e.l.l.p.o.r.t.l.a.n.d.o.r.u.s)
9 Oct 1998 11:43:06 -0700


In article <linux.kernel.199810090132.SAA16009@ann.qtpi.lakewood.ca.us>,
Bob Taylor <brtaylor@inreach.com> wrote:
>In message <361D11E1.4666D087@tbcnet.com>, Terry L Ridder writes:
>> Marcin Dalecki wrote:
>
>[snip]
>
>> Instead of spending energy "reverse engineering" a binary-only UDI
>> driver
>> it would wiser to spend that energy educating vendors to the benefits
>> of releasing hardware documentation so that the Freeware/OpenSource/GNU
>> GPL
>> communities are able to write the drivers.
>
>It is my gut feeling that it would be much less expensive for a hardware
>manufacturer to contract out drivers than pay for one software engineer.

Yes and no. It's cheaper for tax purposes to hire contractors, but
what ends up happening is that end-users will call _you_ for support,
and if the device driver was done by a third party, you'll end up
having someone working almost full-time relaying bug reports and
bugfixes back and forth.

(And, yes, this is assuming a source-available driver; what a lot
of vendors want is a 100 million seat userbase, and a majority of
those users won't give a damn about the driver being freely
distributable or source-available, but will care that it works.)

____
david parsons \bi/ A contractor who's had to deflect support questions
\/ with "sorry, but the vendor doesn't pay me anymore."

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/