From: ellis@nova.gmi.edu (Stew Ellis) Subject: Re: Why not include patches for Diamond Stealth in kernel? Date: Sun, 7 Feb 1993 20:14:15 GMT
jfc@athena.mit.edu (John F Carr) writes:
>In article <ellis.729103048@nova> ellis@nova.gmi.edu (Stew Ellis) writes:
>>I am against this. [...] I think to
>>include the patches in the Linux or 386bsd kernel's or as part of the
>>official configuration options would serve to encourage the ill-conceived
>>proprietary behavior of Diamond and reduce the incentive of people to
>>protest to Diamond and its dealers.
>My interest in Linux is not to support Politically Correct computing. It is
>to build a useful computing environment. I DON'T CARE that the startup.S
>code works with boards built by evil capitalist opressors.
I do not necessarily oppose capitalists, see below.
>It's no secret that many GNU tools have been ported to AUX despite the FSF's
>opposition and the inability to use the regular GNU mailing lists for
>porting help or support. Even if you moderate and censor the Linux
>newsgroups and mailing lists, what do you think you will accomplish aside
>from inconveniencing users? An ineffective boycott just causes a loss of
>credibility.
Apple has wasted a lot of people's time and money engaging in what basically
amounts to barratry. I sort of wish they had won however, and rid us of the
horrible WINDOZE curse. Sun had the good sense to have previously licensed
both from Apple and from Xerox the right to use derivative parts of their
GUIs.
>The Diamond Stealth is only the tip of the iceberg. Where are the calls for
>a boycott of SCSI adapters which don't make programming information freely
>available (Ultrastor support is in the SCSI kit)? Will you require that
>Adaptec release ROM listings so users can write their own microcode?
I am using a slow MFM 2:1 and a 3:1 RLL-like Perstor, so I admit I have not
been too interested in the SCSI wars, but you seem to imply that the
Ultrastor API is available without being threatened with a lawsuit. I am
almost positive the Adaptec API is available. There is plentiful code in
the public domain on which to model your programming and to use as evidence
in court if they did sue you. One of their engineers spent a good bit of
time hanging around in the Xenix and 386 UNIX groups, maybe the dos hardware
groups a few years ago. His presence, revealing tricks and secrets,
probably helped to make the Adaptec as popular as it is.
Publicly available API's have been one of the main factors contributing to
the success of the IBM PC ( even the ROM code was published ) and Sun (
ditto RPC and NFS ).
Just think where we would be today if Hayes had kept up its threats to sue
anyone using the "AT command set".
I would support a free hardware movement, but I am more concerned right now
with a free software and public API movement. I also think UNIX people
should reward those hardware and software companies that take us seriously,
and it is obvious that Diamond thinks we are a buzzing gnat to be swatted or
eradicated with lawsuits.
>--
> John Carr (jfc@athena.mit.edu)