Why FreeBSD not popular on hardware vendors

[Chad Perrin]

On Sun, Dec 14, 2008 at 02:31:17PM +1000, Da Rock wrote:
> 
> What I can't equate with is why its acceptable for intel to do the
> same... check if_iwi and its "firmware". No other wifi device (that I'm
> aware of- at least they'd be in the minority anyway) works this way. The
> excuse is fcc regs- I doubt that...

Atheros drivers used closed firmware until very recently.  Some of them
still do.


> 
> And before anyone defends intel: I've spent a lot of time wasted on
> making their stupid nics to work in windows, I usually just flick em and
> put in a rl nic. The cpus are shit as well- I've had no end of trouble
> with them, plus too hot, power hungry etc. Alas, finding a decent
> notebook with an alternative has been to no avail...

Actually, Pentium M processors may well be the best x86-compatible CPUs
of their generation -- low power consumption relative to the competition,
and the best performance per dollar in their class.  Pentium 4, though,
certainly sucks.

The first generation of Celeron processors were kick-ass x86-compatible
CPUs for their time, too -- actually better than Intel intended them to
be.  Weird how that happens.

-- 
Chad Perrin [ content licensed OWL: http://owl.apotheon.org ]
Quoth William Gibson: "The future is already here.  It's just not very
evenly distributed."
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 195 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-questions/attachments/20081215/22b23eee/attachment.pgp