Why FreeBSD not popular on hardware vendors
rock_on_the_web at comcen.com.au
Sun Dec 14 02:31:27 PST 2008
On Fri, 2008-12-12 at 21:35 +0100, Wojciech Puchar wrote:
> >> NVidia MUST INCLUDE full documentation of their hardware.
> >> this is normal - hardware manufacturer produces hardware, programmers
> >> do make support for it.
> >> what is common today isn't normal.
> > I honestly have no idea what you are trying to communicate here.
> exactly what i wrote. the problem is that people like You (and millions
> others) are willing to buy product without any documentation.
> if you think they do this to hide their hardware secrets you are wrong.
> See x86 instruction set - does it reveal how Intel or Amd made their
> processor so fast? no!
> They do this to hide their hardware faults that way - that's the true
> reason they do this.
> With new hardware produced every year it MUST be buggy and certainly there
> are thousands of hardware bugs.
> with "secret" drivers - they can easily hide them. AFAIK at least half of
> their driver code are to do workaround of their hardware bugs.
Actually that sounds like a very close approximation of what is going
on. It explains why cpu usage can go up some times during use.
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...
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...
More information about the freebsd-questions