Re: Linux, UDI and SCO.

Khimenko Victor (khim@sch57.msk.ru)
Sat, 19 Sep 1998 23:44:10 +0400 (MSD)

In <199809191843.OAA29220@hilfy.ece.cmu.edu> Brandon S. Allbery KF8NH (allbery@kf8nh.apk.net) wrote:
BK> In message <ADf9_0s8NK@khim.mccme.ru>, "Khimenko Victor" writes:
BK> +-----
| SW>> Linux users are an increasing purchasing block. A good binary UDI interfa
BK> | ce
| SW>> will expose more vendors and customers to the True Way. If a vendor makes
| SW>> a mess of it, we can either do it ourselves (no worse off then we are now)
| SW>> or use the increasingly viable options of spending our money elsewhere.
BK> |
BK> | Times are changing :-(( Only few years ago most PC hardware was compatible on
+--->>8

BK> Indeed they are: consider that more hardware vendors are opening up *now*
BK> than before. This constitutes a counter-trend to the one you see.

BK> BTW, you assume that while M$ is putatively paying for hardware vendors to
BK> write buggy UDI drivers, Sun and SCO, et al. are *not* paying for non-buggy
BK> drivers or the specs to write same. That seems rather unlikely unless you
BK> assume the game is in fact already over --- and the flip side of UDI is that
BK> if SCO or Sun gets or writes a non-buggy UDI driver, it will work on a
BK> UDI-compliant Linux.

Remeber Windows 3.1beta ? Binary-Only driver could be buggy under Linux and
not buggy under Solaris or SCO...

-
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/