Re: Bug in 1.2.13 firewall?

dennis (dennis@etinc.com)
Sun, 16 Jun 1996 12:34:58 -0400


>dennis@etinc.com (Dennis)
>> I was joking, but the point is that your ridiculing of commercial products
>> is keeping vendors from supporting LINUX, which hurts the entire
>> user population. The statement that LINUX should prohibit the use of
>> binary-only distributions is totally absurd. Equally absurd is the thought
>> that some dude in the Urals can support a product better than the
>> manufacturer.
>
>Of the messages I've seen in this thread, nobody has criticized
>commercial linux support. Several messages have been critical of
>binary-only drivers, which is a different thing entirely.
>

The idea that a commercial vendor would invest corporate resources
in a value-added software driver and give away source so that their
competitors could use it is simply not practical. Perhaps for a bare
bones or highly board-specific driver...but most of the "value-added"
features that make our product attractive are portable to other products.
So what you're saying is that you only want raw board drivers, and you
guys want to write the frame relay and do all the value-added stuff
yourselves. The result of that is that the entire community has to wait
much longer for the features, and they are stuck with a single set of
features for the entire O/S.

America thrives on competition (and I recognize that you're not from here),
and there isn't enough difference between decent hardware to get
people to buy your product without a price war. If we made source available,
the first thing that would happen is that someone would port
the features to a less expensive board. So then we have to drop our
prices (which you THINK is a good thing), cut back on support and then
we stop doing new development for LINUX and start concentrating
on NT or something where we can make better margins. The effect
is that the LINUX community loses.

Another ramification of the "source" distribution is that it becomes impossible
to support software that has been ported by a user. We are commited to
support the product, but if all of our users are running different versions of
our software (even if its just recompiled) it damages the entire process.

The best one that I heard was the "let 'em put it in E-PROM". Tell me,
why is that acceptable? You want to pay $100 shipping and handling
every time there's an upgrade, or do you want to download from an
ftp site? Another thoughtful quote from the peanut gallery.

Dennis
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Emerging Technologies, Inc. http://www.etinc.com

Synchronous PC Cards and Routers For Discriminating
Tastes. 56k to T1 and beyond. Frame Relay, PPP, HDLC,
and X.25 for BSD/OS, FreeBSD and LINUX.