On Sat, Dec 13, 2008 at 09:42:32PM +0100, Wojciech Puchar wrote: > >probably that they would create "competitors" somehow, magically, without > >providing any information that directly encourages competition for their > >hardware. If they wanted to provide per-incident paid software support > >or simply charge people extra for drivers, *then* I could see this being > >a problem, but I haven't seen a whole lot of that kind of rent-seeking > >behavior from graphics adapter vendors. > > i don't see any problem. There is a product - for example Nvidia > powersuckers^H^H^H^H^H^H^Hfull 3D accellerators. Their can this, that, > blah, blah and blah, they don't have FreeBSD support. > > There are other products, they can this that blah blah and have FreeBSD > support. > > You need blah blah and blah under FreeBSD, you don't buy nvidia. > > end of topic.
I've responded to this attitude of yours in another subthread. I don't remember exactly where, but I mentioned terms like "laptop" and "package deal" (or something to that effect) a bit. Please address that before you go bandying this weak "argument" around any more. -- Chad Perrin [ content licensed OWL: http://owl.apotheon.org ] Quoth William Gibson: "The future is already here. It's just not very evenly distributed."
pgpoBR5HY02rZ.pgp
Description: PGP signature
