> On Sep 27, 2021, at 12:06 PM, Kenneth Gober via cctalk
> <cctalk@classiccmp.org> wrote:
>
> On Mon, Sep 27, 2021 at 11:18 AM Alan Perry via cctalk <
> cctalk@classiccmp.org> wrote:
>
>>> On Sep 27, 2021, at 07:07, Joshua Rice via cctalk <cctalk@classiccmp.org>
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Obviously, there's more hardware platforms that support Linux (like the
>> RPi and other ARM boards)
>>
>
>> Doesn’t this have the relationship between the OS and the hardware
>> platform backwards?
>>
>
> ...
> But more often than not, OS support is a big part of selling hardware. You
> seriously reduce your
> potential sales if your hardware doesn't run a popular operating system,
> and to ensure that your
> operating system(s) of choice will run on your hardware, you pay your own
> developers to do the
> port(s).
> ...
> The situation is similar with add-on hardware that requires device
> drivers. If the documentation
> needed to write a device driver is unavailable, and the only available
> drivers came from the
> hardware maker, then it is definitely a case of the hardware maker
> supporting the OS.
True, and that's also a reason to avoid that hardware. I remember when the SoC
used on the Raspberry Pi was secret. That prompted me to go BeagleBone
instead, since TI published a full manual, over 5000 pages. It seems Broadcom
has cleaned up their act a bit since that time, from what I've heard.
paul
