On 13-Dec-07, at 10:12 PM, Linux Lingam wrote:
> hardware devices that become software applications affect a gestalt
> change, especially if copylefted.
w00t
--
regards
Kenneth Gonsalves
Associate, NRC-FOSS
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://nrcfosshelpline.in/web/
Foss conference for the common man:
The only real downside is using commodity chips for specialized tasks.
Back in the days of dial up we had "win modems" which were a physical
interface to the pstn, but the cpu was in charge of the transmissions,
which caused a lot of overhead. I wonder what the overhead will be like
with this s
Hi,
My thoughts below:
- On Dec 13, 2007 11:15 PM, Smruti <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
| Sounds interesting. But when you get down to ground reality it is still not
| possible to make hardware gpl complaint.
\--
Why not?
-
| Hardware is tangible and it costs. We can make the architecture
On Dec 13, 2007 11:15 PM, Smruti <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Sounds interesting. But when you get down to ground reality it is still not
> possible to make hardware gpl complaint. Simply, because of the fact that
> Hardware is tangible and it costs. We can make the architecture open source
> but t
Sounds interesting. But when you get down to ground reality it is still not
possible to make hardware gpl complaint. Simply, because of the fact that
Hardware is tangible and it costs. We can make the architecture open source
but the hardware itself can't be made for free.
You can make the softwar
dear all,
this story picked off slashdot excites me:
Intel targets WiMAX with software radio device
http://www.electronicsweekly.com/Articles/2007/12/11/42781/intel+targets+wimax+with+software+radio+device.htm
why?
a) gpl or copyleft does not normally work on hardware. (tangible
versus intangib
