Dotan Cohen wrote:
On 07/02/07, Rick Stevens <rstevens@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Not necessarily. Some of TI's wireless network stuff, for example, can
easily be convinced to broadcast at higher-than-normal power levels and
at completely bogus frequencies.
If they open up the driver, the source will be published and anyone with
a tiny bit of know-how can wreak havoc with local wireless networks.
Now, you could argue that TI should redesign the chipset (they have)
but what about all the chipsets that are already out there? Knowing how
lawyers are, TI would get hit with lawsuit after lawsuit. That being
the case, can you blame them for keeping the source closed? I don't.
That's a great arguement. Let me sum it up, to be certain that I
understood correctly:
"TI has sold very powerful hardware: stuff so powerful that it might
be illeagal or even dangerous. So instead of letting everybody use it,
their best interest is in allowing only crippled Windows computers to
use it. Allowing all systems to use the powerful hardware could open
them up to a potential lawsuit."
Let's put GM in the same position. Does this sentance sound logical?
"GM has sold some large, heavy vechicles: vehicles so large and heavy
that they might be illegal or dangerous. So instead of letting
everybody drive them, their best interest is in allowing only elderly
handicapped people drive them. Allowing all drivers to drive the
vehicles could open them up to a potential lawsuit."
Dotan Cohen
http://what-is-what.com/what_is/foss_floss_software.html
http://ultu.com
Dude, it's the FCC, logic doesn't apply! But good one anyhow.
--
John
