On Wed, 22 Dec 2010, Konstantinos Margaritis wrote: > On 22 December 2010 20:39, Piotr Gluszenia Slawinski > <curious@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> So to say that the corporate world might need to consider Open Source to > >> be competitive and survive, but the reverse is not true i.e. Open Source > >> doesn't _require_ the corporate world to survive. > > > > i agree with it fully, and to support this claim i want to remind the > > simple rule of capital accumulation. Open Source community > > _already_ accumulated enough _capital_ in form of algorithms, > > implementations, social relations, experience, documentation and > > augmentation with education system . > > I'm sorry you've got it all wrong. Survive? Yes, certainly. Actually > thrive and make a difference in the world without the corporate world? > Definitely not. If you only care about the former that's fine, but > have no illusion that we would even be having this discussion here > were it not for the corporate world caring about Linux on ARM. Maybe. But corporations so far have played by the Open Source rules to make ARM Linux what it is. There was mutual benefits in that and ARM Linux did grew faster. Having accommodations in the kernel for proprietary drivers is not a mutual benefit anymore. That might be hard to understand from your point of view, but the incentives in the Open Source communities aren't based on commercial results. Nicolas _______________________________________________ dri-devel mailing list dri-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
