Message-ID: <404F50E7.4090907@techsource.com>
Date: Wed, 10 Mar 2004 12:31:19 -0500
From: Timothy Miller <miller@techsource.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Jeff Garzik <jgarzik@pobox.com>
CC: vda <vda@port.imtp.ilyichevsk.odessa.ua>, Dax Kelson <dax@gurulabs.com>,
       James Ketrenos <jketreno@linux.co.intel.com>,
       linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [Announce] Intel PRO/Wireless 2100 802.11b driver
References: <404E27E6.40200@linux.co.intel.com> <1078866774.2925.15.camel@mentor.gurulabs.com> <200403101015.19506.vda@port.imtp.ilyichevsk.odessa.ua> <404ED404.4050604@pobox.com>
In-Reply-To: <404ED404.4050604@pobox.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 1246
Lines: 37


Jeff Garzik wrote:
> vda wrote:
> 
>> *FLAME ALERT*
>> /me is slowly getting mad about his prism54 11g hardware
>> and its firmware, with neither firmware authors nor documentation
>> for this pile of silicon crap nowhere in sight
>>
>> What's so cool about having binary firmware? Bugs are bugs,
>> and you won't be able to even see bugs, less fix, in it.
>> I don't like being at the mercy of firmware authors.
> 
> 
> 
> Well that's typical in wireless, unfortunately.  Certain parts of 
> wireless are political tennis balls with the US govt. and FCC. Sometimes 
> "put it in firmware" is the only way get ever get open source drivers at 
> all :/
> 
> I'll pick firmware over no-driver any day.
> 


Hmmm...  As you may know, I'm a chip designer...

Are there not open specs on the wireless protocols?  Could we not design 
our own open-source wireless network hardware?  What would the US 
government have to say about an open-source implementation?  Are there 
patents which would impede us?

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/