Topic: Intel: Only "Open" for Business

What follows is a message from Theo de Raadt, a letter to the Free and Open Source community at large, urging us to take a stand. Information about how to contact Intel, as well as helpful hints on how to explain the benefits of open documentation to any vendor, follow the message.

[ … 0930232710 ]

Re: Intel: Only "Open" for Business

I actually just e-mailed them yesterday after buying a card based on an RaLink chipset.

Re: Intel: Only "Open" for Business

You e-mailed Intel about RaLink stuff?

Re: Intel: Only "Open" for Business

I e-mailed them to let them know that I didn't buy one of their products and went with RaLink instead.

Re: Intel: Only "Open" for Business

Good.  I hope it was polite and grammatical with no mispellings--err, misspellings.

That's not a joke.

If they get letters like (I know asem doesn't write like this, but for example)

Im not buying ur cards because your really stUpid, it would be ineffective. 

When you write letters of complaint, be as unemotional as possible, e.g. I was planning to purchase your product.  However, I felt my best choice in this case would be to purchase your competitor's product because they have been far more enthusiastic in cooperating with open source developers. 

However, as this was asem, I assume that it was an intelligently written letter.

<@andre> i would be so much more efficient if i wasn't so stupid

Re: Intel: Only "Open" for Business

mine was very short and sweet.  I just said that because of their policy regarding firmware distribution, I had chosen to buy a card based on another company's chipset.  that was all, I didn't really want to go into a tirade about licensing issues and open source and blah blah blah.

Re: Intel: Only "Open" for Business

Im really not one educated enough to make an opinion on this matter, but it seems a little weird.

Yes it kinda sucks having a computer with intel chipsets that aren't supported by the OS, I have recently had this problem with the thinkpad X30. I couldnt  get my favorite *bsd on there because it didnt support the chipset entirely. Yes I could get networking which was a plus, but as for sound and some other things I cant remember right now it was a no go.

However I think its just one of those things where you just either make do or find a better solution. For me I found a better solution which was to get a new computer (see: ibook).

This request by theo is vaguley similar in my mind to asking a software company (I dont know alot of software companies but one that makes software that runs on windows) to make their products license open so that it can be used on free systems and distributed freely. Why on earth would this company do that? they are a company that is in business by selling software. Now with intel, I can kinda see some reasons why OpenBSD would want this and why users would want it, but it may not be their "right" right to have it. Intel sells hardware hardware should in theory be free to use by anyone and for all intents and purposes it is. But why intel should do all of this (even if its just a matter of changing the license) is above and beyond the scope of my imagination. Yes I can see that it would make OpenBSD be able to run on certain hardware, and would make systems stronger, but really thats up to intel. If they want to, then great, but if they need some time to think about it, people harassing them saying that they suck probably wont help. Which sadly is all that I can assume will happen with this request. Pea brained morons reading what theo said and complying in whatever mode they see fit because they cant understand the matter at hand. If that happens, I cant see intel acting favourably towards the situation.

Please correct me if I am wrong, or educate me in this matter better.

Re: Intel: Only "Open" for Business

if it's not clear, this is just about Intel's wireless chipsets, nothing else.

OpenBSD isn't asking for open source firmware, they're asking for the right to distribute the firmware with their operating system without having to sign an agreement with Intel.  they're also asking for better documentation of the firmware so they can write better drivers for it without having to reverse engineer everything.

it's perfectly within Intel's rights to refuse both of these requests, and I'm sure a lot of people will be assholes in their e-mails to Intel, but I hope more people will write eloquent, well-informed e-mails that will make Intel think twice about the business they're losing (which honestly probably isn't very much).