Broadcom Feeling The Heat

Discussion in 'NZ Computing' started by Lawrence D'Oliveiro, Sep 10, 2010.

  1. Nice to see that competition works
    <http://www.zdnet.com/blog/networking/broadcom-makes-its-wi-fi-chipsets-more-linux-friendly/138>:
    after years of Linux users getting the advice “Don’t Use Broadcomâ€, the
    company has finally discovered that the only way to improve the quality of
    its drivers is to make them open source, just like its competitors have
    already been doing.
     
    Lawrence D'Oliveiro, Sep 10, 2010
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Lawrence D'Oliveiro

    victor Guest

    On 10/09/2010 4:58 p.m., Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
    > Nice to see that competition works
    > <http://www.zdnet.com/blog/networking/broadcom-makes-its-wi-fi-chipsets-more-linux-friendly/138>:
    > after years of Linux users getting the advice “Don’t Use Broadcomâ€, the
    > company has finally discovered that the only way to improve the quality of
    > its drivers is to make them open source, just like its competitors have
    > already been doing.
    >


    Better support is always good news

    Broadcom chipsets have always been dominant in linux wifi routers, but
    have been losing out in the rest of the market recently.

    They are doing this so it gets merged into the kernel rather than
    remaining a proprietary binary kernel module like wl.o.

    Its a reaction to OEMs like Dell installing Intel and Atheros wifi
    modules instead of Broadcom despite a price penalty because they
    provided fully manufacturer supported open source linux drivers.
     
    victor, Sep 10, 2010
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. In message <i6ebh4$47l$>, victor wrote:

    > They are doing this so it gets merged into the kernel rather than
    > remaining a proprietary binary kernel module like wl.o.


    They’ve learned the hard way about trying to maintain their own code outside
    of the kernel source tree.

    > Its a reaction to OEMs like Dell installing Intel and Atheros wifi
    > modules instead of Broadcom despite a price penalty because they
    > provided fully manufacturer supported open source linux drivers.


    Competition is good. Open Source is all about the free market in action.
     
    Lawrence D'Oliveiro, Sep 10, 2010
    #3
  4. Lawrence D'Oliveiro

    peterwn Guest

    On Sep 11, 10:34 am, Lawrence D'Oliveiro <l...@geek-
    central.gen.new_zealand> wrote:
    > In message <i6ebh4$>, victor wrote:
    >
    > > They are doing this so it gets merged into the kernel rather than
    > > remaining a proprietary binary kernel module like wl.o.

    >
    > They’ve learned the hard way about trying to maintain their own code outside
    > of the kernel source tree.
    >
    > > Its a reaction to OEMs like Dell installing Intel and Atheros wifi
    > > modules instead of Broadcom despite a price penalty because they
    > > provided fully manufacturer supported open source linux drivers.

    >
    > Competition is good. Open Source is all about the free market in action.


    If 'Impossible' was right in his assessment of the demand for 'open'
    drivers, then Broadcom would not have bothered. But then 'Impossible'
    is merely Micro$oft's cat's paw quite apart from operating under a few
    other 'nyms'.
     
    peterwn, Sep 11, 2010
    #4
  5. Lawrence D'Oliveiro

    Another Me Guest

    On 10/09/10 4:58 PM, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
    > Nice to see that competition works
    > <http://www.zdnet.com/blog/networking/broadcom-makes-its-wi-fi-chipsets-more-linux-friendly/138>:
    > after years of Linux users getting the advice “Don’t Use Broadcomâ€, the
    > company has finally discovered that the only way to improve the quality of
    > its drivers is to make them open source, just like its competitors have
    > already been doing.
    >


    So from reading that article, for the vast majority of users this is
    still a non event.
     
    Another Me, Sep 11, 2010
    #5
  6. Lawrence D'Oliveiro

    victor Guest

    On 11/09/2010 10:34 a.m., Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
    > In message<i6ebh4$47l$>, victor wrote:
    >
    >> They are doing this so it gets merged into the kernel rather than
    >> remaining a proprietary binary kernel module like wl.o.

    >
    > They’ve learned the hard way about trying to maintain their own code outside
    > of the kernel source tree.


    Don't think they've bothered, just done blob drivers for specific
    chipsets like the ones used by the wrt54g asus 520gu etc routers.

    >
    >> Its a reaction to OEMs like Dell installing Intel and Atheros wifi
    >> modules instead of Broadcom despite a price penalty because they
    >> provided fully manufacturer supported open source linux drivers.

    >
    > Competition is good. Open Source is all about the free market in action.



    Sure, but their previous policy was also a response to the competitive
    free market.
     
    victor, Sep 11, 2010
    #6
  7. Lawrence D'Oliveiro

    victor Guest

    On 11/09/2010 1:14 p.m., Another Me wrote:
    > On 10/09/10 4:58 PM, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
    >> Nice to see that competition works
    >> <http://www.zdnet.com/blog/networking/broadcom-makes-its-wi-fi-chipsets-more-linux-friendly/138>:
    >>
    >> after years of Linux users getting the advice “Don’t Use Broadcomâ€, the
    >> company has finally discovered that the only way to improve the
    >> quality of
    >> its drivers is to make them open source, just like its competitors have
    >> already been doing.
    >>

    >
    > So from reading that article, for the vast majority of users this is
    > still a non event.


    Broadcom is probably looking at the amount of embedded linux like
    Android etc currently going into televisions, phones, stbs, slates,
    routers, media players, printers, cameras, projectors, netbooks, nas
    storage, pmps and saying this is our market, so yes, if you use any
    802.11n kit it will probably be a small policy decision that has a small
    effect.
    It probably compiles for Apple too.
    No way its anything but a positive move.
     
    victor, Sep 11, 2010
    #7
  8. In message <i6es98$lcu$-september.org>, victor wrote:

    > On 11/09/2010 10:34 a.m., Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
    >
    >> In message<i6ebh4$47l$>, victor wrote:
    >>
    >>> They are doing this so it gets merged into the kernel rather than
    >>> remaining a proprietary binary kernel module like wl.o.

    >>
    >> They’ve learned the hard way about trying to maintain their own code
    >> outside of the kernel source tree.

    >
    > Don't think they've bothered, just done blob drivers for specific
    > chipsets like the ones used by the wrt54g asus 520gu etc routers.


    Still expensive to maintain on their own, when there’s a whole Linux kernel
    community that will do it for them.

    >>> Its a reaction to OEMs like Dell installing Intel and Atheros wifi
    >>> modules instead of Broadcom despite a price penalty because they
    >>> provided fully manufacturer supported open source linux drivers.

    >>
    >> Competition is good. Open Source is all about the free market in action.

    >
    > Sure, but their previous policy was also a response to the competitive
    > free market.


    Think about it: external market conditions haven’t really changed, but their
    behaviour has.
     
    Lawrence D'Oliveiro, Sep 11, 2010
    #8
  9. Lawrence D'Oliveiro

    Gordon Guest

    On 2010-09-10, Lawrence D'Oliveiro <_zealand> wrote:
    > In message <i6ebh4$47l$>, victor wrote:
    >
    >> They are doing this so it gets merged into the kernel rather than
    >> remaining a proprietary binary kernel module like wl.o.

    >
    > They?ve learned the hard way about trying to maintain their own code outside
    > of the kernel source tree.
    >
    >> Its a reaction to OEMs like Dell installing Intel and Atheros wifi
    >> modules instead of Broadcom despite a price penalty because they
    >> provided fully manufacturer supported open source linux drivers.

    >
    > Competition is good. Open Source is all about the free market in action.


    It is also about competition. In a free world. After all the speeches in the
    House of Representives are often in competition.
     
    Gordon, Sep 11, 2010
    #9
  10. Lawrence D'Oliveiro

    Gordon Guest

    On 2010-09-11, peterwn <> wrote:
    > On Sep 11, 10:34?am, Lawrence D'Oliveiro <l...@geek-
    > central.gen.new_zealand> wrote:
    >> In message <i6ebh4$>, victor wrote:
    >>
    >> > They are doing this so it gets merged into the kernel rather than
    >> > remaining a proprietary binary kernel module like wl.o.

    >>
    >> They?ve learned the hard way about trying to maintain their own code outside
    >> of the kernel source tree.
    >>
    >> > Its a reaction to OEMs like Dell installing Intel and Atheros wifi
    >> > modules instead of Broadcom despite a price penalty because they
    >> > provided fully manufacturer supported open source linux drivers.

    >>
    >> Competition is good. Open Source is all about the free market in action.

    >
    > If 'Impossible'


    No capital I, okay?
     
    Gordon, Sep 11, 2010
    #10
  11. Lawrence D'Oliveiro

    Gordon Guest

    On 2010-09-11, impossible <> wrote:
    >
    >
    > "peterwn" <> wrote in message
    > news:...
    >> On Sep 11, 10:34 am, Lawrence D'Oliveiro <l...@geek-
    >> central.gen.new_zealand> wrote:
    >>> In message <i6ebh4$>, victor wrote:
    >>>
    >>> > They are doing this so it gets merged into the kernel rather than
    >>> > remaining a proprietary binary kernel module like wl.o.
    >>>
    >>> They’ve learned the hard way about trying to maintain their own code
    >>> outside
    >>> of the kernel source tree.
    >>>
    >>> > Its a reaction to OEMs like Dell installing Intel and Atheros wifi
    >>> > modules instead of Broadcom despite a price penalty because they
    >>> > provided fully manufacturer supported open source linux drivers.
    >>>
    >>> Competition is good. Open Source is all about the free market in action.

    >>
    >> If 'Impossible' was right in his assessment of the demand for 'open'
    >> drivers, then Broadcom would not have bothered.

    >
    > Broadcom absolutetly **didn't** bother, you twit.


    impossible is about to play the person, not the ball. All right here we go
    people...

    > How else would you explain
    > releasing a "work in progress" under the guise of a driver? Can anyone
    > actually use this driver to run their wireless? No, because the driver has
    > yet to be developed. Broadcom apparently gave up on the project for lack of
    > interest, which is hardly surprising -- linux desktop usage has been in
    > decline for two years.


    Repeat after me ....


    >
    > Peter the Whiner should learn to think for himself rather than tagging along
    > for the ride on every Larry D'Loserite con job.
    >

    There we are gentle reader a goal. impossible has done it, played the
    person not the ball.

    impossible. Always attack the arguement, not the person. I have friends with
    whom I agree to disagree on certain subjects. We both have accepted this and
    agree not to discuss these matters, for there is nothing more to say
     
    Gordon, Sep 11, 2010
    #11
  12. Lawrence D'Oliveiro

    Richard Guest

    On 10/09/2010 4:58 p.m., Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
    > Nice to see that competition works
    > <http://www.zdnet.com/blog/networking/broadcom-makes-its-wi-fi-chipsets-more-linux-friendly/138>:
    > after years of Linux users getting the advice “Don’t Use Broadcomâ€, the
    > company has finally discovered that the only way to improve the quality of
    > its drivers is to make them open source, just like its competitors have
    > already been doing.


    Could be interesting, might make some of the later routers actually
    usable for openwrt which they are not at the moment.
     
    Richard, Sep 11, 2010
    #12
  13. Lawrence D'Oliveiro

    victor Guest

    On 11/09/2010 3:45 p.m., Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
    > In message<i6es98$lcu$-september.org>, victor wrote:
    >
    >> On 11/09/2010 10:34 a.m., Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
    >>
    >>> In message<i6ebh4$47l$>, victor wrote:
    >>>
    >>>> They are doing this so it gets merged into the kernel rather than
    >>>> remaining a proprietary binary kernel module like wl.o.
    >>>
    >>> They’ve learned the hard way about trying to maintain their own code
    >>> outside of the kernel source tree.

    >>
    >> Don't think they've bothered, just done blob drivers for specific
    >> chipsets like the ones used by the wrt54g asus 520gu etc routers.

    >
    > Still expensive to maintain on their own, when there’s a whole Linux kernel
    > community that will do it for them.
    >
    >>>> Its a reaction to OEMs like Dell installing Intel and Atheros wifi
    >>>> modules instead of Broadcom despite a price penalty because they
    >>>> provided fully manufacturer supported open source linux drivers.
    >>>
    >>> Competition is good. Open Source is all about the free market in action.

    >>
    >> Sure, but their previous policy was also a response to the competitive
    >> free market.

    >
    > Think about it: external market conditions haven’t really changed, but their
    > behaviour has.


    The market has Android now, not just x86 linux distros for geeks to
    install on PCs.
    Broadcom supplies the wifi and bluetooth combo chipsets for the iPod
    touch iPhone and iPad, and I would think they would see quite a bit of
    potential for driver for those chipsets in Android.
     
    victor, Sep 11, 2010
    #13
  14. Lawrence D'Oliveiro

    victor Guest

    On 11/09/2010 3:45 p.m., Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
    > In message<i6es98$lcu$-september.org>, victor wrote:
    >
    >> On 11/09/2010 10:34 a.m., Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
    >>
    >>> In message<i6ebh4$47l$>, victor wrote:
    >>>
    >>>> They are doing this so it gets merged into the kernel rather than
    >>>> remaining a proprietary binary kernel module like wl.o.
    >>>
    >>> They’ve learned the hard way about trying to maintain their own code
    >>> outside of the kernel source tree.

    >>
    >> Don't think they've bothered, just done blob drivers for specific
    >> chipsets like the ones used by the wrt54g asus 520gu etc routers.

    >
    > Still expensive to maintain on their own, when there’s a whole Linux kernel
    > community that will do it for them.
    >
    >>>> Its a reaction to OEMs like Dell installing Intel and Atheros wifi
    >>>> modules instead of Broadcom despite a price penalty because they
    >>>> provided fully manufacturer supported open source linux drivers.
    >>>
    >>> Competition is good. Open Source is all about the free market in action.

    >>
    >> Sure, but their previous policy was also a response to the competitive
    >> free market.

    >
    > Think about it: external market conditions haven’t really changed, but their
    > behaviour has.


    This didn't come out of the blue, Dell and Canonical have been working
    with Broadcom for a while.

    http://blogs.computerworld.com/new_linux_broadcom_wi_fi_drivers_arrive
     
    victor, Sep 11, 2010
    #14
  15. In message <i6fi0v$g7j$>, Richard wrote:

    > Could be interesting, might make some of the later routers actually
    > usable for openwrt which they are not at the moment.


    This is the point that some companies seem to be so slow to get: that open
    drivers make their hardware products more useful and hence more desirable,
    which means they sell more. And open-source drivers cost less to develop and
    maintain than closed-source ones, simply because you’ve instantly got access
    to such a huge pool of potential contributors in the kernel development
    community, who will critique and test your code, and contribute patches for
    it.

    You’d think such a win-win would be blindingly obvious. But quite a few
    companies seem to be more hung up on “protecting intellectual propertyâ€
    (i.e. trade secrets) than on actually making money selling product.
     
    Lawrence D'Oliveiro, Sep 11, 2010
    #15
  16. Lawrence D'Oliveiro

    victor Guest

    On 11/09/2010 10:30 p.m., Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
    > In message<i6fi0v$g7j$>, Richard wrote:
    >
    >> Could be interesting, might make some of the later routers actually
    >> usable for openwrt which they are not at the moment.

    >
    > This is the point that some companies seem to be so slow to get: that open
    > drivers make their hardware products more useful and hence more desirable,
    > which means they sell more. And open-source drivers cost less to develop and
    > maintain than closed-source ones, simply because you’ve instantly got access
    > to such a huge pool of potential contributors in the kernel development
    > community, who will critique and test your code, and contribute patches for
    > it.
    >
    > You’d think such a win-win would be blindingly obvious. But quite a few
    > companies seem to be more hung up on “protecting intellectual propertyâ€
    > (i.e. trade secrets) than on actually making money selling product.


    Its a bit of a tightrope since certifying authorities like the FCC
    aren't all that keen on geeks having access to radio settings and power
    levels
     
    victor, Sep 11, 2010
    #16
  17. Lawrence D'Oliveiro

    Richard Guest

    On 11/09/2010 10:46 p.m., victor wrote:

    >> You’d think such a win-win would be blindingly obvious. But quite a few
    >> companies seem to be more hung up on “protecting intellectual propertyâ€
    >> (i.e. trade secrets) than on actually making money selling product.

    >
    > Its a bit of a tightrope since certifying authorities like the FCC
    > aren't all that keen on geeks having access to radio settings and power
    > levels


    Yeah, its very tempting to jump onto those unused 2.3 and 2.5GHz
    channels for point to point links...
     
    Richard, Sep 11, 2010
    #17
  18. In message <i6fmmv$tet$-september.org>, victor wrote:

    > Its a bit of a tightrope since certifying authorities like the FCC
    > aren't all that keen on geeks having access to radio settings and power
    > levels


    That’s an excuse used by some companies, I don’t think the FCC has ever said
    anything to that effect.

    If a device was modified to infringe some regulation after being purchased,
    the person who did the mod is liable, not the company that originally made
    the product.
     
    Lawrence D'Oliveiro, Sep 11, 2010
    #18
  19. Lawrence D'Oliveiro

    peterbites Guest

    On September 11, 12:59 pm, peterwn <> wrote:

    > But then 'Impossible'
    > is merely Micro$oft's cat's paw quite apart from operating under a few
    > other 'nyms'.


    I am shocked by peterwn's ability to spot other nyms.

    peterwn identifies "impossible" and Roger Sheppard as the same person:
    <http://groups.google.com/group/nz.comp/msg/c6864f40d7b459a1>
    <http://groups.google.com/group/nz.comp/msg/7cadf4994ea0bb05>

    peterwn is not distracted by messy details of geography or English
    language skills.

    "impossible" is posting from Iowa, USA. Roger Sheppard is posting from
    Kapiti Coast, New Zealand.

    Roger Sheppard has a characteristic style of English which he has not
    been able to shake off over many years in nz.comp. "impossible" has the
    ability to compose sentences very different to what Roger Sheppard does.

    Over 90% of nz.comp would identify Roger Sheppard and "impossible" as
    different people. Does that place peterwn in the top decile or bottom
    decile of perceptiveness?
     
    peterbites, Sep 11, 2010
    #19
  20. Lawrence D'Oliveiro

    victor Guest

    On 11/09/2010 11:23 p.m., Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
    > In message<i6fmmv$tet$-september.org>, victor wrote:
    >
    >> Its a bit of a tightrope since certifying authorities like the FCC
    >> aren't all that keen on geeks having access to radio settings and power
    >> levels

    >
    > That’s an excuse used by some companies, I don’t think the FCC has ever said
    > anything to that effect.
    >
    > If a device was modified to infringe some regulation after being purchased,
    > the person who did the mod is liable, not the company that originally made
    > the product.


    They require potential infringement by end users to be locked out.
    Making routers for third party software enthusiasts doesn't have much of
    a market compared to just shifting boxes off the shelf.
    Its not an excuse, getting FCC approval is more important.
     
    victor, Sep 11, 2010
    #20
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. The Rev \(MCT\)

    Every get the feeling.....

    The Rev \(MCT\), Feb 8, 2005, in forum: MCSE
    Replies:
    19
    Views:
    622
    The Rev \(MCT\)
    Feb 10, 2005
  2. LAP

    Are you feeling sad and blue? :)

    LAP, Jul 14, 2003, in forum: Computer Support
    Replies:
    3
    Views:
    568
  3. Bigfred

    Are you feeling old

    Bigfred, Jan 20, 2004, in forum: Computer Support
    Replies:
    4
    Views:
    471
    BuffNET Tech Support - MichaelJ
    Jan 21, 2004
  4. Adam Aglionby

    voipfone website not feeling well?

    Adam Aglionby, Oct 11, 2005, in forum: UK VOIP
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    463
    Mathew Curtis
    Oct 11, 2005
  5. Lawrence D'Oliveiro

    Intel Feeling Heat From ARM On Two Fronts

    Lawrence D'Oliveiro, May 21, 2011, in forum: NZ Computing
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    316
    Lawrence D'Oliveiro
    May 21, 2011
Loading...

Share This Page