←back to thread

387 points pedro84 | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0s | source
Show context
thomastjeffery ◴[] No.14861166[source]
Why does Broadcom insist on proprietary drivers?

How could it possibly be detrimental for Broadcom to have free software drivers?

This article is a poignant example that it is detrimental for them to continue to keep their drivers proprietary.

replies(6): >>14861174 #>>14861519 #>>14862058 #>>14863796 #>>14867469 #>>14871284 #
whowouldathunk ◴[] No.14861174[source]
The drivers are probably pretty complicated and thus valuable IP.
replies(2): >>14861236 #>>14867384 #
thomastjeffery ◴[] No.14861236[source]
I don't buy that.

Every wifi chipset has working drivers; therefore there is little to no value in Broadcom's driver as "IP".

Contrast that to the value of having a free driver that can receive security patches from anyone at any time.

replies(6): >>14861326 #>>14861646 #>>14862004 #>>14862013 #>>14862510 #>>14863716 #
johncolanduoni ◴[] No.14861326[source]
Every GPU has working drivers, but optimizations within them can make huge differences in performance on the same hardware.
replies(3): >>14861387 #>>14861468 #>>14861658 #
1. fulafel ◴[] No.14861658[source]
GPU drivers are very bug ridden and 3D apps can easily cause OS crashes. Apps are tested so they don't trigger those bugs. Witness all the complaint comments on webgl posts about machine crashes - and that's with a thick driver bug workaround layer in browsers.