How VIA Could Have Not Screwed Its Linux Chances

[Qaridarium]

No, NDAs are being used for old documents and such right now. It's been that way already for a number of months.

as i know they don't wana support opensource drivers for old hardware they only wana support opensource drivers on the new hardware generation!

means they don't care abaut the old documents they don't wana let them NDA free!

like intel in the past opensource drivers but no open-spec

VIA don't care about there OLD products!

[BlueJayofEvil]

VIA is a strange company in my eyes. They make a great budget-value CPU line (the Nano) and a budget-value GPU line (S3 is owned by VIA.)

Seeing as how they are consistently slow on getting their products to market (the Nano 3000 series is still M.I.A. and the S3 store hasn't had anything in stock for about a year at least), I doubt they're going to change anytime soon.

It seems they just want to release limited quantity value products with poor driver support and then move on to the next product line.

VIA doesn't seem to care about increasing their market share or image. Nvidia should have bought them out (rumors say they were considering it.) At least then they would have better drivers (even if they would be proprietary) and their image wouldn't suck as bad.

Maybe they are planning to change their ways, maybe not. The coming months will tell.

[deanjo]

VIA really doesn't have much of anything to offer any more, their chipsets are all but gone, the have ground S3 into obscurity, killed of IC Ensembles catalog, shot blanks with Nano's (a processor who gets its roots from Cyrix) with perpetual delays allowing atom to take over the market they should of had. That company does nothing but by promising upstarts and then through horrible management kills off any promise they had. Can you really expect them to have a "linux plan"?

[Chad Page]

Yeah - considering how slowly new VIA hardware comes to market, they really need to support their 'old' stuff, too. And sometimes older stuff gets the latest software innovations (r300g anyone?)

[VinzC]

What's the point of exposing this whole litany publicly? Do you want VIA to do something? So send this letter directly to the hierarchy instead. If you make good points then they should raise VIA management's interest. If not, well, you'll have tried. So far so good.

But I see no reason to publish this on a web site. If VIA deserves some interest, they'll get some. If not, they won't and they'll lose something. But exposing a theory over the whole Internet about a company like this is the case is not the right way to gain some esteem. Instead of shouting loud to the whole planet about what VIA should have done, talk to VIA directly about what you think they should do.

IMHO.

[bugmenot2]

VinzC: What's wrong with publishing an article about bad linux support and tips for doing it better? Also it could be more effective to release it on a website that just write it to VIA itself, they will probably not even read it. If it's released in the public it produces pressure. Don't see what's wrong with it.

[VinzC]

VinzC: What's wrong with publishing an article about bad linux support and tips for doing it better? Also it could be more effective to release it on a website that just write it to VIA itself, they will probably not even read it. If it's released in the public it produces pressure. Don't see what's wrong with it.

Publishing a note in the hope the main targeted “person” is lame, especially if that person doesn't care. In the latter case, there's no pressure, just a buzz. Nobody cares.

If, in turn, Phoronix representatives, in great interests towards VIA software, go to VIA and exposes their views directly, from person to person, that makes it a much more mature approach. Here it's like throwing a bottle in the sea in the hope it'll be caught. Little chances.

When I've got something to say to anybody I don't hide behind an article written in the press.

Sounds harsh, maybe, but I hate this kind of attitude.

[bugmenot2]

The article is about *VIA*, the company and *VIA* is no person, you can talk to directly. Also Michael does *not* hide behind the article. And I'm sure that linux-interested users will care. And so VIA has to care, or they will go under. I can't see here bashing of a special person. Just the hope, that VIA makes it better in the future.

[VinzC]

Publishing a note in the hope the main targeted “person” is lame, [...]

EDIT: «in the hope the main targeted “person” [would read]»

And I seriously doubt Phoronix people are in a good position to pretend at knowing better than VIA themselves what they should have done at their places.

(The EDIT feature doesn't seem to work.)

[VinzC]

The article is about *VIA*, the company and *VIA* is no person, you can talk to directly. Also Michael does *not* hide behind the article. And I'm sure that linux-interested users will care. And so VIA has to care, or they will go under. I can't see here bashing of a special person. Just the hope, that VIA makes it better in the future.

No, there *are* people *behind* VIA. And [people behind] VIA won't feel concerned now either if they didn't in the first place. Again, when you've got a message to say, go directly to the person that you want to talk to instead. At least you know immediately if the person cares or not. Nothing forces [people behind] VIA to respond to this article, nor to take any further responsibility. And if they don't care at all, certainly not this article will change that.

And again, nobody's at [people behind] VIA's place. Hence no one can pretend to know enough to tell them what they should have done. Main grins against VIA are the lack of transparency; would be surprising if their management were at all. Hence no conclusion about what they should do or not may be drawn so far.

Don't you hate when unknown people start telling you what you should do? Either you're trustworthy and responsible person and no need to tell you anything (or at least not that way) or you deserve no trust at all and the message is pointless anyway. So, yes, in either case this present message is absolutely pointless.