On Die, 2007-11-27 at 06:07 +0100, Aaron Kaplan wrote:
> 
> well to be fair, it was nobodies idea at MIT/OLPC to keep it closed .  
> It was AFAIK the only chipset which was usable and they were bound by  

Well, since there is more than chipset on the planet, what ruled out all
the other ones, especially the ones with really open-sourced drivers
like (IIRC) PrismII and Atheros?

> marvell's NDA. See: http://dev.laptop.org/ticket/46  (heck, I already  

Well, then don't sign it. The question is: What was even more important
for an "open" product (which one reads everywhere so it is at least by
the marketing departments) than the openness of all of the source?

And since we have an example of closed-source on that product, it is not
easy to disallow others.

	Bernd
-- 
Firmix Software GmbH                   http://www.firmix.at/
mobil: +43 664 4416156                 fax: +43 1 7890849-55
          Embedded Linux Development and Services




