--- Luke -Jr [email protected] wrote:
On Wednesday 12 March 2008, Leo Mauler wrote:
When you throw in someone who is devout in both areas (such as Luke-Jr, who regards "ndiswrapper" as a kind of apostasy because it requires the use of Microsoft drivers), a Linux list getting a religious rant is entirely too likely.
Do you enjoy misquoting?
Nope, which is why I didn't quote you from memory. Note the lack of quotation marks around my own words in the phrase "Luke-Jr ... regards 'ndiswrapper' as a kind of apostasy" (the one above, obviously not this one). "Apostasy" generally means "becoming immoral" or "adopting immoral behaviors" (both of which aren't that much different from the strict dictionary definition, "leaving one's religion").
I pretty much nailed your exact opinion of "ndiswrapper", which you revealed during a KCLUG list discussion from December 2005 to January 2006, "Linux on older laptops":
On Thursday, 29 Dec 2005 14:20:47 Luke-Jr [email protected] wrote:
On Thursday 29 December 2005 08:57, Leo Mauler wrote:
As for wireless support, learn this keyword: "ndiswrapper".
ndiswrapper is just a hack to use immoral drivers. Not a real solution at all.
Your use of the words "immoral drivers" was what prompted my comment about "apostasy". You didn't call the Microsoft drivers "bad drivers," or "poorly-written drivers." No, you used the religious term "immoral."
And when I tried to defend ndiswrapper, you replied again that it is better to have no drivers AT ALL than to have immoral drivers:
On Sun, 1 Jan 2006 15:57:18, Luke-Jr Luke-Jr [email protected] wrote:
On Sunday 01 January 2006 06:58, Leo Mauler wrote:
--- Luke-Jr [email protected] wrote:
ndiswrapper is just a hack to use immoral drivers. Not a real solution at all.
Of course its a real solution. If you don't have drivers then you don't have a network card. If you do have drivers then you have a network card, regardless of where the drivers came from.
What you meant to say was that it is a less preferable solution.
Better to not have drivers at all than to have immoral drivers.
Other people tried to reason with you as well. You would have none of it:
On Mon, 2 Jan 2006 03:17:03, Luke-Jr [email protected] wrote:
On Monday 02 January 2006 02:20, Matthew Copple wrote:
On Sun, 1 Jan 2006 15:57:18, Luke-Jr [email protected] wrote:
Better to not have drivers at all than to have immoral drivers.
Better an immoral driver than a $1,000+ paperweight (or a $1,299 Windows XP box, which is what would happen if there were no driver available).
Better to deprive business and a sale than to buy hardware without [moral] drivers.
===== And: =====
On Mon, 2 Jan 2006 14:54:32, Luke-Jr [email protected] wrote:
On Monday 02 January 2006 13:03, Bill Cavalieri wrote:
I'm not understanding your comparison of morality and ndiswrapper I guess.
The only practical use for ndiswrapper is to load an immoral driver.
========================== And I tried one more time: ==========================
On Wed, 4 Jan 2006 04:33:11, Luke-Jr [email protected] wrote:
On Tuesday 03 January 2006 20:42, Leo Mauler wrote:
On Tue, 3 Jan 2006 05:34:44, Luke-Jr [email protected] wrote:
On Tuesday 03 January 2006 00:19, Richard Piper wrote:
Just curious Luke, how far do you take this belief? Do you only run computers which work with a free-as-in-freedom BIOs as well?
If I had that choice, I certainly would. Ditto for firmware and hardware.
And if we had the choice of using "moral" drivers, we certainly would. Some of us don't have the choice of using "moral" drivers, so, EXACTLY LIKE YOU, we choose what we have to and not necessarily what we want.
That doesn't work when someone knowingly chooses to limit their choices by buying hardware lacking moral drivers.
I think that "apostasy" accurately describes your opinion of anyone who uses ndiswrapper in Linux. From the words you actually said, your opinion seems to be that there is no *moral* way to use ndiswrapper, thus anyone who uses ndiswrapper has clearly "left the fold".
____________________________________________________________________________________ Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now. http://mobile.yahoo.com/;_ylt=Ahu06i62sR8HDtDypao8Wcj9tAcJ