# Re: Sane drivers

Tripp Lilley (tlilley@perspex.com)
Fri, 2 Apr 1999 20:21:23 -0500 (EST)

- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
- Next message: David Mosberger-Tang: "Re: Internationalized Sane"
- Previous message: Hugo van der Kooij: "Re: Sane drivers"

On Sat, 3 Apr 1999, Hugo van der Kooij wrote:

> We don't sign non-disclosure papers. This is a open-source project. So in
> the end you loose as we now now that your scanners should be
> avoided as your company does not support open-source.
>
> I do fear you have a lot to learn yet about linux and open-source.

And we, as a community, have a lot to learn yet about how to best convince
people to join us. I believe we will make much more headway with Microtek
if we can explain to them the benefits of releasing driver details without
the encumberance of non-disclosure agreements. If we can collect
statistics about our users, testimonials as to why they use brand X
scanners with SANE, and what they'd ideally use, if drivers existed, we
can do more to sway Microtek and others.

It won't do to simply say "your loss" and move on, as tempting as this
might be. The bottom line is that we /all/ lose when someone decides not
to play with us. The more hardware and software there is that "plays nice"
with Free (and Open Source) Software, the better off the whole situation
is. Hardware vendors sell more hardware, users get more done with
functional software, consultants get paid obscene amounts of money to make
the world go round (as they do now, only with better toys to make it go
round), and full-time software developers get paid by consultants who have
the vision to understand that without them, it's back to fighting BSODs.

But in order for this vision to come to be, we must unlearn many of our
divisive, confrontational ways, and focus on how to constructively and
convincingly lure new blood into our world.

Or, as my mom is so find of saying, "You catch more flies with honey than
with vinegar". Let's try not to scrutinize the analogy too far, though, as
we all know that flies /really/ love a steaming pile of horseshit.

So, to Microtek, I'd like to extend an invitation to join us. We have a
growing community of avid users, many of whom work for free as advocates
for products that "play well" in the Open Source Sandbox. Of course, many
of those advocates are even now recommending HP and UMAX scanners, in
spite of how they might feel about Microtek hardware. I, for one, was
consistenly impressed with the Microtek scanners we had at a multimedia
lab where I once worked, but run a 100% Linux/GNU/Open Source shop now.

Perhaps we might together investigate your company's reasons for requiring
an NDA, and perhaps break down a few of the fears driving that
requirement. Many folks are finding that the protection they seek in
obscurity can better be had through open discourse. As the security world
is wont to say, "Security through obscurity is no security at all".

    --
       Tripp Lilley + Innovative Workflow Engineering, Inc. + (tripp@iweinc.com)
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      "You know, this /is/ kinda like the community room in a mental ward."

    --
       Mary Papadopoulos (roommate), commenting on our office/rec room

    --
    Source code, list archive, and docs: http://www.mostang.com/sane/
    To unsubscribe: echo unsubscribe sane-devel | mail majordomo@mostang.com

     Next message: David Mosberger-Tang: "Re: Internationalized Sane"
     Previous message: Hugo van der Kooij: "Re: Sane drivers"