- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
You must log in or register to comment.
The company’s reason is “brand protection”:
We carefully reviewed the project you shared with us (https://github.com/linuxwacom/wacom-hid-descriptors). While we appreciate the initiative, we found that this is primarily a Wacom-led project, and the potential impact for GAOMON would be quite limited. Even if we added support for our devices, the system would still show the device as a GAOMON model, but the overall setup would display Wacom branding. More importantly, participating would require sharing our device specifications directly with Wacom – which is not something we can consider.
The last part of that reply is very wrong.
The article also has a reply from Peter Hutterer, a “senior software engineer at Red Hat and a maintainer of Linux’s core input device handling infrastructure since decades”, which is worth reading.
reply from Peter Hutterer
Not to dunk on his achievements, but his argument is basically that it doesn’t matter because the end user doesn’t see any libwacom branding.
However, when they upgrade their package, it will show the Wacom name. I don’t think it’s unreasonable to rename the project to something which is more descriptive, especially since it contains way more than Wacom code.
I can understand both sides. I also think that you shouldn’t bow to corporate interests in general, for example to marketing departments of any company.
However by keeping the Wacom name you’re basically giving them special treatment just because they came first. Vendor neutral projects should be named vendor-neutrally, IMHO.
I think I agree with everything you said. It seems fair to rename the package to be more universal. I didn’t look into this too far but I don’t think Wacom is forcing their name into the driver, I think it’s just more difficult to change everywhere than it might seem.
It makes me only look at Wacom, because of their strong Linux support, so probably not great for the other companies.
Which, incidentally, proves the point of their marketing department.
Have had a small cheap wacom bamboo for more than 10 years. Not only the device works great in itself and it’s quite sturdy but its support on Linux has always been stellar. Absolutely no complaints whatsoever.
I have also had similar results with my small Wacom bamboo, I should use it more but I have been too busy no do much creative these days.
this. they are shooting themselves in the foot.
I’m feeling pretty justified in sticking with Wacom. I only replaced my first tablet because it had a 4:3 aspect ratio and a serial port. (I could’ve lived with the latter, but the aspect ratio was making things skewed on a modern display.)
Funnily enough, if Huion/XP-Pen/Ugee/… would help with libwacom tablet files before the release of the devices, users wouldn’t even know it existed.
This is executives being money gremlins. Straight up not enough money and the branding shit just feels like the executive saw the branding and went “absolutely not” as soon as they saw it.
