
Razer doesn’t care about Linux - macco
https://blogs.gnome.org/hughsie/2018/02/11/razer-doesnt-care-about-linux/
======
Jonnerz
Razer don't care about their customers full stop. Extremely poor customer
service and low quality products. Their one-start Trustpilot page is a good
read.

------
frabbit
Worth pointing out that if someone like Richard Hughes offers to work on your
firmware it's wise to accept the offer.

------
bobcallme
While I don't support Razer for their hardware choices, I have to side with
them on this issue. LVFS is not the answer to firmware updates and it has
quite a few architectural issues. Firmware should only be updated as a last
resort to solve some critical bug or security issue and pushing frequent
firmware updates is asking for trouble. LVFS and its developers should not
assert themselves as the "industry" standard for pushing firmware updates and
just because not everyone wants to be a part of that does not mean they "don't
care about Linux".

Razer is not a "Linux" first company anyway and it does not help to cry about
it on a blog or complain when their hardware does not work well on "Linux" in
the first place.

~~~
eliaspro
Could you add a few more details why you think LVFS has architectural issues?

Why do you believe firmware shouldn't be updated regularly just like we're
used to do it with regular software?

~~~
bobcallme
> Could you add a few more details why you think LVFS has architectural
> issues?

Updating firmware from a system that is in an unknown state has high risks,
especially if untrusted software is being run (like on most Linux systems).
What if the user pulls the power or there is not enough juice left in the
battery when an update has started? Many consumer devices don't have fallback
firmware to account for such issues. Not being able to revert cleanly to a
last good known firmware if something goes wrong will be an issue.

> Why do you believe firmware shouldn't be updated regularly just like we're
> used to do it with regular software?

OEMs quite frequently push updates that break something since they can't
account for all of the configurations that their hardware will be used;
sometimes they push botched uCode updates or other components they can't fully
account for.

~~~
hanselot
So we should take away the power from the user to choose that for themself?
How exactly does it hurt them to have unofficial Linux firmware?

~~~
bobcallme
> So we should take away the power from the user to choose that for themself?

Razer's lack of cooperation is not taking away freedom from the user. Razer
did not promise to provide "Linux" support and they are not obligated to do
so. The firmwares themselves are already non-free and generally have EULAs
tied to them which take away that freedom . If you wanted that freedom of
choice in the first place, you should have bought hardware that offers that.

> How exactly does it hurt them to have unofficial Linux firmware?

It does hurt Razer to have "unoffical Linux firmware" because they would have
new liabilities, possible legal issues in terms of licenses or an image
problem if an update results in a brick.

I can't believe how many people think they are entitled to support for
something that was never claimed to be supported. If you want "Linux" support,
buy hardware that offers just that.

------
philtar
Razer caters to gamers. 0.41% of steam users use Linux.

Let's be generous and triple that number, 1.2% of Pc gamers use Linux. Razer's
decision makes sense to me.

~~~
ng12
Not sure why you're getting downvoted. Razer doesn't have to care about Linux.

------
thathappened
I've been DIT for two large unicorns ($Bs) with the pull to do whatever I
wanted. Both times we stayed with MacBooks because simply buying a single
razerbook is like funding an indegogo campaign. We gave up trying to get one
when they told us it would be like this for every purchase and at both
companies we purchase over 100/month

