On Thursday 21 March 2002 10:16 pm, Billy Biggs wrote: > Well that sucks. Why do these drivers have to totally screw those of > us who care about quality? In original message, I wrote that there is a fairly simple way to get the least modified output format from the camera for those who care about quality. Nobody is getting screwed and cpia is the most flexible and compatible webcam driver available. Near as I can tell, it works with every app out there. I also stated I believe that an application that wants to should have low level driver access. > Is it really that hard to see that putting a broken conversion in the > kernel (or transparently through the v4l api) doesn't help in the end? I believe that it helps less when users can't use apps because it requires some color space not supported by your webcam. And users don't care if it's the applications fault or the drivers fault. If Application X works on ibmcam and cpia but not ultracam, it's going to leave them rather unhappy with their experience on Linux. > Application writers need to either get over the fact that they should > be building a lib since none of the kernel folks have. libcolorspace is > a step in that direction. Once again we're caught in the "who gets to Keep It Simple Stupid" argument. I want a standard that creates a third voice which says "I'll do the hard stuff if you don't want to".
