God forbid... I like having options.
![[H]ard|Forum](/styles/hardforum/xenforo/logo_dark.png){kind=logo}
Those who have/are thinking about moveing away from windows.
- Thread starter Private_Ops
- Start date
- Status
God forbid... I like having options.
I agree but there should be some consolidation. Look at all the small no name distros out there. If so many programmers where less worried about making a name for themselves with their own distro and actually concerned with furthering linux as a whole we would be at least 5 years ahead of where we are now.
Choice is good but if it where narrowed down to less distros that would hel alleviate one of the biggest hurdles for new users.
You problem is that Microsoft dosn't sleep.
In 5 years they will have added even more features in Windows and made the rpduct feel even more polished.
Linux in 5 years will be where Linux is today...in a nieche.
I dont believe in the whole microsoft war. I am realistic and know that microsoft will never be dethroned. I simply think linux could be a solid alternative even for the average desktop user and would at least like to see lower priced linux based machines in B&M stores actually doing well.
As it is now i think the linux community should be spending less time telling everyone its ready for the mainstream and actually making it ready because its really not even close. Its come a long long way, especially over the last few years but I really question folks grasp on reality when they say its ready to be adopted by the average joe. Either they are overestimating linux or just fail to graps how insanely stupid the "average joe" really is.
Unfortunately for linux to ever truly be successful on a large scale it would mean undoing many of the things that keep the hobbyists interested. Damned if they do damned if they dont.
I'm sure I'll open up a shitstorm with this comment but I'm going to do it anyway.
While Linux and Windows are two completely different operating systems, I see too many arguments stating Linux is "too hard to use for the average joe." A couple people have already brought up points against this by mentioning that the terms average joe and power user are used way too much and with no real definition. I will actually take this point and go a little farther with it. Most of the people referred to as average joe are people who have "grown up" on MS products and this is what really kills the term.
It is actually true, at least in the US, that most of the people referred to as the average joe did start out with MS OSes. However, the point that most people try to make is that the average joe can't figure out a different OS like a Linux distro. That is not true. They are accustomed to or have been trained to use an MS OS. If they had started out with a Linux distro instead, an MS OS would seem very different in regards to installing software, drivers and general usability. Those same people would be looking for a package manager to install software. They wouldn't be accustomed to doing a search for a specific piece of software, finding a site to download it and then running through an installer. No one is born with the knowledge of how to use an OS. eeyrjmr is a perfect example of this. He seems proficient with MS OSes as well as different Linux distros because he started using both at the same time. I don't see any reason why the vast majority of people wouldn't be the same if they had the same opportunity.
So many of the differences between MS OSes and Linux distros are nothing more than different ways of doing the same thing. To say most people can learn one and not the other is completely stupid and extremely insulting to those people who just happen to be the vast majority of computer users. It's generally not a good idea to insult the largest user base of something.
While Linux and Windows are two completely different operating systems, I see too many arguments stating Linux is "too hard to use for the average joe." A couple people have already brought up points against this by mentioning that the terms average joe and power user are used way too much and with no real definition. I will actually take this point and go a little farther with it. Most of the people referred to as average joe are people who have "grown up" on MS products and this is what really kills the term.
It is actually true, at least in the US, that most of the people referred to as the average joe did start out with MS OSes. However, the point that most people try to make is that the average joe can't figure out a different OS like a Linux distro. That is not true. They are accustomed to or have been trained to use an MS OS. If they had started out with a Linux distro instead, an MS OS would seem very different in regards to installing software, drivers and general usability. Those same people would be looking for a package manager to install software. They wouldn't be accustomed to doing a search for a specific piece of software, finding a site to download it and then running through an installer. No one is born with the knowledge of how to use an OS. eeyrjmr is a perfect example of this. He seems proficient with MS OSes as well as different Linux distros because he started using both at the same time. I don't see any reason why the vast majority of people wouldn't be the same if they had the same opportunity.
So many of the differences between MS OSes and Linux distros are nothing more than different ways of doing the same thing. To say most people can learn one and not the other is completely stupid and extremely insulting to those people who just happen to be the vast majority of computer users. It's generally not a good idea to insult the largest user base of something.
When the average joe has problems with his windows computer, he doesn't go on a forum and ask for help, he takes it to a computer shop.
Yet if the average joe installs linux and has a problem, people complain how he will have to learn to reconfigure packages, compile kernels with specific hardware support, and modify his conf files.
KDE has very easy to use wizards and a control panel just as windows does. Linux also supports plug-n-play. Now a days you can plug in a printer or an ipod, and linux (depends on the distros ofcourse) will automatically detect it and install it. There are deb and rpm files which are similar to .exe files in windows, just double click and install it.
People are just too lazy to learn something new, and want every other OS out there to be just like windows. And if its not exactly like windows, its "not ready."
Yet if the average joe installs linux and has a problem, people complain how he will have to learn to reconfigure packages, compile kernels with specific hardware support, and modify his conf files.
KDE has very easy to use wizards and a control panel just as windows does. Linux also supports plug-n-play. Now a days you can plug in a printer or an ipod, and linux (depends on the distros ofcourse) will automatically detect it and install it. There are deb and rpm files which are similar to .exe files in windows, just double click and install it.
People are just too lazy to learn something new, and want every other OS out there to be just like windows. And if its not exactly like windows, its "not ready."
The average joe just wants his computer to work without having to do anything.
The first time the average joe tries to install a printer/webcam/iPod and his install disc does nothing they will have to take it to the shop. On a side note linux support for printers sucks. Dont believe me? Get a list of supported printers and head over to best buy and see how many of their current stock is compatible. Last time i did that not a single one was compatible without paying for a third party driver. Im willing to bet the same is true of webcams. As far as iPod support gos i was able to sync my brothers old 5g ipod but when he got his touch nothing i could find on linux would touch it. Whether that was temporary or not that ended his time with linux.
The average joe wants to buy a box from a store that already has everything he needs in it. The average joe wants to be able to buy a piece of software or even a game or 2 and know when he gets it home that it will just work. The average joe cant be bothered to learn how to use a new operating system because the average joe dont give a fuck about his computer as long as it works.
Let's see, for my consumer grade Brother laser printer I had to go to their website and download the driver for Linux, the same as I had to do for Vista and XP. For my old Logitech webcam I had to go to Logitech's site and download XP drivers and there are no Vista drivers at all. Under Linux I just plugged the webcam in and it worked. I didn't even have to download a driver. My scanner works just fine under Linux by just plugging it in. For XP I have to install the drivers which I downloaded and saved a while back and there are no drivers for it with Vista. I could probably find a lot more hardware in which the cases are very similar with Linux probably winning out or at worst coming to a draw on most.
As stated earlier, your supposed "average joe" doesn't do anything to the MS OS based computer if it's broke or he doesn't know what he's doing. He takes it to a shop or calls someone. How is this different from how people would be with Linux? As I stated earlier, it's all in what someone was previously "trained" to use. I'm sure we could find some people who have used something other than Windows for their whole lives and they would be lost with Windows. Remember, Linux distros and and Windows OSes do the same things, just in a different way.
It's not just printers, but wireless cards as well. That pretty much rules out Linux on laptops for quite a few people.
When netbooks first came out with Linux on them, they didn't sell too well, but when they started coming out with XP on them, they are now the rage. I wonder how much it cost's for a license of XP for them....$30? It hardly makes the effort for Linux worth it.
I would love to run Linux on my laptop just to learn it better and mess around (things I enjoy doing), but without wireless card support for it, I can't do it. I tried the multitude of tutorials around about wrapping a windows driver and such, but there is always something that comes up in those instructions that doesn't work... either they are for a different distro or a older version of the distro I am trying to use, etc and they don't work.
And god forbid asking for help... anyone that wants to help is a newb just like me and doesn't know much more and the experts that do know just tell me to read the instructions which I had already followed to the letter and mentioned in my question that they didn't work....arrhhhggggg.
When netbooks first came out with Linux on them, they didn't sell too well, but when they started coming out with XP on them, they are now the rage. I wonder how much it cost's for a license of XP for them....$30? It hardly makes the effort for Linux worth it.
I would love to run Linux on my laptop just to learn it better and mess around (things I enjoy doing), but without wireless card support for it, I can't do it. I tried the multitude of tutorials around about wrapping a windows driver and such, but there is always something that comes up in those instructions that doesn't work... either they are for a different distro or a older version of the distro I am trying to use, etc and they don't work.
And god forbid asking for help... anyone that wants to help is a newb just like me and doesn't know much more and the experts that do know just tell me to read the instructions which I had already followed to the letter and mentioned in my question that they didn't work....arrhhhggggg.
A nice arguement would be with macs. They are unix-like, and have similar hardware suppport as linux. And yet they are selling like fresh krispy kremes.
Linux is not much different from OSX, but due to the lack of any sort of marketing, when people bought that netbook and saw an OS they never heard before, they felt like they were ripped off. Reports said they would return in in the same day, not even giving it a chance.
Linux is not much different from OSX, but due to the lack of any sort of marketing, when people bought that netbook and saw an OS they never heard before, they felt like they were ripped off. Reports said they would return in in the same day, not even giving it a chance.
I'll give you the point about wireless cards as that has been a problem for ages. Only cards based on certain chips have much in the way of support. It's actually gotten a bit better, though. I know that the Linksys PCI wireless cards I have didn't have any "native" support for a long time but there are a couple distros that actually have built in support for them which I found somewhat amazing. I'm not currently using the cards or those distros so I don't remember which distros actually worked out of the box.
I'm not sure where you're asking for help, though. While I normally find what I need by searching, I don't usually find people getting jumped on for asking questions and if I do see something like that I'll usually jump on the guy doing the jumping. There's no need to get pissy at someone asking a question. If the question pisses you off, then just don't bother replying.
OS X has Apple supporting it with drivers, etc. It also costs a bit of money though... what is the premium that OS X adds to the cost of the computer? It should be fairly easy to estimate that nowadays with Apple's using Intel PC hardware components.
Let's see, for my consumer grade Brother laser printer I had to go to their website and download the driver for Linux, the same as I had to do for Vista and XP. For my old Logitech webcam I had to go to Logitech's site and download XP drivers and there are no Vista drivers at all. Under Linux I just plugged the webcam in and it worked. I didn't even have to download a driver. My scanner works just fine under Linux by just plugging it in. For XP I have to install the drivers which I downloaded and saved a while back and there are no drivers for it with Vista. I could probably find a lot more hardware in which the cases are very similar with Linux probably winning out or at worst coming to a draw on most.
As stated earlier, your supposed "average joe" doesn't do anything to the MS OS based computer if it's broke or he doesn't know what he's doing. He takes it to a shop or calls someone. How is this different from how people would be with Linux? As I stated earlier, it's all in what someone was previously "trained" to use. I'm sure we could find some people who have used something other than Windows for their whole lives and they would be lost with Windows. Remember, Linux distros and and Windows OSes do the same things, just in a different way.
You have been incredibly lucky, my old dlink webcam has 0 linux support whatsoever, same for my canon printer/scanner and the kodak i had before that. not bad or limited support or missing functions. They just plain will not work due to a complete lack of drivers. For most peripherals like that it takes at the very least a year for driver support to come to linux unless the manufacturer actually writes linux drivers. Like i said before head to BB or any B&M and grab any printer or webcam off the shelf and chances are you will be SOL in linux. That alone is a massive obstacle for new users nobody wants to go study model numbers to find out what they can and cannot buy they just want to buy the thing they want and know it works.
Its not a matter of being trained or lost in an OS its a matter of piss poor compatibility and user friendliness that linux still lacks.
Lets also not forget that a linux box without broadband is almost completely useless. With a windows box you go to the store and buy the software you need no internet required. Or god forbid someone on dial up. I suppose it can be done that way but who would want that?
My mothers first computer was an ubuntu 6.xx machine. She did ok for a while but when she wanted to go wireless trying to install the wireless card drivers she managed to completely bork the install to where it wouldnt boot up again. No big deal next time they where in town i reinstalled ubuntu and set up the wireless. 3 months later the 7.04 was released and the update manager asked if she wanted to upgrade as is the nature of linux upgrades it went berserk and would no longer boot. She went out that night and bought a $300 computer from wal mart and has had absolutely no issues since. She even managed to install her wireless card to her new computer with a little help over text messages.
OSX has great peripheral support but actual hardware support is a joke. Want a new wireless adapter for your mac your SOL.
I'm new to Linux... but I have two laptops that I'm using, a Gateway in the sig and a brand new Acer Aspire One. Installed Ubuntu 8.10 on both, and been pretty happy. So far I'm pretty sure everything works on the Gateway without problems, and that includes wireless.
It was a bit more difficult on the Acer to get wireless working, but it is working now. I can't say that it is working optimally though... Transferring files over the network in "Windows" fashion, IE, sharing a folder and making a transfer between the Gateway to the Acer is pretty slow... maxes out at 1mb/s and slowly declines actually to around 600-700 kb/s. If it's a larger file like 300mb+, it seems to get stuck halfway. There were alternate drivers I could install in case the ones on the Acer didn't work, so maybe I'll give that a try.
Must say though, I'm pretty happy with Linux so far. We don't even have Windows on the Acer right now.. I may install either XP if I can find a CD or Vista on it later, but for right now, I'm content. The Ubuntu Netbook Remix is great for it as well
It was a bit more difficult on the Acer to get wireless working, but it is working now. I can't say that it is working optimally though... Transferring files over the network in "Windows" fashion, IE, sharing a folder and making a transfer between the Gateway to the Acer is pretty slow... maxes out at 1mb/s and slowly declines actually to around 600-700 kb/s. If it's a larger file like 300mb+, it seems to get stuck halfway. There were alternate drivers I could install in case the ones on the Acer didn't work, so maybe I'll give that a try.
Must say though, I'm pretty happy with Linux so far. We don't even have Windows on the Acer right now.. I may install either XP if I can find a CD or Vista on it later, but for right now, I'm content. The Ubuntu Netbook Remix is great for it as well
I'm new to Linux... but I have two laptops that I'm using, a Gateway in the sig and a brand new Acer Aspire One. Installed Ubuntu 8.10 on both, and been pretty happy. So far I'm pretty sure everything works on the Gateway without problems, and that includes wireless.
It was a bit more difficult on the Acer to get wireless working, but it is working now. I can't say that it is working optimally though... Transferring files over the network in "Windows" fashion, IE, sharing a folder and making a transfer between the Gateway to the Acer is pretty slow... maxes out at 1mb/s and slowly declines actually to around 600-700 kb/s. If it's a larger file like 300mb+, it seems to get stuck halfway. There were alternate drivers I could install in case the ones on the Acer didn't work, so maybe I'll give that a try.
Must say though, I'm pretty happy with Linux so far. We don't even have Windows on the Acer right now.. I may install either XP if I can find a CD or Vista on it later, but for right now, I'm content. The Ubuntu Netbook Remix is great for it as well
I've also playing with Ubuntu and other distros on the AspireOne, my Dell E1505, and on desktops in the past. The current gnome network and power managers are pretty crappy in comparison to XP/Vista Environments. I can't hotswap batteries without crashing the OS (something is very wrong with g-p-m in Intrepid Ibex, very unstable), and flipping between wireless and wired on the go can be hit or miss. I also can't get all the security protocols I need to load consistently.
All that having been said, Linux can be rock solid and stable as hell on a desktop machine. Mfgs are starting to realize linux drivers are becoming more important to release, but they're still far behind and horrible at updating, while the sheer market share of MS demands that XP/Vista get all the compatibility love.
It's worth mentioning that neither Vista nor any linux distro I've tried could get wireless working oob on my netbook, but that once I got online, I only had to mindlessly click through Windows Update while I had to go hunting for functional madwifi drivers for several hours in Linux.
As for the support forums, well, if you neglect to mention you're on a netbook/laptop, the general forums are very helpful. However, if you actually disclose all your specs to get the best info, you just get yourself set aside in the "laptop problem that noone will ever fix" category.
*edit*
and going back to the question from the OP, it really depends on your usage. If your games work under Wine, you can probably get away with it. If you work in a secure corporate or govt environment, the headache may be more than it's worth, so you might end up dual-booting. If you work in legal, medical, or financial, MS rules the world.
I work for an ISP, only thing I use Unix(PC-BSD) for on my PC is to toy around...even if all our backbone/servers run FreeBSD.
Just changed the DSLAM manegement on 20 DSLAM's...from Windows XP...I don't need linux, just to "try something else"...windows works for me, waaaaay better than BSD/Linux...you know the saying:
Linux is only free if your spare time has no value...
Or if you believe knowledge is power. Or if you want to try something new that may work better for you. Or you enjoy learning and figuring out new or different things. Or a lot of other stuff.
Not even close to everyone thinks the same things you do so it's best not make "absolute" statements such as this.
Don't get me wrong, I like IT...look at my sig and my job.
I just don't see the point in downgrading my options via an OS change.
And i don't consider it fun to spend hours to get something as basic(under Windows) as having to monitors running at different resolutions...those hours could be used more constructive...on sometime a lot more enriching.
I have been using Linux/Windows dual boot for many years. I recently (about 6 months ago) went totally away from Windows and uninstalled it for good and installed a fresh copy of opensuse 11. I still run Windows through vmware, purely for steam friends only. Apart from that I run CrossOver for Linux which allows you to run Windows apps (including games) all through Linux. I run a few games such as TF2 and quakeworld (yes, the original). I play TF2 every night. There is a list of supported games on their website. I do notice a small FPS disadvantage through Linux, but seeing as I don't play competitively, it doesn't phase me. Once you feel comfortable with Linux, it just feels like home. I will never buy Windows again. There are too many advantages of running Linux to go back to Windows. As for software, there is usually a native Linux application that is heaps better than anything made for Windows.
Enjoy it!
Enjoy it!
Crossover looks like it has the exact same support as Wine... and you pay for it?
Same with cedega and like cedega the "compatability" list is so vague and misleading people that dont know better end up paying for it and get dissapointed when the game that supposedly is compatible runs like shit or has no multiplayer, etc.
Wine FTW. The bugs are right there in the open on the appDB so you know what to expect from the beginning.
I dont think so.
That's too bad. I have several gaming buddies in our clan that are Linux engineers for the goverment. They know their shit and they are the people that I turn to when I get stumped. I get into a TS2 channel with them and ask a dumb question and it's like the are speaking greek to each other as they quickly discuss it and then one of them dumb's it down to my level along with a translation from Redhat to Ubuntu.
I can recall talking with one of them and he was bummed out that he couldn't play BF2 on his Linux box back in the day due to Punkbuster not working on Wine.
There are a lot of people in this thread that cite poor hardware support as one of the shortcomings of Linux, but what you have to consider is that a Windows-only binary blob driver released by the hardware vendor takes a significant amount of time, effort, and energy to reverse engineer. One of the primary reasons that Linux is being held back is because hardware vendors will not support it. More and more we are seeing this change, however, and in the meantime, it's really not difficult at all to find a computer that is fully supported. Also, for those of us with legacy hardware, support is way better out of the box.
For reference....all those people whining about hardware support - I've bought 7 different kinds of printer (various reasons) there in the last 12 months, and every single one of them has worked perfectly with my Linux laptop (all the hardware in which worked perfectly out of the box with Ubuntu 8.04 and 8.10), which includes the network-attached printers (with a simple 4-click wizard). For reference, that 4-click process compares with a 10 minute dance on Windows machines.
Just about every webcam on the market is supported by the latest 2.6.27 kernel, which is an automatic update on most distros.
The only irritation I find is with non-Intel wireless cards (I think Atheros chipsets are supported out of the box using open source drivers now, too), where you need to be attached to the network in the first place. However, Ubuntu 8.04+ can still detect the cards and alert you to drivers which already exist for quite a few different variations - which it will then automatically download and install.
Same goes for graphics cards. Where there are multiple driver versions, it'll recommend one for you (and it's been bang-on for me every time).
It really is a simpler process with 95% of hardware on the market than Windows is. I installed Ubuntu 8.10 on a machine a week or so ago for a relative, and I didn't need to drop to the command line once. In fact, I didn't really need to do much that the OS didn't prompt me to do in the first place. As a bonus, the process of installing the OS, installing drivers, installing applications and getting up to date on patches took about an hour, as opposed to the 2hrs+ it takes to get a Windows box to do the same.
If you're going to rag on Linux, you need to realise that things change a lot faster in the Linux world compared to Windows. Look at Ubuntu 6.06 as compared with 8.10 - that's just two and a half years of development, and the out-of-the-box experience is massively improved. Quite simply, if your complaint is with hardware support, command-line shenanigans and eye-candy yet you haven't tried any of the latest distributions....you haven't got a clue what you're talking about and are basically talking out of your ass by implying that your experience from x years ago is remotely relevant.
Just about every webcam on the market is supported by the latest 2.6.27 kernel, which is an automatic update on most distros.
The only irritation I find is with non-Intel wireless cards (I think Atheros chipsets are supported out of the box using open source drivers now, too), where you need to be attached to the network in the first place. However, Ubuntu 8.04+ can still detect the cards and alert you to drivers which already exist for quite a few different variations - which it will then automatically download and install.
Same goes for graphics cards. Where there are multiple driver versions, it'll recommend one for you (and it's been bang-on for me every time).
It really is a simpler process with 95% of hardware on the market than Windows is. I installed Ubuntu 8.10 on a machine a week or so ago for a relative, and I didn't need to drop to the command line once. In fact, I didn't really need to do much that the OS didn't prompt me to do in the first place. As a bonus, the process of installing the OS, installing drivers, installing applications and getting up to date on patches took about an hour, as opposed to the 2hrs+ it takes to get a Windows box to do the same.
If you're going to rag on Linux, you need to realise that things change a lot faster in the Linux world compared to Windows. Look at Ubuntu 6.06 as compared with 8.10 - that's just two and a half years of development, and the out-of-the-box experience is massively improved. Quite simply, if your complaint is with hardware support, command-line shenanigans and eye-candy yet you haven't tried any of the latest distributions....you haven't got a clue what you're talking about and are basically talking out of your ass by implying that your experience from x years ago is remotely relevant.
I would consider myself an average everyday user. Albeit I'm a bit more knowledgeable, but I, as a Linux user, would disagree as I'm sure most Apple users would also. Since we all know that OSX is as dumbed down as it gets.
The large market share seals the deal. Thats all that matters. OSX is slow and has little application support, so its not as good,.
Nobody is whining it is a fact that windows blows linux clean out of the water in hardware and peripheral support. Your luck with printers is not even remotely relative to real world hardware support. Like i said take a list to best buy and come back and tell us how current and compatible linux is.
Many where added however very few of the current webcams "on the market" (On the market means actually still being sold) are actually supported. Linux will always be behind the curve when it comes to new hardware, with the exception of manufacturers taht write their own linux drivers you can generally expect to wait about least a year for printer and webcam support.
I wont even get into how annoying wireless is in linux. Unfortunately the cards that are fully compatible are few and far between.
In some ways things change alot faster in others linux crawls like a fucking turtle. I agree that things have come an exceptionally long way in the last couple years but there are some things that have been neglected at the same time.
For the record my experience is from right now. I use linux on a daily basis and fully support it. I just think the folks in the community that keep arguing that its ready for the average joe instead of actually making it ready need to pull thier heads out of their asses.
This is the exact argument I was going to make. When someone complains about drivers for a new Windows OS all I ever hear is that it's the manufacturers' fault and it's not up to the OS to have drivers for anything. Yet, when it comes to Linux distros, it's always Linux at fault for not have drivers for something even though many Linux distros have much better driver support built in for much of the older hardware that will not work in something like Vista.
I did state earlier that I do not have out of the box support for my network attached Brother laser printer but I had no trouble getting Linux drivers off of Brother's website and haven't had any trouble at all with the printer in Linux. Actually, it was easier and took less time getting the printer up and running on Linux than it did in Windows which includes XP and Vista.
This is the exact argument I was going to make. When someone complains about drivers for a new Windows OS all I ever hear is that it's the manufacturers' fault and it's not up to the OS to have drivers for anything. Yet, when it comes to Linux distros, it's always Linux at fault for not have drivers for something even though many Linux distros have much better driver support built in for much of the older hardware that will not work in something like Vista.
I did state earlier that I do not have out of the box support for my network attached Brother laser printer but I had no trouble getting Linux drivers off of Brother's website and haven't had any trouble at all with the printer in Linux. Actually, it was easier and took less time getting the printer up and running on Linux than it did in Windows which includes XP and Vista.
EXACTLY!
I have had less hardware issues with Linux then I have with Vista (but for vista.. its hardware vendors faults
double standards from the linux haters). I still havn't got my HP wireless network printer working in my lasses Vista session on her laptop (yet for Ubuntu [she uses the most] I just went "find network printer" - HP have VERY good linux support). Likewise the wireless in Vista sometime just decides NOT to come on and hte only way to get it working is to actually delete the wireless hardware device, reboot and let it re-detect (I have todo that every 10 Vista boots)Your PC came with linux pre-installed, so you don't have to worry about drivers for this and that. You go to the electronic store, and tell the clerk you need "insert device here" for your linux PC- and then they would help you find it.
But, things don't work like that. oh well.
But, things don't work like that. oh well.
I dont think anyone is blaming the lack of support on the linux devs. Im simply pointing out that it exists because some certain folkks prefer to live in denial and pretend it dont will never make it true.
Theres a difference between being a blind fanboy and actually supporting something. I support linux 100% which means i expect alot from it. Some folks here you would think support linux but turning a blind eye to the real issues at hand is not helping anyone. Cant fix a problem if you pretend it does not exist.
Theres a difference between being a blind fanboy and actually supporting something. I support linux 100% which means i expect alot from it. Some folks here you would think support linux but turning a blind eye to the real issues at hand is not helping anyone. Cant fix a problem if you pretend it does not exist.
This is NOT why hardware support for Linux isn't as complete as it is for Windows. Denial, selective blindness, or deliberate sandbagging have nothing to do with it. The only correct answer to the question "Why doesn't Linux have support for (this hardware)?" is that the hardware manufacturer choose not to. For proof of this, you only need to read LKML for the reports of deliberate stonewalling by the manufacturers (Broadcom anyone?), and the efforts of some devs to push forward anyway. In other cases, a manufacturer just doesn't care about Linux as a market, and won't invest resources. In still other cases, the manufacturer doesn't understand the GPL, or chooses not to release code under it. I don't think you'll find a LKML posting by a subsystem maintainer that takes a blanket position against supporting a certain piece of hardware.
Developing a Linux driver is not harder than writing one for Windows. The source code for the kernel is open, after all, and there are hundreds of other drivers to use for reference. Experienced guidance is available, as well. GKH, for example, has spearheaded an effort to get more hardware into the kernel and he has had some success. Help is available if the manufacturer wants it - there is no technical barrier to creating a Linux driver. The only walls are political / business ones.
I concede that those political barriers can be formidable, though. The GPL is not compatible with all business contracts, so instances of hardware design licensing can be a problem. Developing sofware openly is another issue - it means giving up some control, which seems to terrify business manager types. But political fences can be hurdled. Occasionally, a manufacturer decides to support Linux and makes some effort to that end. Atheros, for example, hired a Linux dev (L. Rodriguez, I believe) to make it happen. And it has - tons of patches for Atheros support have arrived. Check out the linux-wireless mailing list for details. Atheros has set an excellent example here, one that I hope will be followed by other manufacturers.
Another fanboy enters the fold choosing to ignore what i am saying, take my words out of context and pretend i am putting down his precious...
Seriously it gets old people.Read what the fuck i said and you will clearly see nowhere did i even give a reason to the hardware support issue. Im just pointing out how most folks arguing in this thread have chosen to live in denial about the issue pretending it does not exist.
I know why the support is poor for linux. Look at this thread clearly and you wont see a debate as to why its poor you'll see folks actually telling people its not.
Fanboy? I think not. I didn't take your statement out of context. You said "Im simply pointing out that it exists because some certain folkks prefer to live in denial and pretend it dont will never make it true." Which is provably false. If you don't want somebody to pick apart your argument, then make a solid, defensible one.
I did, and it doesn't hold up under scrutiny. See above.
Whether or not people (non-devs) are in denial has nothing to do with the hardware support issue. If that's what you meant to say, then you should have said it.
As far as I can tell, nobody in this thread has made an argument for Linux hardware support being poor, or not - including you. I see a lot of anecodotes, but no studies, statitics, or anything even remotely real and arguable in the general case in this thread. If you want to make a case for poor Linux hardware support, then do so. Just making an assertion isn't good enough, and that's why you're getting pushback.
Let me help you understand.
Bad punctuation... Do you see what im saying now? Im not blaming them for the issues just saying its stupid to pretend it dont exist because they are not helping the situation any.
Even with the bad punctuation how you get that im blaming anyone for the problems is your basic fanboy urge to oppose anyone criticising your preecious... A little thought about what i said should have told you what i meant.
Bad punctuation... Do you see what im saying now? Im not blaming them for the issues just saying its stupid to pretend it dont exist because they are not helping the situation any.
Even with the bad punctuation how you get that im blaming anyone for the problems is your basic fanboy urge to oppose anyone criticising your preecious...
A little thought about what i said should have told you what i meant.WIth different punctuation it makes more sense, yes. But you're still not making a coherent argument. You need to start with facts and build a logical chain of arguments to a conclusion. We started off with this fact: Linux does not support all PC hardware. What doesn't follow is your assertion that, based on that fact, Linux is somehow unsuitable for general use and never will be. All you've said about Joe Whatever (a strawman that cannot be defended) is noise, and does not contribute to the discussion.
It's been my experience that most users do not alter their hardware, at least in terms of memory, video card, etcetera. From what I've seen, when they do want to add something like a webcam, they call a computer shop or their geek friend to help them out. These people can make appropriate hardware choices, regardless of the operating system in use. Linux hardware support, in my view, is good; I can't think of any category of device for which Linux doesn't have at least one hardware choice.
Of course, the users I've just talked about are my version of Joe Whatever. Your vision of Joe is probably different than mine, which is the central problem in these sorts of threads. Joe Whatever is anything you need him to be to support an argument. Without hard data to flesh him out, he's a spectre, ghost, or figment of the imagination. Therefore, as I said earlier in this thread, Joe is made of fail and cannot be defended. Any argument based on him is pure opinion. There isn't anything wrong with that, but such things should not be taken too seriously. When you act like you have some sort of monopoly on the truth and start rolling virtual eyes at people with differing opinions, it makes you look silly. As does calling people "fanboys".
It's been my experience that most users do not alter their hardware, at least in terms of memory, video card, etcetera. From what I've seen, when they do want to add something like a webcam, they call a computer shop or their geek friend to help them out. These people can make appropriate hardware choices, regardless of the operating system in use. Linux hardware support, in my view, is good; I can't think of any category of device for which Linux doesn't have at least one hardware choice.
Of course, the users I've just talked about are my version of Joe Whatever. Your vision of Joe is probably different than mine, which is the central problem in these sorts of threads. Joe Whatever is anything you need him to be to support an argument. Without hard data to flesh him out, he's a spectre, ghost, or figment of the imagination. Therefore, as I said earlier in this thread, Joe is made of fail and cannot be defended. Any argument based on him is pure opinion. There isn't anything wrong with that, but such things should not be taken too seriously. When you act like you have some sort of monopoly on the truth and start rolling virtual eyes at people with differing opinions, it makes you look silly. As does calling people "fanboys".
Anyways.............
I installed Arch Linux today after only 2 weeks of barely playing with Ubuntu... took a plunge. It's a little daunting, but if I can get a decent install built up I'll be pretty happy with myself
Took a couple installs to finally get it booted up correctly actually... Forgot to install the wireless drivers that time, so I'm trying to get that installed via pacman now.
I installed Arch Linux today after only 2 weeks of barely playing with Ubuntu... took a plunge. It's a little daunting, but if I can get a decent install built up I'll be pretty happy with myself
Took a couple installs to finally get it booted up correctly actually... Forgot to install the wireless drivers that time, so I'm trying to get that installed via pacman now.
- Status