Linux is getting Crappier
in [Computers]
|
From: terryc on 31 Oct 2009 20:16 On Sun, 01 Nov 2009 09:37:53 +1100, Rod Speed wrote: >> it is just that people are getting lazier by the year and they become >> "point and click" experts. > > Most believe that a decent linux distro should automatically handle > common hardware. Microsoft defines "common hardware" as stuff that pays Microsoft to be included. How should Linux define "common hardware"? . Since the various Linux distributions are a combination of company and user support, it depends on what the users have available to test with and can manage to do so in time.
From: Rod Speed on 1 Nov 2009 00:35 terryc wrote > Rod Speed wrote >>> it is just that people are getting lazier by the year >>> and they become "point and click" experts. >> Most believe that a decent linux distro should automatically handle common hardware. > Microsoft defines "common hardware" as stuff that pays Microsoft to be included. That is a bare faced lie. Almost everything is included. > How should Linux define "common hardware"? . What sells in significant volume, stupid. > Since the various Linux distributions are a combination of > company and user support, it depends on what the users > have available to test with and can manage to do so in time. And only a fool would not include what comes standard with most laptops.
From: Sandgroper on 1 Nov 2009 06:47 "me here" <gloaming_agnet(a)hotmail.com> wrote in message news:4aecb517(a)dnews.tpgi.com.au... > > > So has anyone here tried Ubuntu 9.10 yet? > > I was going to ask for a disc again, but they won't currently send one > if you have received 9.04. > > So it's either a full download, or an upgrade. > http://www.lsl.com.au/ -- Sandgroper ---------------------------------------------- Save planet Earth ! It is the only place that has Pizza and Beer !
From: Frank Slootweg on 2 Nov 2009 09:47 Gary R. Schmidt <grschmidt(a)acm.org> wrote: > Doug Jewell wrote: > > I generally quite like Linux. I've run it on servers since it's early > > days, and every now and then I try it as a desktop OS. > [SNIP rant] > > It's not *Linux* that is your problem, but ATI. > > If ATI released decent drivers to the Linux world, then your display > would work. > > The above sentence can be repeated ad infinitum replacing "ATI" with > "manufacturer of item X" and "display" with "X". > > And "released decent drivers" can be replaced with "released > specifications" or "released information not under a Non-Disclosure > Agreement that prevents an open-source driver being written" and > variations thereon. Even if the latter two requirements are met, you can and often still will have a problem. Case in point: After a very long goose chase, including 'help' from Linux zealots which said my problem didn't exist, I *finally* found that my about-to-be-bought USB DVB-T tuner was "supported", in the sense that that make and exact model number had been tested. Just very shortly before buying it, I found out that the current version of that tuner had a slightly different chip-set, which made the device *not* work. If I would have followed the compatibility list(s), I would have wasted my money on a non-working, non-returnable device. > Linux cannot force manufacturers to produce drivers for hardware, the > manufacturers will only do so when they feel that it will not cost them > anything, or if *not* producing them will cost them something. For most devices, the latter scenario just won't happen. Catch-22. [...]
From: Frank Slootweg on 2 Nov 2009 09:50
Sandgroper <woodbudgie(a)dropknickersgmail.com> wrote: > > "Doug Jewell" <ask(a)and.maybe.ill.tell.you> wrote in message > news:9--dnWXb3qZ0VHbXnZ2dnUVZ_rmdnZ2d(a)westnet.com.au... > >I generally quite like Linux. I've run it on servers since it's early days, > >and every now and then I try it as a desktop OS. > > > < ...... snipped > > > > > All in all, my efforts to try linux again have been met with frustration. > > Vista isn't perfect, but at least it works. The ubuntu "upgrades" have > > introduced more bugs. Fedora is absolutely useless even for trivial tasks. > > And it appears that running anything with an ATI graphics card, which is > > the standard graphics card in about 80% of laptops, is a complete waste of > > time. > > It's not that Linux is getting crappier , it is just that people are getting > lazier by the year and they become "point and click" experts. Nonsense. As Doug mentioned, stuff that *worked*, *stopped* working on never releases. Doug and many others, like myself, aren't lazy, nor point and click people. If even we have problems with Linux on a desktop/laptop, it's not ready for prime time, period. > If you have any experience with Linux , then before you would even do an > install , you would have checked out the Hardware Compatibility List (HCL) > to make sure that your system components are compatible with Linux or that > there was driver support for the system components. That often *still* results in stuff which only *does* not work with the current drivers, but *cannot* work with the current drivers. See my response to Gary R. Schmidt for an example. (I have several other similar negative experiences (with mobile 'broad'band devices), so I gave up on Linux on my netbook and went back to XP. No problem since.) Anyway, do we get our money back from *you*, if our stuff *is* on "the Hardware Compatibility List" (FYI, there *isn't* such a 'thing'), but does not work and cannot work? I thought so! > If you had some Linux experience , then you should have known that the ATI > video cards don't play nice with Linux because they lack decent driver > support and that you would have used a nVidia graphics card instead. As has been mentioned, the first part doesn't fly and the second part is no solution, just another set of problems. So get your head out of the sand (;-)), stop blaming the users, especially the ones with ample experience (more than 25 years in my case, and limit your 'help' to exactly that, help. |