4 ms·

I used to have problems in the late 1990s and early 2000s, but then I did what Apple does with OS X and paid a little attention to the hardware and all the prob

by drats 16y ago

I used to have problems in the late 1990s and early 2000s, but then I did what Apple does with OS X and paid a little attention to the hardware and all the problems went away. Most Linux problems are people fighting against hardware, if you just pick your chipsets sensibly it all works out of the box. Beyond hardware I was simply staggered at how quickly I was up and running with a fresh install of Ubuntu 10.10. Everything was in the repository, Flash, Chrome, Gnome-do, codecs... I'd have been running around for an hour or two extra trying to get the same stuff for OS X. And then on the server-side you go to just about any software project and they have the recommended ways to install "sudo apt-get install oursoftware" there, as are copious post-install setup guides. Can't say I found the same experience on OS X (10.4) when I used it for a year and a bit, it was always a clunky struggle to get things installed.

Tyrannosaurs 16y ago
Some of the bundling of stuff with Linux is nice as a time saver on initial install. Having recently spent two days rebuilding a Windows machine (of which a large chunk was just tedious fetching and installing chrome, flash, shockwave, air, acrobat type stuff) this sort of thing is significant. I've never found OS X to be problematic for installs but the basic act of gathering stuff up to put on the machine is basically dead time. But the comment "if you pick your chipsets sensibly" - frankly most people don't want to have to do that sort of research. There are enough variables in the basic specification / vendor decisions without having to drop down to this level.
demallien 16y ago
Most Linux problems are people fighting against hardware, if you just pick your chipsets sensibly it all works out of the box You see, right there is the problem. I don't have to think about that when using a Mac. The drivers are always there, and they always work. Despite your claims, Ubuntu and the other linuxes out there do not "just work". I have not yet met a linux laptop that didn't do weird things when I close then reopen the lid. I have yet to meet a linux laptop that deals with finding itself on different networks in an elegant manner. To put my comments into perspective, for my day job I write userland applications for a Gentoo-derived system, and I do my dev work on a Fedora laptop. At home, I develop for my own company on a Mac, targeting Mac applications. I like to think that I have a reasonable handle on the pros and cons of the two environments. About the only time I find linux compelling is when I want to use an open source package that isn't available on MacPorts. But then, I usually just go and grab a gentoo ebuild for configuring the package in question, create a ruby script to replicate the ebuild, and then install from tarball... It's not a big enough pain to justify sacrificing all of those yummy Apple APIs. If you're an app writer, Cocoa blows GTK out of the water.
- jbm 16y ago
  It seems to be a bit disingenuous to contend that a small amount of research before making a 1400-1500$ investment is too much to think about. I had a problem with sound with Ubuntu 7.10 on my laptop (It came with Vista which was slowing it down). When 8.04 came out, the problem vanished. I haven't had any hardware issues since then. Ubuntu has also worked flawlessly on the 3 or 4 machines I've installed it on since then. I can come up with 3 or 4 reasons why Ubuntu is irritating to use, but "headache with drivers" really comes near the bottom of the pile nowadays. Certainly, the ability to install it on any piece of hardware and put in nearly any peripherals and see it work is a huge bonus. Your second point (about building software on Mac) seems to be from an entirely Ruby-based perspective. I work with a mac server at work, and it was an insane adventure to get Django functional for a web project; as opposed to the 5 minutes (apt-get + config apache) it took to get it functioning on Ubuntu. (The problem was mostly around installing python-mysql on a Mac Server; the solution was on Apple's site and involved downloading an additional set of header files, in case you ever run into that) I'm glad that you enjoy the Mac platform; but I don't think the cost-benefit ratio is quite there for me. (It won't be until I'm making 3 or 4 times my current salary.)
  - scott_s 16y ago
    It seems to be a bit disingenuous to contend that a small amount of research before making a 1400-1500$ investment is too much to think about. It is when I have no way of testing what I've researched, and no guarantee that I made the correct choices. I'm willing to pay a little more for such a guarantee.
    - mkr-hn 16y ago
      How much work is it to compare a feature list to the HCL on your distro of choice? Hardware either works or it doesn't, and problems are rarely unique to a given unit in a line of hardware.
  - calloc 16y ago
    My chipset is fully supported, until it comes time to switch modes using the nouveau driver for my Nvidia graphics card causing Ubuntu 10.10 to throw a black screen instead of showing me X11. I then had to add an extra parameter to my kernel boot line according to some forum posts to make sure it would let me get the installer (nomodeset or some shit like that), after that it installed correctly but Ubuntu 10.10 does away with Grub in any way shape or form so the next time it booted after install I couldn't change that line so I had to boot into a live CD. Then changing /mnt/etc/default/grub.cfg doesn't let me write that out to disk since update-grub tries to look for the currently mounted partition you want to modify in mount and won't find one with a LiveCD it can modify and as such that goes out of the window. You have to modify /mnt/boot/grub/grub.cfg and they have made an ungodly mess out of that file. After I finally figured that out the system still didn't work correctly, so I install the proprietary nvidia driver using their tool, and yet at boot it still does the wrong thing because the nouveau driver is still installed. Finally remove that and Pulseaudio causes my kernel to crash randomly, especially when watching Flash video content. At least I assume it is Pulseaudio, it is the last thing mentioned in /var/log/messages EACH and EVERY time. Since I needed an OS that could run Boxee (it really is too bad it doesn't work on FreeBSD) and didn't cost me any money I finally just grabbed Arch, installed X11 with the nvidia driver, installed Boxee and it works. It hasn't crashed at all since install. Linux doesn't just work, and ultimately I was getting really frustrated with the whole thing. I own multiple Windows machines (two Lenovo's, absolutely fantastic), I run FreeBSD as a gateway machine (and have used it for years as a Desktop machine), OpenSolaris as a server and xVM machine, and own one MacBook Pro. I can clearly say that Linux still has a long WAY to go before it is as easy as Mac OS X, and has the same "just works" features. I've had less issues using PC-BSD on the same hardware as Linux, and FreeBSD the underlying OS generally doesn't have the support from vendors for hardware drivers as Linux does.
grammaton 16y ago
The chipset is just one variable when choosing a laptop. If a laptop has a great chipset for Linux but looks like a pile of ass and weighs five pounds, who cares what the chipset is? What about usability? For the average (non Linux zealot) user, they'll pick their laptop on the basis of portability and yes, to some degree, aesthetics. If Linux doesn't work on that laptop - and quite often, it won't - then as far as they're concerned, it doesn't work well on laptops, and they're right. Disclaimer: I am a big fan of FreeBSD - if you think linux is bad on laptops.....
- bilban 16y ago
  Apple hardware isn't as diverse I'd wager, and as such it's more likely that an Apple OS will be more tailored to work with Apple hardware. That and the quality build, make up the premium. Some laptops are stamped with Linux support - something like Suse professional and they are more likely to work. It's a bit of a gamble at the end of the day, and I'd say the same for Windows running on a laptop. If every thing just works, praise the lamas - keep it. A bit of homework certainly helps before going out and buying something. I have OSX Tiger on an old power book. Free quality apps are few and far between. Though I like the OS. Loads of apps on Windows, but I don't like the UI. OSX and W7 users can always just place Linux in a VM if they wanted to and have the best of both worlds. Ideology and small touches in Gnome keep me wedded to Linux. I still blame the hardware vendors...
  - grammaton 16y ago
    You're quite correct, it's a known fact that Apple hardware is not nearly as diverse. This is a valid point in the carping about Windows stability in many cases - Windows has to deal with orders of magnitude more hardware than Apple does, and the difference is one of the big reasons for OS X's stability (along with the Unix underpinnings). As for the hardware vendors, it may well be their "fault" but the average user won't care - as far as they're concerned it either works or it doesn't, and at the end of the day, they're right.
    - bilban 16y ago
anamax 16y ago
> Most Linux problems are people fighting against hardware, if you just pick your chipsets sensibly it all works out of the box. True, but easier said than done. First you have to find out what chipset a given laptop has. The salescritter won't know, the advert doesn't say. The manufacturer's website might have the info, but it won't be easy to find. Now you have to figure out if the chipset is supported. That's non-trivial because the "supported" lists don't necessarily use the same chipset names as the manufacturer. Sometimes minor variations don't matter but sometimes they do.

by drats 16y ago

Tyrannosaurs 16y ago

Some of the bundling of stuff with Linux is nice as a time saver on initial install. Having recently spent two days rebuilding a Windows machine (of which a large chunk was just tedious fetching and installing chrome, flash, shockwave, air, acrobat type stuff) this sort of thing is significant. I've never found OS X to be problematic for installs but the basic act of gathering stuff up to put on the machine is basically dead time. But the comment "if you pick your chipsets sensibly" - frankly most people don't want to have to do that sort of research. There are enough variables in the basic specification / vendor decisions without having to drop down to this level.

demallien 16y ago

Most Linux problems are people fighting against hardware, if you just pick your chipsets sensibly it all works out of the box You see, right there is the problem. I don't have to think about that when using a Mac. The drivers are always there, and they always work. Despite your claims, Ubuntu and the other linuxes out there do not "just work". I have not yet met a linux laptop that didn't do weird things when I close then reopen the lid. I have yet to meet a linux laptop that deals with finding itself on different networks in an elegant manner. To put my comments into perspective, for my day job I write userland applications for a Gentoo-derived system, and I do my dev work on a Fedora laptop. At home, I develop for my own company on a Mac, targeting Mac applications. I like to think that I have a reasonable handle on the pros and cons of the two environments. About the only time I find linux compelling is when I want to use an open source package that isn't available on MacPorts. But then, I usually just go and grab a gentoo ebuild for configuring the package in question, create a ruby script to replicate the ebuild, and then install from tarball... It's not a big enough pain to justify sacrificing all of those yummy Apple APIs. If you're an app writer, Cocoa blows GTK out of the water.

jbm 16y ago
It seems to be a bit disingenuous to contend that a small amount of research before making a 1400-1500$ investment is too much to think about. I had a problem with sound with Ubuntu 7.10 on my laptop (It came with Vista which was slowing it down). When 8.04 came out, the problem vanished. I haven't had any hardware issues since then. Ubuntu has also worked flawlessly on the 3 or 4 machines I've installed it on since then. I can come up with 3 or 4 reasons why Ubuntu is irritating to use, but "headache with drivers" really comes near the bottom of the pile nowadays. Certainly, the ability to install it on any piece of hardware and put in nearly any peripherals and see it work is a huge bonus. Your second point (about building software on Mac) seems to be from an entirely Ruby-based perspective. I work with a mac server at work, and it was an insane adventure to get Django functional for a web project; as opposed to the 5 minutes (apt-get + config apache) it took to get it functioning on Ubuntu. (The problem was mostly around installing python-mysql on a Mac Server; the solution was on Apple's site and involved downloading an additional set of header files, in case you ever run into that) I'm glad that you enjoy the Mac platform; but I don't think the cost-benefit ratio is quite there for me. (It won't be until I'm making 3 or 4 times my current salary.)
- scott_s 16y ago
  It seems to be a bit disingenuous to contend that a small amount of research before making a 1400-1500$ investment is too much to think about. It is when I have no way of testing what I've researched, and no guarantee that I made the correct choices. I'm willing to pay a little more for such a guarantee.
  - mkr-hn 16y ago
    How much work is it to compare a feature list to the HCL on your distro of choice? Hardware either works or it doesn't, and problems are rarely unique to a given unit in a line of hardware.
- calloc 16y ago
  My chipset is fully supported, until it comes time to switch modes using the nouveau driver for my Nvidia graphics card causing Ubuntu 10.10 to throw a black screen instead of showing me X11. I then had to add an extra parameter to my kernel boot line according to some forum posts to make sure it would let me get the installer (nomodeset or some shit like that), after that it installed correctly but Ubuntu 10.10 does away with Grub in any way shape or form so the next time it booted after install I couldn't change that line so I had to boot into a live CD. Then changing /mnt/etc/default/grub.cfg doesn't let me write that out to disk since update-grub tries to look for the currently mounted partition you want to modify in mount and won't find one with a LiveCD it can modify and as such that goes out of the window. You have to modify /mnt/boot/grub/grub.cfg and they have made an ungodly mess out of that file. After I finally figured that out the system still didn't work correctly, so I install the proprietary nvidia driver using their tool, and yet at boot it still does the wrong thing because the nouveau driver is still installed. Finally remove that and Pulseaudio causes my kernel to crash randomly, especially when watching Flash video content. At least I assume it is Pulseaudio, it is the last thing mentioned in /var/log/messages EACH and EVERY time. Since I needed an OS that could run Boxee (it really is too bad it doesn't work on FreeBSD) and didn't cost me any money I finally just grabbed Arch, installed X11 with the nvidia driver, installed Boxee and it works. It hasn't crashed at all since install. Linux doesn't just work, and ultimately I was getting really frustrated with the whole thing. I own multiple Windows machines (two Lenovo's, absolutely fantastic), I run FreeBSD as a gateway machine (and have used it for years as a Desktop machine), OpenSolaris as a server and xVM machine, and own one MacBook Pro. I can clearly say that Linux still has a long WAY to go before it is as easy as Mac OS X, and has the same "just works" features. I've had less issues using PC-BSD on the same hardware as Linux, and FreeBSD the underlying OS generally doesn't have the support from vendors for hardware drivers as Linux does.

grammaton 16y ago

The chipset is just one variable when choosing a laptop. If a laptop has a great chipset for Linux but looks like a pile of ass and weighs five pounds, who cares what the chipset is? What about usability? For the average (non Linux zealot) user, they'll pick their laptop on the basis of portability and yes, to some degree, aesthetics. If Linux doesn't work on that laptop - and quite often, it won't - then as far as they're concerned, it doesn't work well on laptops, and they're right. Disclaimer: I am a big fan of FreeBSD - if you think linux is bad on laptops.....

bilban 16y ago
Apple hardware isn't as diverse I'd wager, and as such it's more likely that an Apple OS will be more tailored to work with Apple hardware. That and the quality build, make up the premium. Some laptops are stamped with Linux support - something like Suse professional and they are more likely to work. It's a bit of a gamble at the end of the day, and I'd say the same for Windows running on a laptop. If every thing just works, praise the lamas - keep it. A bit of homework certainly helps before going out and buying something. I have OSX Tiger on an old power book. Free quality apps are few and far between. Though I like the OS. Loads of apps on Windows, but I don't like the UI. OSX and W7 users can always just place Linux in a VM if they wanted to and have the best of both worlds. Ideology and small touches in Gnome keep me wedded to Linux. I still blame the hardware vendors...
- grammaton 16y ago
  You're quite correct, it's a known fact that Apple hardware is not nearly as diverse. This is a valid point in the carping about Windows stability in many cases - Windows has to deal with orders of magnitude more hardware than Apple does, and the difference is one of the big reasons for OS X's stability (along with the Unix underpinnings). As for the hardware vendors, it may well be their "fault" but the average user won't care - as far as they're concerned it either works or it doesn't, and at the end of the day, they're right.
  - bilban 16y ago

anamax 16y ago

> Most Linux problems are people fighting against hardware, if you just pick your chipsets sensibly it all works out of the box. True, but easier said than done. First you have to find out what chipset a given laptop has. The salescritter won't know, the advert doesn't say. The manufacturer's website might have the info, but it won't be easy to find. Now you have to figure out if the chipset is supported. That's non-trivial because the "supported" lists don't necessarily use the same chipset names as the manufacturer. Sometimes minor variations don't matter but sometimes they do.