8 ms·

> So pick your hardware with doing some research first. The big linux fallacy. Firstly there is no hardware that can guaranty that everything will work. None.

> So pick your hardware with doing some research first. The big linux fallacy. Firstly there is no hardware that can guaranty that everything will work. None. No dell. No system76. There are just some that have less problems than others. I've many friends saying they never have any problems. I also know they lie, because I come to their home, and I see them using workarounds every time for issues they don't even see anymore as they became part of their workflow. Secondly, there is no hardware that is guaranty that everything will keep working. Each update may break your machine in some imaginative way. The last time it did, I lost ethernet support on thunderbolt. It's like a personnal chaos monkey, checking my work ethic is resilient to random havock. And lastly "This has nothing to do with Linux, but with WiFi makers who can't make drivers" is not true anymore, with most phones using linux and having a wifi chip. The problem comes back with different chip anyway.

shmerl 8y ago
If you buy hardware of those who make junk drivers - you are shooting yourself in the foot. Same applies on any OS without exception. No point to complain, if you don't want to do any research before buying.
- AnIdiotOnTheNet 8y ago
  If the drivers are so junk, why were they accepted into the Kernel? Isn't part of the point of forcing all drivers to be open source so that they can be kept to a certain standard?
  - shmerl 8y ago
    > If the drivers are so junk, why were they accepted into the Kernel? It's possible they weren't junk originally, but stopped being maintained. Or some other reason. Also, WiFi drivers can rely on firmware, which Linux developers have no control over. Which is a bad thing, but it's quite common unfortunately. In general, when choosing WiFi, find the driver which manufacturer actively maintains. Intel is a good example of such.
    - AnIdiotOnTheNet 8y ago
      Funny, "so they can be maintained" is another supposed reason that Linux forces drivers to be part of the kernel. Seems like that justification isn't holding up to scrutiny.
      - shmerl 8y ago
        That's a necessary, but not a sufficient requirement for quality. The driver needs to be both upstreamed and actively maintained obviously, to retain its quality. If you think just getting upstream will magically make it good without any further effort, then you think wrong.
        AnIdiotOnTheNet 8y ago
        Right, so why force everyone who wants to write a driver to upstream? Just make a stable driver ABI they can interface with and be done with it. If their driver is good, it'll work good, if it isn't, it won't. Same as today really, but without the need to constantly recompile and force people to open their code (like that even matters because, as you said: firmware blobs).
        shmerl 8y ago
        If you don't have both - quality will suffer because developers will make any mess they want without aligning with the kernel. One infamous example is Nvidia's "official" GPU driver. All its problems are caused by it not being upstreamed. > Just make a stable driver ABI they can interface with and be done with it. That will also hold the kernel back. So let the driver better be compatible for some version window, but not forever, even if it's provided with dkms. That's a good, not a bad thing. Freezing driver interfaces forever will turn the kernel itself into a mess. No one does it, including Windows.
        AnIdiotOnTheNet 8y ago
        > One infamous example is Nvidia's "official" GPU driver. All its problems are caused by it not being upstreamed. Alternative perspective: the lack of any kind of stability in the driver ABI causes all the problems with the nVidia driver. > That will also hold the kernel back. So let the driver better be compatible for some version window, but not forever [...] Who said it had to be forever?

shmerl 8y ago

If you buy hardware of those who make junk drivers - you are shooting yourself in the foot. Same applies on any OS without exception. No point to complain, if you don't want to do any research before buying.

AnIdiotOnTheNet 8y ago
If the drivers are so junk, why were they accepted into the Kernel? Isn't part of the point of forcing all drivers to be open source so that they can be kept to a certain standard?
- shmerl 8y ago
  > If the drivers are so junk, why were they accepted into the Kernel? It's possible they weren't junk originally, but stopped being maintained. Or some other reason. Also, WiFi drivers can rely on firmware, which Linux developers have no control over. Which is a bad thing, but it's quite common unfortunately. In general, when choosing WiFi, find the driver which manufacturer actively maintains. Intel is a good example of such.
  - AnIdiotOnTheNet 8y ago
    Funny, "so they can be maintained" is another supposed reason that Linux forces drivers to be part of the kernel. Seems like that justification isn't holding up to scrutiny.
    - shmerl 8y ago
      That's a necessary, but not a sufficient requirement for quality. The driver needs to be both upstreamed and actively maintained obviously, to retain its quality. If you think just getting upstream will magically make it good without any further effort, then you think wrong.
      - AnIdiotOnTheNet 8y ago
        Right, so why force everyone who wants to write a driver to upstream? Just make a stable driver ABI they can interface with and be done with it. If their driver is good, it'll work good, if it isn't, it won't. Same as today really, but without the need to constantly recompile and force people to open their code (like that even matters because, as you said: firmware blobs).
        shmerl 8y ago
        If you don't have both - quality will suffer because developers will make any mess they want without aligning with the kernel. One infamous example is Nvidia's "official" GPU driver. All its problems are caused by it not being upstreamed. > Just make a stable driver ABI they can interface with and be done with it. That will also hold the kernel back. So let the driver better be compatible for some version window, but not forever, even if it's provided with dkms. That's a good, not a bad thing. Freezing driver interfaces forever will turn the kernel itself into a mess. No one does it, including Windows.
        AnIdiotOnTheNet 8y ago
        > One infamous example is Nvidia's "official" GPU driver. All its problems are caused by it not being upstreamed. Alternative perspective: the lack of any kind of stability in the driver ABI causes all the problems with the nVidia driver. > That will also hold the kernel back. So let the driver better be compatible for some version window, but not forever [...] Who said it had to be forever?