5 ms·

Your doing it wrong [1] A Single data point does not a result make. Others have had no problems with that exact laptop. For a counter point I could never get th

by dkhenry 14y ago

Your doing it wrong [1] A Single data point does not a result make. Others have had no problems with that exact laptop. For a counter point I could never get the CD-ROM hotplug working on my old dell laptop in windows. Clearly windows doesn't support CD-ROMS. 1. http://www.linlap.com/hp_mini_210 http://www.linlap.com/hp_mini_210

cturner 14y ago
> A Single data point does not a result make. no, it's entirely reasonable here. Earlier you claimed that linux support was good. It doesn't make many counter examples to contradict that. YMMV is not Good. You had an experience where linux worked. Some other have been able to struggle machines over the line previously but this is not evidence of maturity. > Others have had no problems with that exact laptop. If ever there was clear evidence of platform immaturity, this is it. It's common to read in this forum and others comments like yours, "oh linux has been well-supported on laptops for years" and then to optimistically go out and buy hardware, or try something, and find that you can't boot or similar. Just three weeks ago I had a hell of a time trying to get different distributions of linux (including ubuntu) to boot consistently on a three year old macbook with dual video cards. The problem seems to be caused by an issue that has been known about for two years, but with much fiddling in grub I couldn't get it to the stage where it would boot every time. And then there were all sorts of suspend/resume problems. Wireless has definitely not been mature for a decade. Wireless on ubuntu has been mature from backend to user interface for about four years. Earlier than that there were all sorts of things that should have been done in the background being done in gnome tooling, and it caused suspend/resume problems on some platforms, and configuration was broken. Maybe a commenter could point out that there was some magic combination that didn't have that problem. Doesn't matter. magic combinations != mature. Another favourite is where you install the base distribution, and things work, but then you make reasonable changes using the approved package management system and all sorts of crap just starts breaking. Flash stops working, or audio vanishes, or your display doesn't work in X any more, or your second display stops working.
emp_ 14y ago
Consumers and their whole experience of one are the only data point they use to make decisions after purchases.
- dkhenry 14y ago
  Yes, but you can't say it doesn't work because it didn't work _for me_. I have found people are really quick to blame Linux when things aren't working on their Linux laptop , but they blame everything else before they blame windows when it happens on a windows based system. Thats why you should always check the consensus of the community* most of the time they can point you in the right direction *I would just like to point out that in addition to having just a good if not better hardware support across the board , Linux really excels with its community and availability of online resources to fix most problems. I know some people don't like the idea that they might need to go look for solution and just want things to work , and I understand that, but I like knowing if I need it there is help out there I can leverage. Things will break no matter what OS your running and someone will need to fix it.
  - will_work4tears 14y ago
    Not arguing against your point, but there's gotta be a fallacy for this. I know people that refuse to eat a restaurant because they got sick or the food wasn't very good a single time. Or they will never buy a brand of car because they know one person that had a bad experience. I can imagine people base their computer purchase the same way.
    - stonemetal 14y ago
      Hasty generalization, or Unrepresentative Sample.
batgaijin 14y ago
Dude when I install Fedora it comes with less power management options because of the _WINDOW MANAGER_!!! I love Linux, but if you can't admit to how fucked up certain basic concepts are you are living in a TTY.
- irahul 14y ago
  > Dude when I install Fedora it comes with less power management options because of the _WINDOW MANAGER_!!! What do you mean by "power management" here? I am having a hard time figuring out what has window manager got to do with power management?
- dkhenry 14y ago
  Debate. You can install any number of window managers on Fedora. You can even do it at install time using Anaconda.
  - batgaijin 14y ago
    The point isn't that it can be fixed. We all know the answer to that. The point is the issue shouldn't exist. It's not about Gnome 3/Unity/KDE all deciding create the same interface - it's that they shouldn't have that power to begin with. Once you create behemoths for managing wireless, power, the display, and rendering what do you expect to happen? These are huge artificial systems that prevent any actual innovation. The Linux desktop needs awesome APIs and to use modern development practices that allow for decoupling between parts.
    - dkhenry 14y ago
      For the most part they have awesome API's used to manage those things. Everyone uses the NetworkManager API because it works really really well, and the XrandR API was _ supposed_ to support all the rendering configuration ( most free drivers support it fairly well ). There are also kernel API's for power management, but consider that powermanagement is a little more complex then setting some registers, there is a full stack of changes that need to be made, like when your screen turns off do you want you DE to know to lock the sesison, how about _when_ to turn off stuff, how does a cog type program know when to power stuff down if it doesn't integrate with the DE and X server. also how would the GPU know when to power down if it wasn't integrated with X11. when you get into the grits of power management it really makes sense to have it handled as a system. There might me some abstraction that could be done through D-Bus, but in the end its going to be a big integrated system.
nicholassmith 14y ago
But you're applying the data point of "I didn't have any problems" as your generalisation, I can say from having installed Linux on a weird amount of laptops recently that occasionally things like the trackpads will not have full features, occasionally webcams will fail to be found and/or not work properly and so on. But the thing is, that's just my experience with one specific distro (Ubuntu 11.04) out of the box, and shouldn't be taken for a whole.
- dkhenry 14y ago
  Things will break, I fully agree, but for the most part they work really really well. I have installed Linux on scores of laptops , and I have seen some stuff just not work, but in general ( and I think you will find this to be the consensus around the community ) it works great and most laptops work with nothing more then a fresh install of your Distro of choice .
  - nicholassmith 14y ago
    Don't get me wrong, for the most part things do seem to work really well, staggeringly so when you think about how much clout a free upstart like Linux should have. However, certain hardware has got poor support on Linux and people do get bitten by it every now and again, my argument was mostly your single data point, and my single data point and kijin's data point don't make a conclusive one as the same model of laptop might actually have a WiFi card from one manufacturer which craps out or one that works perfectly. But for the most part Linux does cover hardware pretty well, and I've not seen a 'core' part of a laptop not work properly for a long while.
imgabe 14y ago
> A Single data point does not a result make. Just like how installing Fedora on a laptop 8 years ago and having everything work doesn't mean that there aren't some things that are perpetually broken on Linux distros.
- drivebyacct2 14y ago
  Are you using "perpetually" ironically in that sentence or is the logical absurdity of what you said evading you? (look up "perpetually").
  - imgabe 14y ago
    It is quite clear what perpetually means in that sentence. Are you really trying to start an argument about semantics with a stranger on the Internet? Do you consider this the best use of your one finite lifetime?
    - drivebyacct2 14y ago
      I just don't understand what you're trying to save. It can't be or have a "perpetually unfixed problem" if it "everything work[ed]" at one point in time. Besides, it's not like there was anything substantial there besides more hand waving old inaccurate stereotypes about linux.
      - imgabe 14y ago
        See the second definition: http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/perpetual http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/perpetual occurring continually : indefinitely long-continued As in, every time I install Linux on a new laptop, as I have several times over the past 5 years or so, problems with WiFi continue to reoccur, and require some level of googling around to resolve. Yet, years later, with an updated distribution on a new computer, they occur again, perpetually. The problem can remain perpetually unfixed at the distribution level if everyone who installs it is willing to spend time tinkering around to get things to work right.

by dkhenry 14y ago

cturner 14y ago

> A Single data point does not a result make. no, it's entirely reasonable here. Earlier you claimed that linux support was good. It doesn't make many counter examples to contradict that. YMMV is not Good. You had an experience where linux worked. Some other have been able to struggle machines over the line previously but this is not evidence of maturity. > Others have had no problems with that exact laptop. If ever there was clear evidence of platform immaturity, this is it. It's common to read in this forum and others comments like yours, "oh linux has been well-supported on laptops for years" and then to optimistically go out and buy hardware, or try something, and find that you can't boot or similar. Just three weeks ago I had a hell of a time trying to get different distributions of linux (including ubuntu) to boot consistently on a three year old macbook with dual video cards. The problem seems to be caused by an issue that has been known about for two years, but with much fiddling in grub I couldn't get it to the stage where it would boot every time. And then there were all sorts of suspend/resume problems. Wireless has definitely not been mature for a decade. Wireless on ubuntu has been mature from backend to user interface for about four years. Earlier than that there were all sorts of things that should have been done in the background being done in gnome tooling, and it caused suspend/resume problems on some platforms, and configuration was broken. Maybe a commenter could point out that there was some magic combination that didn't have that problem. Doesn't matter. magic combinations != mature. Another favourite is where you install the base distribution, and things work, but then you make reasonable changes using the approved package management system and all sorts of crap just starts breaking. Flash stops working, or audio vanishes, or your display doesn't work in X any more, or your second display stops working.

emp_ 14y ago

Consumers and their whole experience of one are the only data point they use to make decisions after purchases.

dkhenry 14y ago
Yes, but you can't say it doesn't work because it didn't work _for me_. I have found people are really quick to blame Linux when things aren't working on their Linux laptop , but they blame everything else before they blame windows when it happens on a windows based system. Thats why you should always check the consensus of the community* most of the time they can point you in the right direction *I would just like to point out that in addition to having just a good if not better hardware support across the board , Linux really excels with its community and availability of online resources to fix most problems. I know some people don't like the idea that they might need to go look for solution and just want things to work , and I understand that, but I like knowing if I need it there is help out there I can leverage. Things will break no matter what OS your running and someone will need to fix it.
- will_work4tears 14y ago
  Not arguing against your point, but there's gotta be a fallacy for this. I know people that refuse to eat a restaurant because they got sick or the food wasn't very good a single time. Or they will never buy a brand of car because they know one person that had a bad experience. I can imagine people base their computer purchase the same way.
  - stonemetal 14y ago
    Hasty generalization, or Unrepresentative Sample.

batgaijin 14y ago

Dude when I install Fedora it comes with less power management options because of the _WINDOW MANAGER_!!! I love Linux, but if you can't admit to how fucked up certain basic concepts are you are living in a TTY.

irahul 14y ago
> Dude when I install Fedora it comes with less power management options because of the _WINDOW MANAGER_!!! What do you mean by "power management" here? I am having a hard time figuring out what has window manager got to do with power management?
dkhenry 14y ago
Debate. You can install any number of window managers on Fedora. You can even do it at install time using Anaconda.
- batgaijin 14y ago
  The point isn't that it can be fixed. We all know the answer to that. The point is the issue shouldn't exist. It's not about Gnome 3/Unity/KDE all deciding create the same interface - it's that they shouldn't have that power to begin with. Once you create behemoths for managing wireless, power, the display, and rendering what do you expect to happen? These are huge artificial systems that prevent any actual innovation. The Linux desktop needs awesome APIs and to use modern development practices that allow for decoupling between parts.
  - dkhenry 14y ago
    For the most part they have awesome API's used to manage those things. Everyone uses the NetworkManager API because it works really really well, and the XrandR API was _ supposed_ to support all the rendering configuration ( most free drivers support it fairly well ). There are also kernel API's for power management, but consider that powermanagement is a little more complex then setting some registers, there is a full stack of changes that need to be made, like when your screen turns off do you want you DE to know to lock the sesison, how about _when_ to turn off stuff, how does a cog type program know when to power stuff down if it doesn't integrate with the DE and X server. also how would the GPU know when to power down if it wasn't integrated with X11. when you get into the grits of power management it really makes sense to have it handled as a system. There might me some abstraction that could be done through D-Bus, but in the end its going to be a big integrated system.

nicholassmith 14y ago

But you're applying the data point of "I didn't have any problems" as your generalisation, I can say from having installed Linux on a weird amount of laptops recently that occasionally things like the trackpads will not have full features, occasionally webcams will fail to be found and/or not work properly and so on. But the thing is, that's just my experience with one specific distro (Ubuntu 11.04) out of the box, and shouldn't be taken for a whole.

dkhenry 14y ago
Things will break, I fully agree, but for the most part they work really really well. I have installed Linux on scores of laptops , and I have seen some stuff just not work, but in general ( and I think you will find this to be the consensus around the community ) it works great and most laptops work with nothing more then a fresh install of your Distro of choice .
- nicholassmith 14y ago
  Don't get me wrong, for the most part things do seem to work really well, staggeringly so when you think about how much clout a free upstart like Linux should have. However, certain hardware has got poor support on Linux and people do get bitten by it every now and again, my argument was mostly your single data point, and my single data point and kijin's data point don't make a conclusive one as the same model of laptop might actually have a WiFi card from one manufacturer which craps out or one that works perfectly. But for the most part Linux does cover hardware pretty well, and I've not seen a 'core' part of a laptop not work properly for a long while.

imgabe 14y ago

> A Single data point does not a result make. Just like how installing Fedora on a laptop 8 years ago and having everything work doesn't mean that there aren't some things that are perpetually broken on Linux distros.

drivebyacct2 14y ago
Are you using "perpetually" ironically in that sentence or is the logical absurdity of what you said evading you? (look up "perpetually").
- imgabe 14y ago
  It is quite clear what perpetually means in that sentence. Are you really trying to start an argument about semantics with a stranger on the Internet? Do you consider this the best use of your one finite lifetime?
  - drivebyacct2 14y ago
    I just don't understand what you're trying to save. It can't be or have a "perpetually unfixed problem" if it "everything work[ed]" at one point in time. Besides, it's not like there was anything substantial there besides more hand waving old inaccurate stereotypes about linux.
    - imgabe 14y ago
      See the second definition: http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/perpetual http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/perpetual occurring continually : indefinitely long-continued As in, every time I install Linux on a new laptop, as I have several times over the past 5 years or so, problems with WiFi continue to reoccur, and require some level of googling around to resolve. Yet, years later, with an updated distribution on a new computer, they occur again, perpetually. The problem can remain perpetually unfixed at the distribution level if everyone who installs it is willing to spend time tinkering around to get things to work right.