online article: Should Linux vendors think differently?

[Hein-Pieter van Braam]

First of all, sorry etienne for receiving this email twice, time for 
an evo setting to automatically reply to list :)

On Tue, 2005-10-11 at 11:19 -0400, Etienne Goyer wrote:
> Duncan Anderson wrote:
> > Since most hardware is specifically designed to support a well known 
> > brand of neocolonialist spyware, getting any form of Linux to install 
> > without a hitch is quite an achievement.
> 
> "Neocolonialist spyware" ... gotta remeber that one ! :)
> 
> One thing to keep in mind is that people are actually expecting Ubuntu 
> (Linux in general, in fact) to *outperform* Windows hardware detection 
> and support.  I have handled several machine in the past (and still own 
> a few) that Windows do not correctly detect and support the graphic 
> hardware out-of-the-box.  You have to first figure out which graphic 
> chip it is, then find the appropriate drivers (you did keep all the 
> drivers disk, right ?) to get anything better than 640x480 in 8 bits 
> color.  Same for sound, Ethernet, etc.
> 
> IME, most modern distro have better out-of-the-box hardware support than XP.
> 

I second that, maybe I'm just lucky, but I have yet to come across a box
that wasn't supported by the hoary installer out of the box. People may
moan about the proprietary ATI and Nvidia driver install support, but
THAT problem is not an ubuntu one, it's one of ati and nvidia not
supporting the community in the way it wants to be supported. 

Even, considering that, and just ignoring the fact that due to the
license the drivers can not be included, for ati and nvidia cards, there
is no meaningful 3D acceleration in windows XP either after a clean
installation. Due to directX versions and driver versions, you don't get
'proper' 3d support in windows out of the box either.

I have never had a network card or sound card not work OOTB after a
hoary install. (the situation was a bit worse than that on warty, but
who remembers that? ;))

The ubuntu installation is so much more friendly than it's windowsXP
counterpart, but, fact remains, that someone who is unable to install
windows him/herself is unlikely to be able to install ubuntu, exactly
the same goes for hardware. 

"popping the hardware in and insert the CD" rarely works in windows,
especially for USB devices, as people DO NOT READ instructions. It
should be fool proof, the instructions usually state that you must
install the drivers BEFORE inserting the device, it's very rare that
people read that, and in some cases in can in fact, lead to
non-functioning hardware. 

While in linux installing a device may require a bit more hands-on
approach (if not supported OOTB) at least people will *have* to read
documentation, and, I think that, when tested, you will find that the
successrate on ubuntu will be higher than on winXP.

A fact in point: A rather elderly person I've installed ubuntu for
(about 60-65 I believe) bought and installed a printer and a digital
camera for his PC, and I only learned about this when I came to visit
and he showed me some pictures he had taken and printed :)

People expect to plug something in and having it work, ANY mucking about
with manual driver installation is going to fail, miserably. We really
need "made for ubuntu" stickers on hardware :)

this turned to be a rather large rant :)

my 2 cents (maybe even 20)

TMM
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
Url : http://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/sounder/attachments/20051012/a009bfa6/attachment.pgp