online article: Should Linux vendors think differently?

[Duncan Anderson]

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.
>
Yes, I agree. I hope no-one assumed I was knocking Ubuntu too much. I 
like it very much, especially for new users and so on. The problems I 
alluded to in my earlier posting are normally easy enough to repair by a 
bit of judicious editing of the mode lines in the X configuration file, 
but unfortunately they may be discouraging for a novice user.

Of course, you are absolutely correct in saying that Ubuntu or any 
modern Linux distribution outdoes Winstrosity when it comes to hardware 
detection (except for its misbegotten offspring, winmodems and winprinters).

cheers
Duncan

		
___________________________________________________________ 
To help you stay safe and secure online, we've developed the all new Yahoo! Security Centre. http://uk.security.yahoo.com