Went Back To Windows(R)...
spamtrap at arumes.com
Tue Aug 2 20:19:11 UTC 2011
On Sat, 30 Jul 2011 13:32:57 -0500, Jordon Bedwell wrote:
> On 30/07/11 06:00, Avi Greenbury wrote:
>> So Linux being incompatible with large swathes of hardware is because
>> the users are idiots? That's hardly useful as far as gaining support
>> for more hardware.
> I think you are a bit confused about how the world really works if you
> think that is the case. Here is the deal, just to fill you in... for a
> long time everybody was kept in the dark when it came to ATI, it was a
> guessing game, most of the time it didn't work out so well but sometimes
> it did. It wasn't till a few years ago that ATI opened up a bit and we
> finally started getting somewhere, "yay 3D!" and it wasn't until
> recently that we really did start getting somewhere. It is obviously
> Linux's fault right? I mean they should have broken into ATI's
> headquarters and stolen everything they needed to build rock solid
> drivers so, it's obviously Linux's fault.
> My bad, I always thought it was up to the guys who made the hardware to
> build the drivers and give it support, I mean damn it seems like when I
> go buy a graphics card it always has a driver with it to give Windows
> support for it, but it always seems to lack a Linux driver, guess it was
> really Microsoft doing all that hard work building the drivers right?
> Yes, Linux does build a lot of drivers, yes some hardware makers do
> commit to the Kernel to give better hardware support for their hardware.
> Why? Because they have to, or Linux would get nowhere, but it's not
> Linux's fault for the lack of hardware support, it's the hardware makers
> fault. Get with the program sir.
It's only their fault if Linux support is profitable. Otherwise, it's
just a sane decision.
Regards, Robert http://www.arumes.com
More information about the ubuntu-users