(I know this is sort of "old news" by now, but I am catching up after a 2-day holiday, and I really would like to post my $0.02) On Sun, 22 Feb 2004 12:12:41 +0100 Jos Vos <jos@xxxxxx> wrote: > On Sun, Feb 22, 2004 at 12:52:16PM +0200, xyzzy@hotpop [...] > > However, even with all of M$ garbage, the bottom line is that their > > garbage works on my system and Linux does not. > > Yes, and this is *not* because M$ is good and Linux is bad, but > because those manufacturers have "close cooperations" with M$ and > don't care(or are not allowed to care!!!) about Linux. I couldn't agree more. It has always been like this, and, even though it's been slowly changing (you see companies like Dell, NVidia and Intel, among others, dedicating personnel to improve Linux and guarantee it is compatible with their products), a lot is still done as reverse-engineering (or sometimes "blind-engineering") when it comes to supporting bleeding-edge (or maybe even plainly "unusual") hardware. This of course doesn't apply to MS, with its mentioned "close cooperation" with hardware manufacturers -- and this cooperation doesn't even has to be paid for sometimes, because it's on the best interest of hardware manufacturers that the world's best selling OS works on their products. Anyway, it shouldn't sound awkward that Linux needs sometime to catch up with bleeding-edge hardware if you consider it is developed and maintained generally by voluntaries scattered around the world, with no relationship to hardware manufacturers whatsoever (aside from the honorable exceptions mentioned above). This, of course, doesn't mean you don't have the right to be pissed off because Linux doesn't work on your new hardware. Just make sure you understand the reasons why, don't spread FUD and don't completely give up on it (give it another try later on). Best, Andre -- Andre Oliveira da Costa
