Operating Systems > Linux and UNIX
Certified to suck.
Kintaro:
--- Quote ---Hey guys. Turns out, I had the awesome privilege to look in to Linux certification this past week. You know, like how when Novell says SUSE runs well on some laptops, then, well, it should? Well, turns out they have a funny definition of "well".
--- End quote ---
http://linuxhaters.blogspot.com/2008/08/certified-to-suck.html
Refalm:
Wow, I didn't even know there was any 3D acceleration possible on Intel Graphics with Linux. I always suspected that if you're not on nVidia or ATI, you're fucked.
Dell seems to use the same videocard in their Linux laptops:
https://ecomm2.dell.com/dellstore/basket.aspx?c=us&cs=19&l=en&s=dhs&itemtype=CFG&oid=24726e90-c168-4494-bb3d-a6fa3113ed8b
I wonder if they spontaneously reboot with Compiz enabled as well.
Also, here's an article on why ACPI sucks in Linux:
http://www.osnews.com/story/17689/Bill-Gates-on-Making-ACPI-Not-Work-with-Linux/
At least that is something that can't be helped, but Intel Graphics? That sucks, any onboard nVidia or ATI videocard would be just as cheap.
Kintaro:
--- Quote ---While we don't know if he actually managed to do just that (creating problems to other OSes to work well with ACPI), but if he did, it is a good explanation why ACPI has been flaky on the majority of x86 computers with anything else other than Windows (the older, APM standard, seemed more compatible with alternative OSes).
--- End quote ---
Sounds like someone is making really lame excuses for a standard that was made with complete transparency. The reason ACPI sucks on Linux is because Linux doesn't follow published specifications on ACPI. Fuck, it pretends its Windows to sacrifice every good ACPI compliant motherboard for every bad one that only likes Windows. Why do you think FreeBSD never had these luser problems with ACPI? They followed the standard.
Just found this in the comments...
--- Quote ---"3) Wireless connection was not tested due to a lack of an Intel Linux driver for the wireless adapter, will perform wireless stress test when driver becomes available."
Holy shit, wireless doesn't work on a notebook and it gets certified? WTF good is a notebook without wireless?
Could you imagine if Microsoft bulled this bullshit on you? It'd be a shit storm.
--- End quote ---
Orethrius:
--- Quote from: Kintaro ---Sounds like someone is making really lame excuses for a standard that was made with complete transparency.
--- End quote ---
You got me there! 600 pages with not a simplified version in sight - I believe someone's invented "obscurity through absolute transparency"! For the record, Microsoft is one of five partners including Intel (remember the "Wintel" days before AMD became any kind of force, because I sure do), HP, Toshiba (two historically major Windows resellers), and Phoenix (the only BIOS to date that has ever had the annoying tendency to hide drive specifications from the administrator). Add in this little number, and I wonder why people might get the impression that something else is going on here.
--- Quote from: Kintaro ---The reason ACPI sucks on Linux is because Linux doesn't follow published specifications on ACPI.
--- End quote ---
Neither does BSD. You should really keep up with Nate Lawson more often.
--- Quote from: Kintaro ---Fuck, it pretends its Windows to sacrifice every good ACPI compliant motherboard for every bad one that only likes Windows.
--- End quote ---
If you're referring to suspend_to_ram, that's a STANDARD that BSD still hasn't gotten to work. If you're referring to X frontends, one must wonder whether you have HALF A FUCKING CLUE about how X works. For the record, when implemented properly, it's not supposed to hook the system - hell, even THAT is left up to vendor-specific drivers.
--- Quote from: Kintaro ---Why do you think FreeBSD never had these luser problems with ACPI?
--- End quote ---
Obviously you're just misinformed on BSD's current ACPI support status. Neither Hibernate nor Suspend has full support yet, so they're in much the same boat as Linux.
--- Quote from: Kintaro ---They followed the standard.
--- End quote ---
You're arguing that this can be fully implemented without running afoul of various dipshit hardware-specific decisions. I know you can't be THAT stupid.
--- Quote from: Kintaro ---Holy shit, wireless doesn't work on a notebook and it gets certified? WTF good is a notebook without wireless?
--- End quote ---
*strangles Kintaro with homemade CAT-6* Sometimes, you can't recreate hard-wired performance - see recent 10-gigabit developments like FiOS for reference. Oh, and for the record, Intel has THE BEST track record with open drivers. They get the same slack that people afford ATi Omega drivers on Windows because they've earned it (that is, nobody has a gun to their heads).
--- Quote from: Kintaro ---Could you imagine if Microsoft bulled this bullshit on you? It'd be a shit storm.
--- End quote ---
Reference Windows ME, Windows XP Gold, and Windows Vista for proof. There's a difference between "it's been delayed" and "not in your lifetime" and you know it.
Kintaro:
FreeBSD will still actually boot on a lot of hardware Linux will not with broken ACPI.
Anyway, I don't know what you are on about after that because nobody shipped a wireless device without a windows driver, that got a certified PC. You go on about 98, ME, Vista, but fuck, they all had wireless drivers in their time? Just what the fuck are you on about. It had nothing to do with performance: NO DRIVER EXISTS TO TEST.
This is a clear issue of a dodgy certification, given to a laptop that doesn't support suspend, wifi, and hardware 3D which are pretty fucking important on laptops. I can't believe you defend bullshit on this level.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
Go to full version