Stop Microsoft

All Things Microsoft => Microsoft as a Company => Topic started by: RaZoR1394 on 28 May 2005, 12:23

Title: Windows not ready for the desktop YET
Post by: RaZoR1394 on 28 May 2005, 12:23
Check THIS (http://os.newsforge.com/article.pl?sid=05/05/18/2033216) article.

Quote
[size=-1] Every year or so I like to see how Microsoft is doing in its attempt to make a desktop operating system as usable as Linux. Microsoft Windows XP, Home Edition, with Service Pack 2, is a tremendous improvement over previous Windows versions when it comes to stability and appearance, but it still has many glitches that keep it from being competitive with GNU/Linux for everyday users, including a tedious installation procedure, lack of productivity software included with the operating system, hardware compatibility problems, and a price so much higher than any of the Linux distributions I've tested lately that I don't feel this product is a good value for most home or small office users
[/size]
It's mainly meant as I joke I think but It's hilarious :D. He's very right about KDE and Gnome as they are indeed much more userfriendly and functional.
Title: Re: Windows not ready for the desktop YET
Post by: Jenda on 28 May 2005, 16:27
Ha ha!!! One of the best I've read lately. I immediately spammed all my friends with the link...
Title: Re: Windows not ready for the desktop YET
Post by: Calum on 28 May 2005, 18:41
i don't really see how it's a joke. is its "joke" status supposed to imply that windows *is* ready for desktop use, to a higher degree than many linux distros?
Title: Re: Windows not ready for the desktop YET
Post by: RaZoR1394 on 28 May 2005, 20:14
No I totally agree with his points + that Windows is less userfriendly. It's just the way he has wroten the article
Title: Re: Windows not ready for the desktop YET
Post by: Jenda on 29 May 2005, 00:45
Exactly. Although it is very funny, it is still saying the whole truth and nothing but the truth. I will definitely force my to-be converts to read this one.
The only part where he "gives away" the humorous nature of the article is:
[size=-1]
Quote
It's possible that the monitor manufacturers aren't willing to give Microsoft and other proprietary operating system companies the information they need to create appropriate drivers and that the manufacturers, not Microsoft, deserve the blame for this problem.
This is a typical anti-/pro-Linux argument. He switched it around, although it makes very little sense this way.
[/size]
Title: Re: Windows not ready for the desktop YET
Post by: Aloone_Jonez on 29 May 2005, 04:25
Well unfortunelaty I've decided to take this article seriously. :D

I agree that KDE has a better user interface than Windows but:

I've had more problems with hadware support in Linux than Windows (graphics card, scanner winmodem) yes I've tried the drivers I've found on the internet.

I didn't need to install Windows as it came with my PC so the installation wasn't an issue.

The reason I use Windows is because it runs propietry software I need for work for which there is no Linux alternative and Wine won't run it either.
Title: Re: Windows not ready for the desktop YET
Post by: RaZoR1394 on 29 May 2005, 12:56
Aloone_Jonez - I have several computers with very different configurations and all have gotten perfect driver support after som tweaking and fixing. The good thing about Linux is that the drivers are implemented inside the kernel (inbuilt) or as an external module. The kernel also has support for most of todays available devices.

Well, still the ATI drivers lack performance and features but that will be fixed later on.

In Windows you need to load up the disc from the manufacturer or download the driver separately from the web. Sometimes you may have lost the disc or the drivers on it may be very old.

A good example is the Microsoft joysticks and gamepads. Some won't even work anymore with the provided drivers if you use XP as they have ended the support for them, at least not the special features. In linux they work fine after tweaking some configs and loading the proper drivers.

Also, in Windows one of my computers has a bluetooth antenna which requires an extra license. The funny thing is that the company Widcomm doesn't supply the license anymore. The unit availability also fades away from time to time (system properties). In Linux there is no need for stupid licenses, just compile the chipset driver into the kernel and you're go. My bluetooth dongle works perfectly now and it doesn't disappear like it did in Windows.

Then we have the SATA drivers and RAID controllers... On one of my computers It's impossible as I refuse to put a 3.5 floppy in the bay. Instead I use a card reader... Sure, you can slipstream it with nLite but that's a lot of hassle, at least with these drivers.

Except that most drivers already present on the Windows disc are outdated or not compatible so you'll often have to upgrade them anyway. Imagine living on the countryside without an internet connection. In your left hand you have a Gentoo universal 2005.0 livecd with updated drivers for 90% of your devices. In your other hand you have a WinXP CD which covers drivers with good functionality for about 30% of your devices. Which would you choose?

So... Personally I've only had bad experiences with Windows drivers and how It's driver system works. Maybe you have some very rare hardware or maybe a laptop with a mobility chipset or something similar?

About proprietary Windows softare. Yes some apps that won't run in Wine is a pain in the ass. Personally I use a lot of Architectural desktop 2005 and that works perfectly in VMware. I think It's worth it.
Title: Re: Windows not ready for the desktop YET
Post by: Aloone_Jonez on 29 May 2005, 16:03
Quote from: RaZoR1394
Aloone_Jonez - I have several computers with very different configurations and all have gotten perfect driver support after som tweaking and fixing.


My pro savage video card is slow under Linux, my leximark printer/scanner prints slowly and won't scan, my winmodem has a driver but it only works with the 2.4.x kernel. Yes I have downloaded and installed the relevant drivers.

Quote from: RaZoR1394
The good thing about Linux is that the drivers are implemented inside the kernel (inbuilt)


I fail to see the advantage here, a kernel with lots of drivers suitable to run on a wide selection of hardware will be big, slow and bloated. It's very stupid how you need to recompile the kernel to add NTFS support.

Quote from: RaZoR1394
or as an external module. The kernel also has support for most of todays available devices.


That's a far better option, use a mimium kernel and load the drivers for aditional hardware support - like it should be.

Quote from: RaZoR1394
Well, still the ATI drivers lack performance and features but that will be fixed later on.


Just like my pro savage card. :)

Quote from: RaZoR1394
In Windows you need to load up the disc from the manufacturer or download the driver separately from the web. Sometimes you may have lost the disc or the drivers on it may be very old.


In general a decient product comes with good drivers, my Leximark printer scanner came with very good drivers and a great OCR too.

Quote from: RaZoR1394
A good example is the Microsoft joysticks and gamepads. Some won't even work anymore with the provided drivers if you use XP as they have ended the support for them, at least not the special features. In linux they work fine after tweaking some configs and loading the proper drivers.


However my Cannon LBP-660 printer doesn't have a driver designed for NT5.1 (Windows XP) but I rung up support and they suggested using an old driver (NT4 I I think) and it works a treat.


What the fuck? Linux won't let me use a Winmodem driver designed for the 2.4.x kernel on the 2.6.x kernel even though it's been compiled, while Windows will allow me to use an old NT4 driver binary!

Quote from: RaZoR1394
Also, in Windows one of my computers has a bluetooth antenna which requires an extra license. The funny thing is that the company Widcomm doesn't supply the license anymore. The unit availability also fades away from time to time (system properties). In Linux there is no need for stupid licenses, just compile the chipset driver into the kernel and you're go. My bluetooth dongle works perfectly now and it doesn't disappear like it did in Windows.


I can't disagree with you here licensing is not a pgood old GPL.

Quote from: RaZoR1394
Then we have the SATA drivers and RAID controllers... On one of my computers It's impossible as I refuse to put a 3.5 floppy in the bay. Instead I use a card reader... Sure, you can slipstream it with nLite but that's a lot of hassle, at least with these drivers.

Except that most drivers already present on the Windows disc are outdated or not compatible so you'll often have to upgrade them anyway. Imagine living on the countryside without an internet connection. In your left hand you have a Gentoo universal 2005.0 livecd with updated drivers for 90% of your devices. In your other hand you have a WinXP CD which covers drivers with good functionality for about 30% of your devices. Which would you choose?


It simply isn't fair to compare a Windows XP CD made in 2003 and a live Linux CD made in 2005. I personally don't expect the operating system to come with any drivers except for the generic ones required to boot up and install it. Drivers as far as I'm concerned are the responsibility of the hardware manufacturer this is why I don't blame driver problems on Windows or Linux.

Quote from: RaZoR1394
So... Personally I've only had bad experiences with Windows drivers and how It's driver system works. Maybe you have some very rare hardware or maybe a laptop with a mobility chipset or something similar?


Our personal experiances will vary, there's really no point in argueing about them. I've only had one problem with Windows XP it used to hang up when going to the screensaver but this was fixed by altering the power saving monitor configureation.

Quote from: RaZoR1394
About proprietary Windows softare. Yes some apps that won't run in Wine is a pain in the ass. Personally I use a lot of Architectural desktop 2005 and that works perfectly in VMware. I think It's worth it.


Lot's of prorams are unstable under WINE if they work at all, Protel, Electronics Work bench and Crocadile Clips all don't work and there are no decent Linux alternatives. To run Windows programs under VMWARE don't you need Windows anyway?
Title: Re: Windows not ready for the desktop YET
Post by: piratePenguin on 29 May 2005, 16:35
Quote from: Aloone_Jonez
What the fuck? Linux won't let me use a Winmodem driver designed for the 2.4.x kernel on the 2.6.x kernel even though it's been compiled, while Windows will allow me to use an old NT4 driver binary!
I'm using the 2.4 kernel and have no intention of switching to 2.6 for a while. 2.6.11.11, yuck. No worries with 2.4. Update the kernel less, and everything's working fine for me.
Consider the whole compiling-the-kernel thing an extra bonus, something you won't get on Windows. The 2.6.11.11 kernel is, ahem, 2 days old.
The 2.4.30 kernel isn't even 2 months old. It works. Use it.
Quote from: Aloone_Jonez
It simply isn't fair to compare a Windows XP CD made in 2003 and a live Linux CD made in 2005.
It's MS's latest home release versus Gentoo's latest release. Seems fair to me.
Quote from: Aloone_Jonez
I personally don't expect the operating system to come with any drivers except for the generic ones required to boot up and install it. Drivers as far as I'm concerned are the responsibility of the hardware manufacturer this is why I don't blame driver problems on Windows or Linux.
I agree - so you can blame the manufacturers for not giving GNU/Linux the support it deserves.
Even if they released the Windows drivers under a free software licence, they'd be ported pretty damn fast.
Quote from: Aloone_Jonez
Lot's of prorams are unstable under WINE if they work at all, Protel, Electronics Work bench and Crocadile Clips all don't work and there are no decent Linux alternatives. To run Windows programs under VMWARE don't you need Windows anyway?
I have no clue about VmWare.
Windows will run programs that are designed to run on Windows.
GNU/Linux will run programs that are designed to run on GNU/Linux.
Wine is, another, extra bonus.
Title: Re: Windows not ready for the desktop YET
Post by: Jenda on 29 May 2005, 17:00
Quote
2.6.11.11 kernel is, ahem, 2 days old.
The 2.4.30 kernel is almost 2 months old. It works. Use it.

And the windoesn't kernel is...?
Title: Re: Windows not ready for the desktop YET
Post by: piratePenguin on 29 May 2005, 17:03
Quote from: Jenda
And the windoesn't kernel is...?
I have no idea, that's why I didn't mention it. I'd say they update it with Windows Update, but I dunno.

EDIT: I edited that part of my previous post...
"isn't even" is probably better.
Title: Re: Windows not ready for the desktop YET
Post by: RaZoR1394 on 29 May 2005, 23:13
Quote from: Aloone_Jonez
My pro savage video card is slow under Linux, my leximark printer/scanner prints slowly and won't scan, my winmodem has a driver but it only works with the 2.4.x kernel. Yes I have downloaded and installed the relevant drivers.  I fail to see the advantage here, a kernel with lots of drivers suitable to run on a wide selection of hardware will be big, slow and bloated. It's very stupid how you need to recompile the kernel to add NTFS support.
 You will see the advantage when you compile a kernel that only contains what you need. I didn't say that the compiled kernel should contain all options available in the "make menuconfig". And why should NTFS be enabled as default in the kernel? The filesystem is a Windows one and should be considered a bonus. Also, many desktop distros already have support for ntfs. Servers which is where Linux is used most don't have any use for ntfs. at least not most of them. They probably use ext3, jfs, xfs, reiserfs or reiser4.  My main argument is that you get all your drivers you need with one cd, not 10 or 20. They are also up to date and should work better with the current software. I personally hate to install all drivers after a reformat as I have a lot of controllers, other peripherals and so on. It just isn't effective.  
Quote
In general a decient product comes with good drivers, my Leximark printer scanner came with very good drivers and a great OCR too.
 That's true. I have a high end HP printer and it works fine with the CD driver in Windows, but you still need the disc or an internet connection to get a new one with bugfixes. I use DSL but I think it would be rather crappy to have for ex a 56k connection and download a 150mb driver package (audigy for ex) because of the CD being lost. I've read and heard a lot about this problem before, where the customers had to pay 10$ to get a new driver cd.  Think off needing to get a school work done on a Windows machine... You have no drivers installed for the printer and the disc is somehow bad and your internet connection is down. All you have is the Windows disc.  
Quote
However my Cannon LBP-660 printer doesn't have a driver designed for NT5.1 (Windows XP) but I rung up support and they suggested using an old driver (NT4 I I think) and it works a treat.
 Yes, but that's because Canon is "alive". Many manufacturers end support for certain units and devices which get the customers left in dark like with my bluetooth dongle and probably like 5 gaming units.  
Quote
It simply isn't fair to compare a Windows XP CD made in 2003 and a live Linux CD made in 2005. I personally don't expect the operating system to come with any drivers except for the generic ones required to boot up and install it. Drivers as far as I'm concerned are the responsibility of the hardware manufacturer this is why I don't blame driver problems on Windows or Linux.
 Yes It's fair because I'm referring to a XP SP2 cd, and It's nearly still the same regarding driver support as it was with original XP and SP1. Hardware manufacturers are the ones who have the best specifications of their stuff but I think they should collaborate more with open source developers so that it will be possible to integrate the drivers into the kernel.  
Quote
Our personal experiances will vary, there's really no point in argueing about them. I've only had one problem with Windows XP it used to hang up when going to the screensaver but this was fixed by altering the power saving monitor configureation.
 Well, I was mainly thinking about the driver model in the two OS,s .  
Quote
Lot's of prorams are unstable under WINE if they work at all, Protel, Electronics Work bench and Crocadile Clips all don't work and there are no decent Linux alternatives. To run Windows programs under VMWARE don't you need Windows anyway?
 Yes but you don't need to dualboot and you're able to enter the system pretty fast. It's not so bad really because you'll only use it when you'll need those "special" apps. I'm currently running XP SP2 in the virtual machine but If I want I could just put a Longhorn beta/alpha on it as I don't have to get scared about the system going down because the alpha/beta state. Soon I'll put OSX 10.4 under Pearpc which is available under linux. Will be pretty cool to experiment with.  
Quote from: "PiratePenguin"
I'm using the 2.4 kernel and have no intention of switching to 2.6 for a while. 2.6.11.11, yuck. No worries with 2.4. Update the kernel less, and everything's working fine for me. Consider the whole compiling-the-kernel thing an extra bonus, something you won't get on Windows. The 2.6.11.11 kernel is, ahem, 2 days old. The 2.4.30 kernel isn't even 2 months old. It works. Use it.
 Yes I've heard about that but I don't understand why really. The 2.6 kernel is extremely stable at least for heavy gaming usage and heavy gcc compiling + some video rendering without any hitches. The 2.6 kernel is also much faster.  
Quote from: "Jenda"
And the windoesn't kernel is...?
 Whoosh. OLD!! I haven't seen many kernel upgrades on Windows update or in the patches for a long time. It's mostly small fixes which probably are for modules anyway.
Title: Re: Windows not ready for the desktop YET
Post by: Aloone_Jonez on 30 May 2005, 12:35
Quote from: RaZoR1394
You will see the advantage when you compile a kernel that only contains what you need. I didn't say that the compiled kernel should contain all options available in the "make menuconfig".

Of course being able to compile the kernel yourself is an advantage but my point was all drivers (except the ones need to boot) should be external to the kernel. For example if the kernel should only have ext3 driver (or wharever file system you use) built in so all the other drivers can be loaded. This would save resources because when I'm not reading my ntfs or FAT32 drive the driver doesn't need to be in memory.

Quote from: RaZoR1394
And why should NTFS be enabled as default in the kernel? The filesystem is a Windows one and should be considered a bonus.

Yes, it is a bonus but that wasn't my point.

Quote from: RaZoR1394
Also, many desktop distros already have support for ntfs. Servers which is where Linux is used most don't have any use for ntfs. at least not most of them.

Redhat doesn't, but it would be better if you could just download and compile another module that can be loaded on demand to read the ntfs drive instead of bloating up the kernel.

Quote from: RaZoR1394
They probably use ext3, jfs, xfs, reiserfs or reiser4.

This Linux ntfs driver is pretty shitty as it only really supports read only access. I'm not makeing a point here because ntfs is Windows not Linux and read only access is good enough anyway.

Oh sorry I do have a point, the Linux ntfs driver isn't as good as the Windows driver because the people who wrote it did so by a process of reverse engineering - similar to how most Linux drivers are written.

Quote from: RaZoR1394
My main argument is that you get all your drivers you need with one cd, not 10 or 20. They are also up to date and should work better with the current software.

Sorry, while they may be anough to get your system booted   no Linux distribution has contained drivers for my printer/scanner, winmodem, and the graphics card driver is always slow.

Quote from: RaZoR1394
I personally hate to install all drivers after a reformat

I thought Linux was supposed to be so stable a reformat is rarely needed. :D

Quote from: RaZoR1394
as I have a lot of controllers, other peripherals and so on. It just isn't effective.    That's true. I have a high end HP printer and it works fine with the CD driver in Windows, but you still need the disc

The disc that came with the printer?
You should just keep this in a safe place with the printer manual warranty ect.

Quote from: RaZoR1394
or an internet connection to get a new one with bugfixes. I use DSL but I think it would be rather crappy to have for ex a 56k connection and download a 150mb driver package (audigy for ex)

I only have a 56k connection and the printer driver was well under 1MB.

Quote from: RaZoR1394
because of the CD being lost.

That's your fault for loosing it, you should keep it in a safe place. :D

Quote from: RaZoR1394
I've read and heard a lot about this problem before, where the customers had to pay 10$ to get a new driver cd.

If they kept in in a safe place they wouldn't have this problem and all they need to do is download a small file from the internet anyway.

Quote from: RaZoR1394
Think off needing to get a school work done on a Windows machine... You have no drivers installed for the printer and the disc is somehow bad and your internet connection is down. All you have is the Windows disc.

Or you could be in an even same position on a Linux machine, but even worse the printer driver you require simply doesn't exist. This wouln't bother me either way as I would just take the work to school on a disc.


Quote from: RaZoR1394
Yes, but that's because Canon is "alive".

Canon could've been dead and it wouln't have made any difference the driver I use on Windows XP (NT5.1) was designed for NT4 which is very old. The only way Canon being alive has benifited is I could ring the support, but I could've found this information on the Intenet anyway.

Quote from: RaZoR1394
Many manufacturers end support for certain units and devices which get the customers left in dark like with my bluetooth dongle and probably like 5 gaming units.

I can see how this could be a problem, the only possible advantage of hacker-written drivers is that manufacturer support is not needed to obtain the drivers.

Quote from: RaZoR1394
Yes It's fair because I'm referring to a XP SP2 cd, and It's nearly still the same regarding driver support as it was with original XP and SP1.

Ok fair enough but lets not blame the operating system for driver problems as it's the manufacturer's fault.

Quote from: RaZoR1394
Hardware manufacturers are the ones who have the best specifications of their stuff but I think they should collaborate more with open source developers

Yes I agree, the problem is manufacturers ofen want to keep their trade secretes - something not compatable with open source software.

Quote from: RaZoR1394
so that it will be possible to integrate the drivers into the kernel.

And make it bloated?
No it'd be better to keep them separate and load them when they're needed.

Quote from: RaZoR1394
Well, I was mainly thinking about the driver model in the two OS,s .

I'd say the Windows driver model is better for the same reason the Mac model is better than Linux because the manufacturers support them something that Linux just can't help.


Quote from: RaZoR1394
Yes but you don't need to dualboot and you're able to enter the system pretty fast. It's not so bad really because you'll only use it when you'll need those "special" apps. I'm currently running XP SP2 in the virtual machine

Now that is a very good idea, I think I'll need to upgrade though, while 256MB of RAM might be good enough for what I currently use my PC for I'll need more to fit two operating systems in memory but it might just be worth it.

Quote from: RaZoR1394
but If I want I could just put a Longhorn beta/alpha on it as I don't have to get scared about the system going down because the alpha/beta state. Soon I'll put OSX 10.4 under Pearpc which is available under linux. Will be pretty cool to experiment with.     Yes I've heard about that but I don't understand why really. The 2.6 kernel is extremely stable at least for heavy gaming usage and heavy gcc compiling + some video rendering without any hitches. The 2.6 kernel is also much faster.

All I was saying was that it seems strange a Windows driver binary compiled for a very old kernel works on the most recent kernel and a Linux driver designed for a very slightly older kernel won't work even though it's compiled from source.

Maybe I'll go back to the slightly older 2.4.x kernel the next time I can be bothered to install Linux.

Quote from: RaZoR1394
Whoosh. OLD!! I haven't seen many kernel upgrades on Windows update or in the patches for a long time. It's mostly small fixes which probably are for modules anyway.

Yes it is a bit old, Windows 2000 was NT 5.0 and Windows XP sp2 is NT 5.1.26 - only a minor update which really takes this piss if you ask me. You pay though the nose for just a minor update with Microsoft software.

The kernel isn't the bad part of Windows anyway I think Cutler did a very good job. The bad part of Windows is all the other shit that's wrapped around the kernel.
Title: Re: Windows not ready for the desktop YET
Post by: piratePenguin on 30 May 2005, 15:23
Quote from: Aloone_Jonez
Ok fair enough but lets not blame the operating system for driver problems as it's the manufacturer's fault.
So WTH are ye going on about?

Manufacturers aren't giving GNU/Linux the support it deserves, they're giving Windows and Mac OS X too much support.
The Linux kernel could be fcking perfect and the manufacturers still wouldn't support it.
When enough people start using it, the manufacturers will start supporting GNU/Linux properly (assuming they're not under a don't-support-GNU/Linux contract by MS or someone), then you can look forward to having your printer print properly, your scanner scan, and your graphics card work, Aloone.
Title: Re: Windows not ready for the desktop YET
Post by: Aloone_Jonez on 30 May 2005, 16:19
Quote from: piratePenguin
So WTH are ye going on about?


I'm saying you shouldn't blame driver problems on the operating system whether it be Windows, Linux or Mac OS. You should blame the hardware manfacturers, I suppose you could with Mac OS but that'd only be the case for Mac hardware.

Quote from: piratePenguin
Manufacturers aren't giving GNU/Linux the support it deserves, they're giving Windows and Mac OS X too much support.

Well I wouldn't say that, I'd say they should give Linux the same level of support as Windows & Mac OS.

Quote from: piratePenguin
The Linux kernel could be fcking perfect and the manufacturers still wouldn't support it.
When enough people start using it, the manufacturers will start supporting GNU/Linux properly (assuming they're not under a don't-support-GNU/Linux contract by MS or someone), then you can look forward to having your printer print properly, your scanner scan, and your graphics card work, Aloone.
In my opinion Linux has been stuck in a vicious circle for quite some time, here's my reasoning:

Lots of people,  organizations and businesses don't use Linux because it doesn't fully support their hardware or they rely on a piece of proprietary software for which there is no Linux equivalent.

Manufacturers don't make Linux drivers and software vendors don't release Linux versions which isn't helped by the fact that many Linux users are GPL fanboys who hate proprietary software.

These two factors feed of each other and are alone strong enough to stop Linux from becoming the main operating system for quite some time if ever and this will be the same for any other free operating system.

Don't worry though I working getting Linux to do what I want even if just on an old PC.
Title: Re: Windows not ready for the desktop YET
Post by: piratePenguin on 30 May 2005, 16:36
Quote from: Aloone_Jonez
I'm saying you shouldn't blame driver problems on the operating system whether it be Windows, Linux or Mac OS. You should blame the hardware manfacturers, I suppose you could with Mac OS but that'd only be the case for Mac hardware.
Yes exactly, so there's no point in even discussing it for so damn long.


Quote from: Aloone_Jonez
Well I wouldn't say that, I'd say they should give Linux the same level of support as Windows & Mac OS.
That would suffice :D

Quote from: Aloone_Jonez
In my opinion Linux has been stuck in a vicious circle for quite some time, here's my reasoning:

Lots of people, organizations and businesses don't use Linux because it doesn't fully support their hardware or they rely on a piece of proprietary software for which there is no Linux equivalent.

Manufacturers don't make Linux drivers and software vendors don't release Linux versions which isn't helped by the fact that many Linux users are GPL fanboys who hate proprietary software.

These two factors feed of each other and are alone strong enough to stop Linux from becoming the main operating system for quite some time if ever and this will be the same for any other free operating system.
I agree. Except it'll be the same for any other operating system, free or otherwise.

The hardware (and software) manufacturers really need to get their act together. Even if they just make their Windows drivers free software - they'd be ported pretty quick.

Once GNU/Linux overtakes Mac OS X, the manufacturers would wanna have a good reason for making Mac OS X drivers and not GNU/Linux drivers.
Title: Re: Windows not ready for the desktop YET
Post by: Aloone_Jonez on 30 May 2005, 16:54
Mac OS being owned by a hardware company helps a lot, also any operating system that's owned by a rich company has the advantage of being able to offer money.

I can only hope that OEM sales of Linux will increase and more companies will use it. There are already are both hardware and software companies supporting Linux and I hope this trend continues to improve.
Title: Re: Windows not ready for the desktop YET
Post by: RaZoR1394 on 30 May 2005, 17:31
Quote from: Aloone_Jonez
Of course being able to compile the kernel yourself is an advantage but my point was all drivers (except the ones need to boot) should be external to the kernel. For example if the kernel should only have ext3 driver (or wharever file system you use) built in so all the other drivers can be loaded. This would save resources because when I'm not reading my ntfs or FAT32 drive the driver doesn't need to be in memory.

Redhat doesn't, but it would be better if you could just download and compile another module that can be loaded on demand to read the ntfs drive instead of bloating up the kernel.

You can put all drivers external but that's just stupid as it messes up your lsmod and makes the computer slower. If you compile everything inside the kernel and only the ones you'll need you won't have sluggish problems. I don't see why you would wan't to recompile the kernel every week or so alternatively unload/load modules frequently because of driver support. It's not like the average person would bring home a new gadget every week.

Windows drivers are always loaded. They don't load on demand. The only problem I see in linux is that It's harder to recompile the kernel or make the modules than to click an .exe file. And you said you weren't able to remove them on demand?

As I said before Windows XP does not support auto loading of drivers. At least not by the looks of it in processmanager plus all compability problems when not uninstalled.
 But guess what, practically Linux supports fast module loading but you'll do that manually. In linux you just do
 
 #rmmod *modname*
 
 and when you insert it
 
 #insmod *modname*
 
Quote
This Linux ntfs driver is pretty shitty as it only really supports read only access. I'm not makeing a point here because ntfs is Windows not Linux and read only access is good enough anyway.

Oh sorry I do have a point, the Linux ntfs driver isn't as good as the Windows driver because the people who wrote it did so by a process of reverse engineering - similar to how most Linux drivers are written.

The ntfs driver does support writing with the captive option and I know people who have been able to transfer a lot of files to the disc without problems, but yes it ins't safe. Why bitch with ntfs btw? Why not just create a spare fat32 partition.

Quote
Sorry, while they may be anough to get your system booted no Linux distribution has contained drivers for my printer/scanner, winmodem, and the graphics card driver is always slow.

For people who have used Windows before It's pretty sad if their comps components won't work with all drivers provided but you should always check the compability list for Linux drivers before you buy anything. That's what I've done before I've bought my computers. You can't buy extremely rare hardware and say that the driver support sucks because the hardware not being compatible. I wasn't so sure about ATI and Nvidia cause I used Windows pretty often. That's why I choosed an ATI card.

In general most long-time linux users are either aware of the driver problems/incompability which makes them switch brands when buying a new one. Those who are using their older incompatible computers are becoming fewer.

Quote
I thought Linux was supposed to be so stable a reformat is rarely needed. :D

I referred to Windows off course. I guess I wasn't clear.

Quote
The disc that came with the printer?
You should just keep this in a safe place with the printer manual warranty ect.

That's your fault for loosing it, you should keep it in a safe place. :D

I didn't, some friends did.

Quote
If they kept in in a safe place they wouldn't have this problem and all they need to do is download a small file from the internet anyway.

All soundblaster full packages are 100mb plus. Creative is a very common brand as their soundcards rock, specially for gamers. Another problem is that the current driver cd contains old mixer, surround testing apps and so on. Printers are another story.

Quote
I can see how this could be a problem, the only possible advantage of hacker-written drivers is that manufacturer support is not needed to obtain the drivers.

No there are other advantages as well. Millions of other people can make modifications of the driver and optimize it as they wan't. There can exist several versions of the driver which may work better on different machines.

Quote
Ok fair enough but lets not blame the operating system for driver problems as it's the manufacturer's fault.

Yes It's their fault because Microsoft include old ones when there are much better drivers available months ago for download. They just keep remanufacturing the same discs as the original XP plus the servicepacks which are often bugfixes not driverupdates. All they have to do is to update their disc when manufacturing. If they put the OS on DVD they could add all common driversets as .exe files on the disk. Similar how it is in linux. (as I did with nLite though only for my computer)

Quote
I'd say the Windows driver model is better for the same reason the Mac model is better than Linux because the manufacturers support them something that Linux just can't help.

The driver model has nothing to do with manufacturers support. Many manufacturers have released proprietary drivers that are available as modules which are loadable and unloadble, not like in Windows where you need to uninstall the whole driverset and reboot.

Quote
Now that is a very good idea, I think I'll need to upgrade though, while 256MB of RAM might be good enough for what I currently use my PC for I'll need more to fit two operating systems in memory but it might just be worth it.

Actually 256mb ram should be reserved just for the VMWare OS. I have 2gb ram and have reserved 512mb. That should be enough. So totally 1gb of ram should be recommended when using VMWare.

Quote
All I was saying was that it seems strange a Windows driver binary compiled for a very old kernel works on the most recent kernel and a Linux driver designed for a very slightly older kernel won't work even though it's compiled from source.

It may not work correctly performance and functionality wise but It doesn't bring down the whole system like certain older Windows driver do when you put them on for ex Win XP SP2.

Quote
Maybe I'll go back to the slightly older 2.4.x kernel the next time I can be bothered to install Linux.

I was referring the 2.6 kernel thingie to PiratePenguin as you can see.

Quote
Yes it is a bit old, Windows 2000 was NT 5.0 and Windows XP sp2 is NT 5.1.26 - only a minor update which really takes this piss if you ask me. You pay though the nose for just a minor update with Microsoft software.

The kernel isn't the bad part of Windows anyway I think Cutler did a very good job. The bad part of Windows is all the other shit that's wrapped around the kernel.

Yes, true. I don't think that the DOS kernel would have suited so good in WinXP, lol. They were kind off forced to write a new one.

So simply my thoughts about drivers:

* Feature wise and compability wise Windows drivers are better.
* Fast unloading/loading does not exist in Windows. If you need to disable them you need to restart the computer or disable them in autostart if that even is possible.
* The distribution of the drivers is better in Linux as they are provided on for ex livediscs. On Windows disc they are few and you see below they are often old which will need to be updated later on.
* When recompiling to a new kernel you get all the driver updates. If you need proprietary you can download them separatly. In most cases people only need 1 or 2 propriatary drivers.
* Many drivers for chipsets like for ex bluetooth work for severel kinds of units not just a certain brand. The same can be noted for Wireless cards. motherboards and so on.
* Provided drivers on the Windows discs even SP2 are old . They should update them regularly and if they just use the extra space on the cd they could stick in some more. DVD's would be perfect.
Title: Re: Windows not ready for the desktop YET
Post by: Aloone_Jonez on 31 May 2005, 23:37
RaZoR1394,
I agee with most of your post but I do have a few issues. :D

Quote from: RaZoR1394
You can put all drivers external but that's just stupid as it messes up your lsmod and makes the computer slower.

Most other operating systems load the drivers separately and they work just fine.

Quote from: RaZoR1394
If you compile everything inside the kernel and only the ones you'll need you won't have sluggish problems. I don't see why you would wan't to recompile the kernel every week or so alternatively unload/load modules frequently because of driver support. It's not like the average person would bring home a new gadget every week.

What happens if you recompile the kernel with a bad driver?

Quote from: RaZoR1394
Windows drivers are always loaded. They don't load on demand. The only problem I see in linux is that It's harder to recompile the kernel or make the modules than to click an .exe file. And you said you weren't able to remove them on demand?

As I said before Windows XP does not support auto loading of drivers. At least not by the looks of it in processmanager plus all compability problems when not uninstalled.
 But guess what, practically Linux supports fast module loading but you'll do that manually. In linux you just do
 
 #rmmod *modname*
 
 and when you insert it
 
 #insmod *modname*



Thanks I didn't know about that.

Quote from: RaZoR1394
The ntfs driver does support writing with the captive option and I know people who have been able to transfer a lot of files to the disc without problems, but yes it ins't safe.

The captive option isn't a Linux ntfs driver, it's a wrapper for the existing Windows NTFS driver which is separate from the NT kernel - a wise design choice if you ask me. :D

Quote from: RaZoR1394
Why bitch with ntfs btw?

That was an example of how you need to recompile the kernel to add something (NTFS support).
Quote from: RaZoR1394
Why not just create a spare fat32 partition.

Just like I've done.


Quote from: RaZoR1394
For people who have used Windows before It's pretty sad if their comps components won't work with all drivers provided but you should always check the compability list for Linux drivers before you buy anything. That's what I've done before I've bought my computers. You can't buy extremely rare hardware and say that the driver support sucks because the hardware not being compatible. I wasn't so sure about ATI and Nvidia cause I used Windows pretty often. That's why I choosed an ATI card.

Quote from: RaZoR1394
In general most long-time linux users are either aware of the driver problems/incompability which makes them switch brands when buying a new one.

I agree not supporting open source software is a good enough reason to boycot any product.

Quote from: RaZoR1394
Those who are using their older incompatible computers are becoming fewer.

Which I can believe because hackers are writing drivers all the time and some companies are now supporting Linux.

Quote from: RaZoR1394
All soundblaster full packages are 100mb plus. Creative is a very common brand as their soundcards rock, specially for gamers. Another problem is that the current driver cd contains old mixer, surround testing apps and so on.


It's silly because I bet you the driver file small, often you get lots of shit you don't really need with drivers.



Quote from: RaZoR1394
No there are other advantages as well. Millions of other people can make modifications of the driver and optimize it as they wan't. There can exist several versions of the driver which may work better on different machines.

Sorry I forgot that one.

Quote from: RaZoR1394
Yes It's their fault because Microsoft include old ones when there are much better drivers available months ago for download. They just keep remanufacturing the same discs as the original XP plus the servicepacks which are often bugfixes not driverupdates. All they have to do is to update their disc when manufacturing. If they put the OS on DVD they could add all common driversets as .exe files on the disk. Similar how it is in linux. (as I did with nLite though only for my computer)

While it is nice for the CD to come with loads of drivers, I don't believe it's essential, in my opinion the operating system only needs be shipped with enough drivers to get the system booted. I take your point that Microsoft should update them more often but as long as there's enough on the CD to start the system up I can't see a problem.


Quote from: RaZoR1394
The driver model has nothing to do with manufacturers support. Many manufacturers have released proprietary drivers that are available as modules which are loadable and unloadble, not like in Windows where you need to uninstall the whole driverset and reboot.

I understand now, the driver model is more to do with the licencing.


Quote from: RaZoR1394
Actually 256mb ram should be reserved just for the VMWare OS. I have 2gb ram and have reserved 512mb. That should be enough. So totally 1gb of ram should be recommended when using VMWare.

I really do need an upgrade then as I only have 256MB of RAM on my system, mybe I could run Windows 98 and allocate 32MB for it.



Quote from: RaZoR1394
It may not work correctly performance and functionality wise but It doesn't bring down the whole system like certain older Windows driver do when you put them on for ex Win XP SP2.

It depends on the driver, a printer driver problem won't normally take down the whole system while a graphics driver might.

Quote from: RaZoR1394
Yes, true. I don't think that the DOS kernel would have suited so good in WinXP, lol.

True. :D

Quote from: RaZoR1394
They were kind off forced to write a new one.

The development of NT started way back in 1988 by Dave Cutler and it wasn't ready for the mainstreem untill 2000.

Quote from: RaZoR1394

So simply my thoughts about drivers:

* Feature wise and compability wise Windows drivers are better.
* Fast unloading/loading does not exist in Windows. If you need to disable them you need to restart the computer or disable them in autostart if that even is possible.
* The distribution of the drivers is better in Linux as they are provided on for ex livediscs. On Windows disc they are few and you see below they are often old which will need to be updated later on.
* When recompiling to a new kernel you get all the driver updates. If you need proprietary you can download them separatly. In most cases people only need 1 or 2 propriatary drivers.
* Many drivers for chipsets like for ex bluetooth work for severel kinds of units not just a certain brand. The same can be noted for Wireless cards. motherboards and so on.
* Provided drivers on the Windows discs even SP2 are old . They should update them regularly and if they just use the extra space on the cd they could stick in some more. DVD's would be perfect.


I agree.
Title: Re: Windows not ready for the desktop YET
Post by: piratePenguin on 1 June 2005, 02:01
Quote from: Aloone_Jonez
Most other operating systems load the drivers separately and they work just fine.
It's slightly faster to have the drivers in the kernel. But only the ones you use alot, the ones you only use now and again are better off as modules, although they'd usually be faster if they were in the kernel (but they'd always be in ram too).
Quote from: Aloone_Jonez
What happens if you recompile the kernel with a bad driver?
Bad drivers don't get into the kernel source. Usually you compile a third party driver as a module, not into the kernel. Only compile the stuff that comes in the kernel source code into the kernel.
Quote from: Aloone_Jonez
The captive option isn't a Linux ntfs driver, it's a wrapper for the existing Windows NTFS driver which is separate from the NT kernel
Yes, and it works.
I really don't see the point in the kernel programmers in spending much more time trying to get NTFS write into the kernel. Even if they get it working now, it won't work for future versions of Windows. And if it works for Windows XP, it might'nt work for Windows 2000 (I heard they're different versions of NTFS).
It's only the Windows + GNU/Linuc dualbooters that have any use for Captive NTFS, usually, and they already have the Windows NTFS driver so... It makes sense,
Quote from: Aloone_Jonez
That was an example of how you need to recompile the kernel to add something (NTFS support).
NTFS is *far* better off as a module IMO. I don't see much point in compiling NTFS *into* the kernel. It could make it less stable. It *will* make it bigger (and the kernel is always in ram, of course).
Quote from: Aloone_Jonez
While it is nice for the CD to come with loads of drivers, I don't believe it's essential, in my opinion the operating system only needs be shipped with enough drivers to get the system booted. I take your point that Microsoft should update them more often but as long as there's enough on the CD to start the system up I can't see a problem.
Whenever I install any GNU/Linux distro, I *never* worry about drivers. I don't even think about them. The essential stuff (for almost all setups) is in the kernel, and the other drivers are compiled as modules. No non-free drivers either (usually), because it's just the stuff from the kernel source.
I love it!
Title: Re: Windows not ready for the desktop YET
Post by: Aloone_Jonez on 1 June 2005, 10:35
Quote from: piratePenguin
It's slightly faster to have the drivers in the kernel. But only the ones you use alot, the ones you only use now and again are better off as modules, although they'd usually be faster if they were in the kernel (but they'd always be in ram too).

I can see that advantage.


Quote from: piratePenguin
Bad drivers don't get into the kernel source. Usually you compile a third party driver as a module, not into the kernel. Only compile the stuff that comes in the kernel source code into the kernel.
Yes, and it works.

Sorry I didn't mean bad as in shit, I meant wrong, as in what would happen if I added the wrong driver so the system wouldn't boot.

Quote from: piratePenguin
I really don't see the point in the kernel programmers in spending much more time trying to get NTFS write into the kernel. Even if they get it working now, it won't work for future versions of Windows. And if it works for Windows XP, it might'nt work for Windows 2000 (I heard they're different versions of NTFS).

Sorry I was never trying to argue that read/write NTFS support is realy important. My point was that when you require it needs to be added to the kernel - you can't just add a device driver, and also there's no write access because the driver is hacked together like many Linux drivers.

Quote from: piratePenguin
It's only the Windows + GNU/Linuc dualbooters that have any use for Captive NTFS, usually, and they already have the Windows NTFS driver so... It makes sense,

I agree, I bet most Linux users don't need NTFS at all.

Quote from: piratePenguin
NTFS is *far* better off as a module IMO. I don't see much point in compiling NTFS *into* the kernel.

No but you do need to compile it into the kernel to use it for some Linux distros, how ever many nowadays already come with it.

Quote from: piratePenguin
It could make it less stable. It *will* make it bigger (and the kernel is always in ram, of course).

Exactly.

Quote from: piratePenguin
Whenever I install any GNU/Linux distro, I *never* worry about drivers. I don't even think about them. The essential stuff (for almost all setups) is in the kernel, and the other drivers are compiled as modules. No non-free drivers either (usually), because it's just the stuff from the kernel source.
I love it!

Well good for you, but spare a thought for people who aren't as lucky. :(
Title: Re: Windows not ready for the desktop YET
Post by: solemnwarning on 1 June 2005, 15:28
Windows aint ready for anything

i plugged in a freshly instaled windows laptop i was reinstalling for my mum and it thought, hmmmm 2 network adaptors?

LETS START DNS GATEWAY AND DHCP!!!!

So i spent 2 hours searching all the hubs and routers for connections that wernt supposed to be there since the winshit laptop had taken over dhcp and got all boxes on wrong ip info while setting domain to mshome.net <_<
Title: Re: Windows not ready for the desktop YET
Post by: piratePenguin on 1 June 2005, 22:41
Quote from: Aloone_Jonez
Sorry I didn't mean bad as in shit, I meant wrong, as in what would happen if I added the wrong driver so the system wouldn't boot.
As long as the right drivers *required to boot* are *in* the kernel, then it will boot. If one, say, the ext3 driver is missing, you get a kernel panic, so it's back to menuconfig.
Quote from: Aloone_Jonez
My point was that when you require it needs to be added to the kernel - you can't just add a device driver
You can compile the module and load it with modprobe/insmod. Same thing.
Quote from: Aloone_Jonez
and also there's no write access because the driver is hacked together like many Linux drivers.
It's the best that can be done, and it's done well. I'm happy with all the drivers that I'm using anyhow. The ISDN drivers were "hacked together" in the same way, and there is no question, the Linux (hisax) driver beats the living daylights out of MS's one (which doesn't exist) and the manufacturers ones. I couldn't get my ISDN card to work in Windows XP, even using the manufacturers drivers for Windows XP. Sometimes it would work but after a reboot I'd need to reinstall them. The Linux (hisax) driver is ****better****.
Quote from: Aloone_Jonez
No but you do need to compile it into the kernel to use it for some Linux distros, how ever many nowadays already come with it.
You *never* need to compile the NTFS driver *into* the kernel. Compile it as a module, and load it with insmod/modprobe.
Quote from: Aloone_Jonez
Well good for you, but spare a thought for people who aren't as lucky. :(
Heh. If their system works, they'll be fine. Printers, scanners, etc., they're a different story, and can only be blamed on the manufacturers.