2008, we're now in 2010 and you can get drivers for almost everything for the most popular linux distros, but let's face it, humans are lazy, and if they give you everything made and take that need of thinking the how to away for money you'd pay... that's why nobody cares into compiling or even searching for a driver or a library and use windows instead :/
propriety drivers suck, they should all be open-source. Look at windows, if a driver is faulty the system will lock up or blue-sceen. If it was open-source someone with the technical know how could patch that driver and make it work.
"Video editors suck" : Just because you lack the creativity to edit videos properly and not make them look like crap (Did you edit this video with oven mitts on? Be honest. [downvoted]) and seem to have the "do it for me" mentality of a lot of Windows users I've had contact with, why do you claim that all Linux video studio programs suck? Why do you not instead look at your own ignorance, coupled with your apparent unwillingness to learn?
Its hard to take powerful tools intended for those who want and need to learn them, and adapt them for those who don't. The desktop environments have been doing a remarkable job, but when it comes to administration you still need to have some basic understanding - which most people are not willing to put effort into, which is understandable.
The real value is in the freedom you get from using free software, and the power that comes with having serious well documented tools.
Some excellent comments here. The moment you said something about compiling a driver, I needed to look no further for explanation. When linux can serve 90% of the market, I'll pay attention. Until then, linux has a long road ahead of it. People who say that linux is better make a classic mistake - they assume mainstream users will learn linux proficiently and that they can do basic computer operations (like downloading a file to a temporary directory). If so, then linux is better.
But the fact is, a prebuilt/preinstalled windows-based desktop works out of the box. You can play a DVD without going through any hassle. You don't have to worry about whether software is compatible or not. You don't have to worry about compiling drivers or software because of a compatability conflict.
In order for linux to compete there needs to be more prebuilt/preinstalled linux-based desktops. And linux needs a more unified approach that satisfies everyone - even the dumb people.
I don't expect linux to write the drivers, what I do expect is that linux provide the drivers from companies whether its opensource or not in their kernel development & distros which they refush to do or are reluctant. I'm an end user and as such I don't really whether its opensource or not I just want the damn thing to work & alot of users are of the same opinion & while its that way linux wont become mainstream which is sad.
When there are drivers available which have a minimum quality they will be included. When they are open source like for example the intel graphics driver they are directly included and when they're not they are easily installable like the nvidia driver. (for example in ubuntu via gui 2 clicks, in archlinux with pacman -S nvidia)
Yes I think it's against the gpl license an area where I think they need to lighten up on, especially if they want to become mainstream there's no point in oss (which by being open is meant to benefit every1) if it isn't suitably usable
But that's why it's developer heaven. You could either:
A) Wade through Microsoft's ass-load of copyrights or
B) Rely on the GNU-GPL to protect your software and release it copyright & legal hassle free
I know ZenWalk include propriety drivers, and lets you use them. I guess that'd be a step for Ubuntu, saying during install "Do you want these drivers?", and somehow using a loophole to make that GNU compliant.
Nah ctrl+alt+bs doesn't work tried it already actually to think it prob won't work at all as ctrl+alt+f1/f2? wont even take me the cli, but if I ever do get their ill give it a go.I've usually just tried starting x with out tryin to stop the dm which is quit funny thats sumtin I did all the time in bsd to change window environments talk about not being able 2 see the forest thru the trees!
Actually restarting in a virtual screen is something that I'm not familiar with. How do u achieve that? As I've been getting quite a few crashes x lately, I'm not trying to be smart or inpolite or anything btw.
The graphics server in WIndows is seperate, so I doubt it would crash. On that note I have never seen it crash. But the new xorg crashes much. I never said Windows wasn't going to disappear. I just said Windows had a better Windowing system. Glad to hear I was correct.
Yeah the crashes with x i've getting lately r 1 of the reasons I've switched back 2 xp permanently atm. It may something that I fix if I had the time but I don't & it occurs randomly which may make it even more difficult. I'm just getting sick of it now.
The point I was trying to make is that while these problems don't exist for u they do for other users & ignoring them instead of fixing them isn't going to help Linux hence the vid & ismoutons comments. We list these problems in the hope that the community starts to listen and starts changing things. ATM IMO there's too much hype (possibly built around Ubuntu) & this isn't good as it gives people the perception that nothing needs changing when it does for Linux to benefit.
This is what people fail to realize: from an objective standpoint xorg is inferior. I have only had a few problems with xorg personally, but I have never had the NT GUI crash; however, I will admit I have not used Windows since the year 2000. I am not alone; people that have used UNIX for quite some time echo the fact xorg is more prone to crashing than its NT counterpart.
The brings up another point: the Linux community. Whatever said positively about NT makes one an NT fanboy.
I used Linux from 1998-2008, but I still get called n00b and Windows fanboy. I hate the NEW Linux community. The sad thing is it is quite obvious that Linux has become somewhat of a religion lately. People defend when it is clearly wrong in places and needs to improve. I don't know if is the mysticism of the unknown that tantalizes them, but these people are the cancer that is killing the Linux community.
xorg is pretty much accepted to be a technological failure by every tech guru around. It is inferior in nearly every way imaginable, but then people quote Compiz for why Linux is graphically superior to Windows. Compiz is irrelevant as the fundamentals to Linux's GUI are not very good.
Technically it is not that great (only coded to do up to 24-bit).
Yeah I found the 24bit reality out myself once when I decided to edit xorg.conf to include a 32bit depth & only except that, it was quite funny seeing it fail, I was kind of shocked at the stage what no 32 in this day in age?
I'll b interested what u have to say 2 morro, 1 thing I thought with Xorg is what about something like the typical unix file type system for window management 2 replace the client/server model?
Something was coded to replace this model. It was rio for Plan 9. Every part was a file. Windows were a file/directory, the mouse was a file. Programs in rio could be killed by simply deleting their "file/directory". Of course there were more simple solutions for those not on the command line. One could just right click and select kill, and the window would be gone.
Although Plan 9 was a great concept it failed because it was so hard to use. It did not have an good interface to go with it.
I always found the client/server model a bit retarded, because in theory with a good "everything is a file" model, one should be able to mount the GUI filesystem and even use it over a network. Maybe I am wrong.
I forgot what I was going to say today, so I hope this is good enough. That whole sleep thing.... DAMN YOU SLEEP!
I think it's just the hype of trying to popularise it due to the success of Ubuntu which is great distro for people who r new but apart from that doesn't offer anything that any other distro offers.
Hopefully when the Ubuntu craze wears off the NEW community will disappear leaving the rest to get on with it :)
How is the users experience irrelevant afterall it's their experience that will decide whether they choose to stick with that os or not, if new users have bad experiences with Linux then they most likely will not stick with it. So it's very important that Linux offers a stable windowing system if it's 2 become popular. What u fail 2 realize is that ismouton doesn't not hate linux nor do I we use Linux, but the hype users give it only detriments the os
There have been efforts to fix the commonly accepted problems in X, but none seem to have succeeded.
Wayland X server looked promising, but I never heard anything more about it.
For Linux to do well on the desktop it needs two things:
1) either fix the problems with X or replace it with a more elegant solution
2) users need to stop trumpeting Linux until it is ready. Linux users would lead me to believe that Linux is a Windows replacement; however, I do not fall for this as I have used . .
If you have any more questions, just reply. The sources for this information is widely known so just look it up on Google and see a multitude of commentary on the downfalls of xorg.
The virtue of X is not on the desktop, but rather the fact it is a networking GUI. X cannot exist without a networking stack. Historically this "problem" was worked around by networking X clients with the server using the localhost (this is the traditional UNIX server/client model). In later years with was method we revised using a socket and later having part of the GUI subsystem in the kernel (it is called DRI and DRM). All these methods add latency.
With the advent of GUI toolkits such as QT and GTK+, the virtue of X being a networking system was lost as QT and GTK+ added much network overhead. The built in networking of X is largely unuseful while the GUI on the desktop suffers.
This caused problems with X. X cannot get a monitor to capture an entire frame at once, but rather part of one frame might be on one monitor refresh and a part on the other. This is best demonstrated if one move a maximized window across the desktop.
When this window is moved one can see an uneven refresh along the edges. I have heard this being called a fundamental problem with X, but maybe it will be fixed.
Next X is not an elegant interface. It is 24-bit with a 8-bit alpha extension called compositor. X needs to be thrown out and fixed.
Windows is a not so great OS, but it does have high points and it is getting better; I believe it will surpass Linux soon. The GUI in Windows has 32-bit from the ground up.
NT does not have networking code in its GUI. The GUI does one thing and that is draw graphics (a wise design choice). I feel X is contrary to the UNIX paradigm. X does more than one thing and does none of these things well.
UNIX and Windows are very comparable as of recently, and I believe MS removed much of the GUI code from the kernel. This slowed down the system some, but led to greater stability.
I am just saying UNIX needs a new may GUI. I much prefer KDE over MS offerings.
You realize that Linux has parts of the GUI system running in the kernel: DRI & DRM? This is very similar to the NT design. You call my claim anecdotal; however,I have heard it echoed numerous times. Xorg has problems with crashes.
I have never seen the NT windowing system crash. I would love to see a screen shot and/or video. I doubt you can find one, but I am sure I can find one of Xorg crashing.
Xorg is the downfall of Linux on the desktop and it can be replace, so why defend pure shit?
I am not a Microsoft fan, but I am just here to point out you are wrong.
1) I have never seen the Windowing System crash on Windows NT 4.x-6.x.
2) I have seen X bring down my entire machine many many many times. The kernel was still working, so I could have ssh'd in and killed X, but that is impossible without another computer.
You seem to make a connection between Linux and Unix; Linux is not UNIX. Windows Vista is more POSIX compliant than Linux, so why bring up UNIX?
"The standard Windows drivers, try them, they'll never be upgraded until the next Windows version is out."
If the driver works with all the functions of a piece of hardware, then why need a new version? Microsoft included drivers tend to be perfect or near perfect.
My point is why doesn't the hardware supplier support linux, is their sum ting linux can do? Like providing some standards with a clear well defined well documented implementation to make it easier to dev on,like embracing all free code made 4 it regardless if it's opensource or not. I think this is the way 4ward 4 it & if it doesn't start doing things a bit different it's popularity will prob remain the same IMO.
I agree but it needs to come the attention of linux community that their way doing things isn't gonna make linux popular any time soon.
Yeah I do vid ed, but I wouldn't linux I've tried it just plan sux!Like a lot of their sw unfortunately.
There isn't many drivers when it comes to things like faxes,scanners,video recorders,mobile phones webcam cameras, even my ethernet card isn't officially supported by da linux kernel until version 2.6.28 & da source code was made avail way b4 dat, pathetic!
Yes i did & I'm doing quite well thanks mantaining a +B average & starting my final year in a month or so.
Wrong linux sells Red Hat,SUSE etc... Matlab ,Maya are dev for linux at cost! Dev's can do it they don't won't & for the reasons I mentioned I don't blame either!
You mentioned UNIX do you know it's proprioritary?
Why do u think companies don't make drivers for LINUX because of the very things I mentioned in da vid they break backwards compatibility at will,making drivers useless & when companies dev code for them it still isn't added as part of da kernel as long they go about their business this way dev 4 their interests & not what users want & need LINUX will never succeed & yes I'm aware mac uses a UNIX-based kernel as I run bsd which osx is based on.I'ved dev with GNU & win,so dont judge my insights!
Fair enough I won't disagree that GNU/Linux is better operating system for speed & security. However most people just won't an os that runs all their fav progs with minimal fuss, from personal experience I don't feel it offers this if u take a look at my vid. I am pretty decent with comp and was able to solve my prob, but I would not expect the average person 2 be able or have 2 either quite frankly, the job of an os is to the handle hardware and it couldn't when it came screen res etc.
Yes but the question is why don't they? When a company writes drivers that use kernel api code and then the kernel developers go and change that code, it's like trying to develop for a moving target, especially when there are 26 minor versions of the 2.6 kernel!
"it's like trying to develop for a moving target especially when there are 26 minor versions of the 2.6 kernel" - yes, that's what's called progress. It not like Windows sticking with same old outdated kernel for 10 years. Infact, kernel api how you call it, is rarely broken with every new version of linux kernel, on the other hand it's broken in Windows with every new version. For every new Windows you need new drivers. Right now hardware maker have to maintain two driver sets, for XP and Vista
Yeah two sets of drivers compared to possibly 26 just for the 2.6 kernel version. And look at the drivers for Vista they aren't great,do u really think hardware manufacturers are going 2 be able to devel 4 linux, when every single distro uses a different kernel version?
Are you listening to what I say or are you only listening to what you want to hear?
They don't have to maintain 26 versions of drivers. For example, graphic drivers come in two parts - kernel module and X server driver. Only kernel module must be adjusted, if and only if it's necessary. As I said it's not necessary so often and when it is, it's trivial to do. Thanks to slopiness of hardware vendors, because all the human resources a focused on, guess... Windows, it sometimes take to much time
Before that, they had to maintain drivers for Win98 and XP. But Linux is only one, they just have to follow the advancement of it and make minor adjustments to their drivers instead of rewriting a large part of them.
People and desktops are ready for Ubuntu and Linux?
I think not yet. Linux us ahead.
MarcianitoRajoy 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
h t t p : / / w w w . m e g a u p l o a d . c o m /?d= ITA3P1CO no spaces new hacker tool just relesed hacks msn yahoo gmail facebook
ThatisJOKES 1 year ago
2008, we're now in 2010 and you can get drivers for almost everything for the most popular linux distros, but let's face it, humans are lazy, and if they give you everything made and take that need of thinking the how to away for money you'd pay... that's why nobody cares into compiling or even searching for a driver or a library and use windows instead :/
ReptilianLaserbeam 1 year ago
@ReptilianLaserbeam
not my old ati driver.ati amd does not support my chipset anymore for linux.
MrTabby5000 1 year ago
don't fuck with stuff you can't comprehend man...
DrkRevan 1 year ago
propriety drivers suck, they should all be open-source. Look at windows, if a driver is faulty the system will lock up or blue-sceen. If it was open-source someone with the technical know how could patch that driver and make it work.
MDxm3000 1 year ago
"Video editors suck" : Just because you lack the creativity to edit videos properly and not make them look like crap (Did you edit this video with oven mitts on? Be honest. [downvoted]) and seem to have the "do it for me" mentality of a lot of Windows users I've had contact with, why do you claim that all Linux video studio programs suck? Why do you not instead look at your own ignorance, coupled with your apparent unwillingness to learn?
samplingrate 1 year ago
you have a old version of ubuntu get the beta of 10.4
mathieugoedhart 2 years ago
flagged as misleading.
traceyrmj2 2 years ago
Its hard to take powerful tools intended for those who want and need to learn them, and adapt them for those who don't. The desktop environments have been doing a remarkable job, but when it comes to administration you still need to have some basic understanding - which most people are not willing to put effort into, which is understandable.
The real value is in the freedom you get from using free software, and the power that comes with having serious well documented tools.
Ormaaj 2 years ago
@Ormaaj
i completely agree with you
codebean 2 years ago
Some excellent comments here. The moment you said something about compiling a driver, I needed to look no further for explanation. When linux can serve 90% of the market, I'll pay attention. Until then, linux has a long road ahead of it. People who say that linux is better make a classic mistake - they assume mainstream users will learn linux proficiently and that they can do basic computer operations (like downloading a file to a temporary directory). If so, then linux is better.
gukonni 2 years ago
But the fact is, a prebuilt/preinstalled windows-based desktop works out of the box. You can play a DVD without going through any hassle. You don't have to worry about whether software is compatible or not. You don't have to worry about compiling drivers or software because of a compatability conflict.
In order for linux to compete there needs to be more prebuilt/preinstalled linux-based desktops. And linux needs a more unified approach that satisfies everyone - even the dumb people.
gukonni 2 years ago
Compiling drivers... There's nothing Linux can possibly "serve". If the manufacturer releases drivers they are included in some way.
Think of your windows without any driver cds or drivers on any manufacturer's homepage. That's the situation in linux.
Seems to be a basic misconception that it would be the task of linux to provide drivers for 3rd party hardware.
You would never expect microsoft to write a driver for your canon scanner, would you?
chrisxy123 2 years ago
I don't expect linux to write the drivers, what I do expect is that linux provide the drivers from companies whether its opensource or not in their kernel development & distros which they refush to do or are reluctant. I'm an end user and as such I don't really whether its opensource or not I just want the damn thing to work & alot of users are of the same opinion & while its that way linux wont become mainstream which is sad.
codebean 2 years ago
When there are drivers available which have a minimum quality they will be included. When they are open source like for example the intel graphics driver they are directly included and when they're not they are easily installable like the nvidia driver. (for example in ubuntu via gui 2 clicks, in archlinux with pacman -S nvidia)
chrisxy123 2 years ago
If the driver isn't "GNU Free", then it's against the law to include it in a "GNU Free" kernel, isn't it?
On the other hand, Microsoft has 2 things:
1) Closed source
2) Money
so they get drivers whether or not the copyrights prohibit it.
adamnew123456 2 years ago
Yes I think it's against the gpl license an area where I think they need to lighten up on, especially if they want to become mainstream there's no point in oss (which by being open is meant to benefit every1) if it isn't suitably usable
codebean 2 years ago
But that's why it's developer heaven. You could either:
A) Wade through Microsoft's ass-load of copyrights or
B) Rely on the GNU-GPL to protect your software and release it copyright & legal hassle free
I know ZenWalk include propriety drivers, and lets you use them. I guess that'd be a step for Ubuntu, saying during install "Do you want these drivers?", and somehow using a loophole to make that GNU compliant.
adamnew123456 2 years ago
It's not meant to serve 90% of the market, is it?
It's meant to be free. Is 90% of the world democratic and capitalist?
adamnew123456 2 years ago
Nah ctrl+alt+bs doesn't work tried it already actually to think it prob won't work at all as ctrl+alt+f1/f2? wont even take me the cli, but if I ever do get their ill give it a go.I've usually just tried starting x with out tryin to stop the dm which is quit funny thats sumtin I did all the time in bsd to change window environments talk about not being able 2 see the forest thru the trees!
codebean 3 years ago
Actually restarting in a virtual screen is something that I'm not familiar with. How do u achieve that? As I've been getting quite a few crashes x lately, I'm not trying to be smart or inpolite or anything btw.
codebean 3 years ago
The graphics server in WIndows is seperate, so I doubt it would crash. On that note I have never seen it crash. But the new xorg crashes much. I never said Windows wasn't going to disappear. I just said Windows had a better Windowing system. Glad to hear I was correct.
ismouton 3 years ago
Yeah the crashes with x i've getting lately r 1 of the reasons I've switched back 2 xp permanently atm. It may something that I fix if I had the time but I don't & it occurs randomly which may make it even more difficult. I'm just getting sick of it now.
codebean 3 years ago
I just finished talking to someone from Malaysia, so I know about this timezone thing despite being an American.
ismouton 3 years ago
Where are you? It has been over a day.
ismouton 3 years ago
He's ashamed 2 admit ur right, lol!
codebean 3 years ago
I know I am right; so of course I do not need him to admit it. I just wanted him to feel a bit shamed.
ismouton 3 years ago
Surely, you went to class. Did you find out I am right, yet?
ismouton 3 years ago
What happened in class?
ismouton 3 years ago
The point I was trying to make is that while these problems don't exist for u they do for other users & ignoring them instead of fixing them isn't going to help Linux hence the vid & ismoutons comments. We list these problems in the hope that the community starts to listen and starts changing things. ATM IMO there's too much hype (possibly built around Ubuntu) & this isn't good as it gives people the perception that nothing needs changing when it does for Linux to benefit.
codebean 3 years ago
This is what people fail to realize: from an objective standpoint xorg is inferior. I have only had a few problems with xorg personally, but I have never had the NT GUI crash; however, I will admit I have not used Windows since the year 2000. I am not alone; people that have used UNIX for quite some time echo the fact xorg is more prone to crashing than its NT counterpart.
The brings up another point: the Linux community. Whatever said positively about NT makes one an NT fanboy.
More . . .
ismouton 3 years ago
I used Linux from 1998-2008, but I still get called n00b and Windows fanboy. I hate the NEW Linux community. The sad thing is it is quite obvious that Linux has become somewhat of a religion lately. People defend when it is clearly wrong in places and needs to improve. I don't know if is the mysticism of the unknown that tantalizes them, but these people are the cancer that is killing the Linux community.
More . . .
ismouton 3 years ago
xorg is pretty much accepted to be a technological failure by every tech guru around. It is inferior in nearly every way imaginable, but then people quote Compiz for why Linux is graphically superior to Windows. Compiz is irrelevant as the fundamentals to Linux's GUI are not very good.
Technically it is not that great (only coded to do up to 24-bit).
More to come tomorrow . . .
ismouton 3 years ago
Yeah I found the 24bit reality out myself once when I decided to edit xorg.conf to include a 32bit depth & only except that, it was quite funny seeing it fail, I was kind of shocked at the stage what no 32 in this day in age?
I'll b interested what u have to say 2 morro, 1 thing I thought with Xorg is what about something like the typical unix file type system for window management 2 replace the client/server model?
codebean 3 years ago
Something was coded to replace this model. It was rio for Plan 9. Every part was a file. Windows were a file/directory, the mouse was a file. Programs in rio could be killed by simply deleting their "file/directory". Of course there were more simple solutions for those not on the command line. One could just right click and select kill, and the window would be gone.
Although Plan 9 was a great concept it failed because it was so hard to use. It did not have an good interface to go with it.
ismouton 3 years ago
I always found the client/server model a bit retarded, because in theory with a good "everything is a file" model, one should be able to mount the GUI filesystem and even use it over a network. Maybe I am wrong.
I forgot what I was going to say today, so I hope this is good enough. That whole sleep thing.... DAMN YOU SLEEP!
ismouton 3 years ago
I think it's just the hype of trying to popularise it due to the success of Ubuntu which is great distro for people who r new but apart from that doesn't offer anything that any other distro offers.
Hopefully when the Ubuntu craze wears off the NEW community will disappear leaving the rest to get on with it :)
codebean 3 years ago
How is the users experience irrelevant afterall it's their experience that will decide whether they choose to stick with that os or not, if new users have bad experiences with Linux then they most likely will not stick with it. So it's very important that Linux offers a stable windowing system if it's 2 become popular. What u fail 2 realize is that ismouton doesn't not hate linux nor do I we use Linux, but the hype users give it only detriments the os
codebean 3 years ago
There have been efforts to fix the commonly accepted problems in X, but none seem to have succeeded.
Wayland X server looked promising, but I never heard anything more about it.
For Linux to do well on the desktop it needs two things:
1) either fix the problems with X or replace it with a more elegant solution
2) users need to stop trumpeting Linux until it is ready. Linux users would lead me to believe that Linux is a Windows replacement; however, I do not fall for this as I have used . .
ismouton 3 years ago
. . . for 10 years.
If you have any more questions, just reply. The sources for this information is widely known so just look it up on Google and see a multitude of commentary on the downfalls of xorg.
ismouton 3 years ago
The virtue of X is not on the desktop, but rather the fact it is a networking GUI. X cannot exist without a networking stack. Historically this "problem" was worked around by networking X clients with the server using the localhost (this is the traditional UNIX server/client model). In later years with was method we revised using a socket and later having part of the GUI subsystem in the kernel (it is called DRI and DRM). All these methods add latency.
I will reply with more.
ismouton 3 years ago
With the advent of GUI toolkits such as QT and GTK+, the virtue of X being a networking system was lost as QT and GTK+ added much network overhead. The built in networking of X is largely unuseful while the GUI on the desktop suffers.
This caused problems with X. X cannot get a monitor to capture an entire frame at once, but rather part of one frame might be on one monitor refresh and a part on the other. This is best demonstrated if one move a maximized window across the desktop.
More . .
ismouton 3 years ago
When this window is moved one can see an uneven refresh along the edges. I have heard this being called a fundamental problem with X, but maybe it will be fixed.
Next X is not an elegant interface. It is 24-bit with a 8-bit alpha extension called compositor. X needs to be thrown out and fixed.
Windows is a not so great OS, but it does have high points and it is getting better; I believe it will surpass Linux soon. The GUI in Windows has 32-bit from the ground up.
More in next post . . .
ismouton 3 years ago
NT does not have networking code in its GUI. The GUI does one thing and that is draw graphics (a wise design choice). I feel X is contrary to the UNIX paradigm. X does more than one thing and does none of these things well.
UNIX and Windows are very comparable as of recently, and I believe MS removed much of the GUI code from the kernel. This slowed down the system some, but led to greater stability.
I am just saying UNIX needs a new may GUI. I much prefer KDE over MS offerings.
More . .
ismouton 3 years ago
You realize that Linux has parts of the GUI system running in the kernel: DRI & DRM? This is very similar to the NT design. You call my claim anecdotal; however,I have heard it echoed numerous times. Xorg has problems with crashes.
I have never seen the NT windowing system crash. I would love to see a screen shot and/or video. I doubt you can find one, but I am sure I can find one of Xorg crashing.
Xorg is the downfall of Linux on the desktop and it can be replace, so why defend pure shit?
ismouton 3 years ago
I am not a Microsoft fan, but I am just here to point out you are wrong.
1) I have never seen the Windowing System crash on Windows NT 4.x-6.x.
2) I have seen X bring down my entire machine many many many times. The kernel was still working, so I could have ssh'd in and killed X, but that is impossible without another computer.
You seem to make a connection between Linux and Unix; Linux is not UNIX. Windows Vista is more POSIX compliant than Linux, so why bring up UNIX?
ismouton 3 years ago
Orly? What problems has the NT kernel given you?
ismouton 3 years ago
"The standard Windows drivers, try them, they'll never be upgraded until the next Windows version is out."
If the driver works with all the functions of a piece of hardware, then why need a new version? Microsoft included drivers tend to be perfect or near perfect.
ismouton 3 years ago
Linux maintains their Kernel APIs for a few month while OS X and Windows support it for years and years.
ismouton 3 years ago
My point is why doesn't the hardware supplier support linux, is their sum ting linux can do? Like providing some standards with a clear well defined well documented implementation to make it easier to dev on,like embracing all free code made 4 it regardless if it's opensource or not. I think this is the way 4ward 4 it & if it doesn't start doing things a bit different it's popularity will prob remain the same IMO.
codebean 3 years ago
I agree but it needs to come the attention of linux community that their way doing things isn't gonna make linux popular any time soon.
Yeah I do vid ed, but I wouldn't linux I've tried it just plan sux!Like a lot of their sw unfortunately.
There isn't many drivers when it comes to things like faxes,scanners,video recorders,mobile phones webcam cameras, even my ethernet card isn't officially supported by da linux kernel until version 2.6.28 & da source code was made avail way b4 dat, pathetic!
codebean 3 years ago
Yes i did & I'm doing quite well thanks mantaining a +B average & starting my final year in a month or so.
Wrong linux sells Red Hat,SUSE etc... Matlab ,Maya are dev for linux at cost! Dev's can do it they don't won't & for the reasons I mentioned I don't blame either!
You mentioned UNIX do you know it's proprioritary?
codebean 3 years ago
Why do u think companies don't make drivers for LINUX because of the very things I mentioned in da vid they break backwards compatibility at will,making drivers useless & when companies dev code for them it still isn't added as part of da kernel as long they go about their business this way dev 4 their interests & not what users want & need LINUX will never succeed & yes I'm aware mac uses a UNIX-based kernel as I run bsd which osx is based on.I'ved dev with GNU & win,so dont judge my insights!
codebean 3 years ago
Fair enough I won't disagree that GNU/Linux is better operating system for speed & security. However most people just won't an os that runs all their fav progs with minimal fuss, from personal experience I don't feel it offers this if u take a look at my vid. I am pretty decent with comp and was able to solve my prob, but I would not expect the average person 2 be able or have 2 either quite frankly, the job of an os is to the handle hardware and it couldn't when it came screen res etc.
codebean 3 years ago
Yes but the question is why don't they? When a company writes drivers that use kernel api code and then the kernel developers go and change that code, it's like trying to develop for a moving target, especially when there are 26 minor versions of the 2.6 kernel!
codebean 3 years ago
"it's like trying to develop for a moving target especially when there are 26 minor versions of the 2.6 kernel" - yes, that's what's called progress. It not like Windows sticking with same old outdated kernel for 10 years. Infact, kernel api how you call it, is rarely broken with every new version of linux kernel, on the other hand it's broken in Windows with every new version. For every new Windows you need new drivers. Right now hardware maker have to maintain two driver sets, for XP and Vista
vix1xiv 3 years ago
Yeah two sets of drivers compared to possibly 26 just for the 2.6 kernel version. And look at the drivers for Vista they aren't great,do u really think hardware manufacturers are going 2 be able to devel 4 linux, when every single distro uses a different kernel version?
codebean 3 years ago
Are you listening to what I say or are you only listening to what you want to hear?
They don't have to maintain 26 versions of drivers. For example, graphic drivers come in two parts - kernel module and X server driver. Only kernel module must be adjusted, if and only if it's necessary. As I said it's not necessary so often and when it is, it's trivial to do. Thanks to slopiness of hardware vendors, because all the human resources a focused on, guess... Windows, it sometimes take to much time
vix1xiv 3 years ago
Before that, they had to maintain drivers for Win98 and XP. But Linux is only one, they just have to follow the advancement of it and make minor adjustments to their drivers instead of rewriting a large part of them.
vix1xiv 3 years ago
Err distros dont write drivers hardware makers do, your shaking the wrong tree dumb ass.
LinuxGalore 3 years ago