What Linux needs "Even Ubuntu" - Ubuntu

This is a discussion on What Linux needs "Even Ubuntu" - Ubuntu ; On 2008-08-16, Jose hit the keyboard and wrote: > On Fri, 15 Aug 2008 15:01:51 +0000, SINNER wrote: > >> You arent born with that knowledge in Windows either. > > Yes, but Windows users aren't expected to edit config ...

+ Reply to Thread
Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 LastLast
Results 21 to 40 of 71

Thread: What Linux needs "Even Ubuntu"

  1. Re: What Linux needs "Even Ubuntu"

    On 2008-08-16, Jose hit the keyboard and wrote:
    > On Fri, 15 Aug 2008 15:01:51 +0000, SINNER wrote:
    >
    >> You arent born with that knowledge in Windows either.

    >
    > Yes, but Windows users aren't expected to edit config files manually. It
    > can be done if necessary, but usually isn't, because driver support is
    > good.



    Please! Look into a newsgroup for windows users and learn
    how often a driver can't be found anymore because the
    manufacturer went belly up, or *OFTEN* the only recourse
    offered is to edit the *registry-file*, and that is much
    more prone to cause problems then editing one file, for a
    certain application. Windows users who messed with the
    registry have often much more hassle to get a working OS
    back, compared to a Gnu/Linux user who might wind up having
    the wrong resolution for his Monitor f.e. (using your
    example)

    >
    > Jose




    --

    Dragomir Kollaric
    --
    This signature is licensed under the GPL and may be
    freely distributed as long as a copy of the GPL is included... :-)


  2. Re: What Linux needs "Even Ubuntu"

    On 2008-08-16, Florian Diesch hit the keyboard and wrote:
    > FG wrote:
    >
    >
    >> But what Linux users have forgotten is that Linux itself is its worst
    >> enemy. A thousand versions and none can agree with each other.

    >
    > Yes, that's a real problem. It's just the same as with cars: Average
    > people will never buy cars as long as there are so many models to
    > choose from. Everything would be better if there's just one car
    > model to buy, maybe in 2 different colors. *Then* people woulds really
    > start to use cars.


    Yes Florian, and if they would listen to my advise one of the cars
    should be the BMW "Isseta" the other the origianal "Puch 500" all
    vehicles I loved as a kid :-)

    So now lets hear other *2 best* choices...



    >
    >
    >
    > Florian



    --

    Dragomir Kollaric
    --
    This signature is licensed under the GPL and may be
    freely distributed as long as a copy of the GPL is included... :-)


  3. Re: What Linux needs "Even Ubuntu"

    Jose wrote:
    > On Sat, 16 Aug 2008 06:57:50 +0000, Moog wrote:
    >
    >
    >> That's not a video card issue. That's a monitor issue.
    >>

    >
    > Irrespective of what it is, if editing a config file will let Linux do
    > its thing, then a table with the proper values would be =extremely=
    > useful to linux users, especially newbies.
    >
    >
    > Whilst a sample file would possibly help, it would be very difficult to
    > cover all bases. There's a lot of none standard hardware out there. It
    > would take more than a sample file. You'd need a full blown database.
    > <<
    >
    > Exactly. I didn't want to actually post a full blown database to the
    > newsgroups. But the linux community would benefit by such a database.
    >
    >
    > Also, I have had numerous problems with varying monitors in other os's
    > too. It's most certainly not linux specific. The good thing about linux is
    > that you *can* configure virtually anything to spring into life.
    > <<
    >
    > Yes, this is a good thing. But it would be so much better if the
    > relevant values were in the database, kind of like pretty much all the
    > software is in the database (repository).
    >
    >
    > So while I understand your point, it is both a pro and a con in equal
    > measure.
    >
    > Personally, I prefer the ability to tweak whatever I wish to being blindly
    > told to install a closed source binary to operate my hardware.
    > <<
    >
    > So do I. I'm not proposing closed source binaries. I'm proposing an
    > open source text file that contains the numbers for all the hardware.
    >
    > Jose
    >



    This information is readily available, Jose. You just don't know yet
    where to look, or maybe have overlooked it.

    The first place is your owner's manual.

    Lacking that, because you purchased something with poor documentation,
    lost your manual, or bought second-hand equipment without a manual, then
    you need to do the legwork I'm afraid.

    There are many good hardware sites available on the Web that list
    hardware specifications. You can make finding this information fairly
    easy if you take some time to learn how and where to search.

    Once you learn more about hardware (and GNU/Linux), you will be able to
    make very educated guesses on the correct parameters to use. Do a lot of
    reading and experimenting to obtain this wisdom. Don't spend your life
    waiting around for someone else to publish their findings -- or
    opinions, which may be totally incorrect, and can possibly damage your
    hardware. There are way too many different possibilities for one size
    fits all.


    --
    John

    No Microsoft, Apple, AT&T, Intel, Novell, Trend Micro, nor Ford products were used in the preparation or transmission of this message.

    The EULA sounds like it was written by a team of lawyers who want to tell me what I can't do. The GPL sounds like it was written by a human being, who wants me to know what I can do.

  4. Re: What Linux needs "Even Ubuntu"

    * Henning Præstegaard wrote in alt.os.linux.ubuntu on 2008-08-16:
    > "SINNER" <> skrev i meddelelsen
    > news:scjhn5xgan.ln2@news.gates-of-hell.com...


    >>> But what Linux users have forgotten is that Linux itself is its worst
    >>> enemy. A thousand versions and none can agree with each other.


    >> Yeah, cause having a choice really sux.
    >> What Windows users haven't even realized is that choice is good, unless
    >> you always got to the ice cream stand and always get vanilla...


    > Why is it, that when sombody point out an error in linux


    What error?

    > or the behavor of
    > linux useres, the first thing you do is to shoot the messinger.


    He is wrong, no one shot him, he is being corrected. He states the
    alternative of having no choice and being stuck using propriatary code
    is better than having a choice and the ability to use FOSS which is
    patently false.

    > I read FG's meassege as: Linux useres work together and then beat
    > microsoft.


    Then you must be a magician because it does not even come close to
    insinuating such.

    --
    David | Fight Back!
    Bilbo's First Law:
    You cannot count friends that are all packed up in barrels.

  5. Re: What Linux needs "Even Ubuntu"

    On 2008-08-16, Jose hit the keyboard and wrote:



    ><<
    >
    > Yes, this is a good thing. But it would be so much better if the
    > relevant values were in the database, kind of like pretty much all the
    > software is in the database (repository).


    For crying out loud: The relevant *VALUES* are in the manual
    of the monitor. If a user is just too lazy to look that up,
    then others should spend time updating a data-base for him?

    I've got a no-name Monitor here "ColorPro" now please google
    its specifications, you think people should spend time to
    search for new Monitors and then update the "data-base"?
    Come on when all it takes is to add the values in a
    config-file!

    Me thinks you are a troll, sorry this is the impression I get.

    >
    > Jose




    Dragomir Kollaric
    --
    This signature is licensed under the GPL and may be
    freely distributed as long as a copy of the GPL is included... :-)


  6. Re: What Linux needs "Even Ubuntu"

    On 2008-08-16, Jose hit the keyboard and wrote:



    > I just made a suggestion that a certain form of documentation would make
    > a world of difference for new people. It would address a problem with
    > Linux not recognizing certain hardware automatically (a problem which
    > appears from postings to be rather common, though it shouldn't be), and
    > give new people an easy first step into the world of manual configuration.


    Back to the point, people should create a database for all
    obscure Monitors (or other hardware) sold on the market?
    Have you found the specification for my monitor yet? Strange
    isn't it the thing is about 2 years old, and each and every
    version of Gnu/Linux I used so far could get a driver loaded
    for it.

    But if you are so keen that Databases are created, why don't
    you take up the task yourself, who's *STOPPING* you from
    doing it, certainly not me, GO FOR IT DUDE, this way you can
    contribute something constructive. Maybe until now people in
    the OS Community didn't think it was necessary, but you can
    show them wrong, and offer your help. Get involved! It's
    your idea, ACT UPON IT if it's such a big problem that this
    hardware database doesn't exist yet.

    God luck to you,

    >
    > Jose




    Dragomir Kollaric
    --
    This signature is licensed under the GPL and may be
    freely distributed as long as a copy of the GPL is included... :-)


  7. Re: What Linux needs "Even Ubuntu"

    Dragomir Kollaric wrote:

    > On 2008-08-16, Florian Diesch hit the keyboard and wrote:
    >> FG wrote:
    >>
    >>
    >>> But what Linux users have forgotten is that Linux itself is its worst
    >>> enemy. A thousand versions and none can agree with each other.

    >>
    >> Yes, that's a real problem. It's just the same as with cars: Average
    >> people will never buy cars as long as there are so many models to
    >> choose from. Everything would be better if there's just one car
    >> model to buy, maybe in 2 different colors. *Then* people woulds really
    >> start to use cars.

    >
    > Yes Florian, and if they would listen to my advise one of the cars
    > should be the BMW "Isseta" the other the origianal "Puch 500" all
    > vehicles I loved as a kid :-)
    >
    > So now lets hear other *2 best* choices...


    No, if we really want to get the car ready for the street there has to
    be only *one* model, and it has to be compatible with horses. Otherwise
    people won't switch.


    Florian
    --

    -----------------------------------------------------------------------
    ** Hi! I'm a signature virus! Copy me into your signature, please! **
    -----------------------------------------------------------------------

  8. Re: What Linux needs "Even Ubuntu"

    On Sat, 16 Aug 2008 18:18:23 +0000, Jose wrote:

    > On Sat, 16 Aug 2008 09:24:22 -0500, John F. Morse wrote:
    >
    >> This information is readily available, Jose. You just don't know yet
    >> where to look, or maybe have overlooked it.

    >
    > Or maybe am putting together used equipment without a manual. In any
    > case, I =do= know where to look, I =have= looked it up, I =have= edited
    > my config file, and my monitor is working well.
    >
    > It's not about me.
    >
    > It's about whether the Linux community wants to be a techie club ("we
    > paid our dues, so you should too") or whether it wants to actually get
    > Joe Sixpack to try Linux and like it, scoring another victory against
    > the Closed Source Monster.
    >
    > For that matter, man pages are just there for those too lazy to
    > experiment with the software, right?
    >
    > I just made a suggestion that a certain form of documentation would make
    > a world of difference for new people. It would address a problem with
    > Linux not recognizing certain hardware automatically (a problem which
    > appears from postings to be rather common, though it shouldn't be), and
    > give new people an easy first step into the world of manual
    > configuration.
    >
    > I don't see why there is such hostility towards that.
    >
    > ... then Dragomir Kollaric said:
    >
    >> Me thinks you are a troll, sorry this is the impression I get.

    >
    > Think what you want.
    >
    > Jose


    I must agree with Jose. If indeed the Linux community really wants to
    expand, it must make setting up a system easier. I saw in one of the
    replies that "setting up a database of monitors....etc.." Well now you
    know why Microsoft charges for Windows. They had to do that. That is part
    of the cost of Windows. Obviously the Linux community cannot do that. But
    there is a great deal that it can do to make setting the system up.
    However, the community is going to have to decide, do you want to be some
    kind of techie exclusive club (this reminds me of the old amateur radio
    geeks or Hams who insisted on using Morse Code) or do you want to be a
    bit more inclusive and bring in a much larger base. I hope it is the
    latter.

    BTW, just because someone disagrees or presents a cogent argument for a
    change of the status quo does not make them a troll.

  9. Re: What Linux needs "Even Ubuntu"

    On 2008-08-16, LittleGorm hit the keyboard and wrote:


    > I must agree with Jose. If indeed the Linux community really wants to
    > expand, it must make setting up a system easier. I saw in one of the
    > replies that "setting up a database of monitors....etc.." Well now you
    > know why Microsoft charges for Windows. They had to do that. That is part
    > of the cost of Windows. Obviously the Linux community cannot do that. But
    > there is a great deal that it can do to make setting the system up.
    > However, the community is going to have to decide, do you want to be some
    > kind of techie exclusive club (this reminds me of the old amateur radio
    > geeks or Hams who insisted on using Morse Code) or do you want to be a
    > bit more inclusive and bring in a much larger base. I hope it is the
    > latter.


    I've been using Gnu/Linux for many years now, and I can say
    that installing f.e. Ubuntu has been much easier then when I
    first installed Suse 6.2.! 8 years ago people made the same
    lousy claim, it's so hard to set up Gnu/Linux bla bla. Sorry
    I don't buy this. "Jose" should try a distribution requiring
    many packages to be self compiled, then he'd appreciate how
    easy it is to install *Ubuntu, hell people make fun how
    Ubuntu is too easy to install/set up and maintain. "Ubuntu
    is a African word meaning Slackware is too hard for me".
    Yeah if this was the "Slackware" group, "users" like Jose
    might have a point.


    If something isn't done like it's done on M$ then its
    *plain* too hard. So here we are, trying to get away from M$
    but at the same time we want things to be done like it is
    done in M$. Again if some-one changes over to a mac, would
    he/she complain about the need to learn, that things are
    done in a different way? But hell Gnu/Linux should be like a
    carbon copy of MS!?


    Why is it that a 15 year old boy could install a Mint from a
    CD-ROM I gave him?


    Back to the Database, how many people bemoan the fact that *Ubuntu
    installs a lot of *useless* stuff like modules they don't use,

    /lib/modules
    2,8G insgesamt

    OK I've got to clean that out, but I just wonder how big a data-base
    for all the *hardware* existing would be.

    >
    > BTW, just because someone disagrees or presents a cogent argument for a
    > change of the status quo does not make them a troll.


    I still have this impression, sorry can't help it.
    Besides this is free speech isn't it? :-)

    Again my advice remains if anybody thinks there is a need to
    improve Gnu/Linux software/package-management etc.etc. they
    are more then welcomed to get going and contribute to it.
    Don't just demand it DO IT, get involved to make it better.




    Dragomir Kollaric
    --
    This signature is licensed under the GPL and may be
    freely distributed as long as a copy of the GPL is included... :-)


  10. Re: What Linux needs "Even Ubuntu"

    "SINNER" <> skrev i meddelelsen
    news:25ajn5x81u.ln2@news.gates-of-hell.com...

    >>>> But what Linux users have forgotten is that Linux itself is its worst
    >>>> enemy. A thousand versions and none can agree with each other.

    >
    >>> Yeah, cause having a choice really sux.
    >>> What Windows users haven't even realized is that choice is good, unless
    >>> you always got to the ice cream stand and always get vanilla...

    >
    >> Why is it, that when sombody point out an error in linux

    >
    > What error?
    >

    I was, I think the word is, general sizeing.

    >> or the behavor of
    >> linux useres, the first thing you do is to shoot the messinger.

    >
    > He is wrong, no one shot him, he is being corrected. He states the
    > alternative of having no choice and being stuck using propriatary code
    > is better than having a choice and the ability to use FOSS which is
    > patently false.
    >
    >> I read FG's meassege as: Linux useres work together and then beat
    >> microsoft.

    >
    > Then you must be a magician because it does not even come close to
    > insinuating such.
    >

    Or I have misunderstod the sitatation. I have not read the full thread.
    Sorry.

    It is just that, when I started to folow this newsgroup when Ubuntu was
    young
    there was mutch more help and less argue here.

    I gess that Ubuntu is beeing so good now that help is not the priority eany
    more. ;-)

    Sorry for my spelling. Englis is not my first laungs.

    regards
    Henning


  11. Re: What Linux needs "Even Ubuntu"

    In alt.os.linux.ubuntu on Sun, 17 Aug 2008 00:18:53 +0200, Henning
    Præstegaard wrote:

    <...>

    > I gess that Ubuntu is beeing so good now that help is not the priority eany
    > more. ;-)


    This newsgroup has attracted some attention from trolls, kooks and
    flamers. The signal-to-noise ratio isn't as good as it was, but it
    seems to me that questions are still receiving useful answers.

    Compared with comp.os.linux.misc, AOLU is a nice place to be. :-)


    --
    PJR :-)

    ,http://slrn-doc.sourceforge.net/>


  12. Re: What Linux needs "Even Ubuntu"

    Jose wrote:

    > On Fri, 15 Aug 2008 21:27:11 -0500, Joe wrote:
    >
    >> Linux would be far better off if there was a comprehensive Hardware
    >> Compatibility List showing which devices will work out of the box. Then,
    >> if someone decides to use something not on the list, they go into it
    >> knowing that there can (and likely will) be problems...

    >
    > True. But this doesn't invalidate my point that Linux would be better
    > off with a comprehensive configuration list too.


    Usually the problem is to keep this lists up to date. The problems are
    usually caused by new or rare hardware and this hardware most likely
    wouldn't be in the list, too. Sad but true.


    > A FAQ with full answers, as it were, because these (how do I get Ubuntu
    > to recognize my monitor?...) actually =are= frequently asked.


    Today this things are answered in Wikis instead of FAQs. It's Web2.0,
    you now...



    Florian
    --

    -----------------------------------------------------------------------
    ** Hi! I'm a signature virus! Copy me into your signature, please! **
    -----------------------------------------------------------------------

  13. Re: What Linux needs "Even Ubuntu"

    On Sat, 16 Aug 2008 18:18:23 +0000, Jose wrote:

    > It's about whether the Linux community wants to be a techie club ("we
    > paid our dues, so you should too") or whether it wants to actually get
    > Joe Sixpack to try Linux and like it, scoring another victory against
    > the Closed Source Monster.


    Joe Sixpack wants a system with a pre-configured OS that works right out
    of the box. It's possible for a vendor to deliver a Linux-based system
    that meets that requirement, but Joe Sixpack will soon discover that it
    doesn't support a game or application he wants to run, and that is why he
    won't be happy with Linux.

    Charlie

  14. Re: What Linux needs "Even Ubuntu"

    * LittleGorm wrote in alt.os.linux.ubuntu on 2008-08-16:

    [...[

    > I must agree with Jose. If indeed the Linux community really wants to
    > expand, it must make setting up a system easier. I saw in one of the
    > replies that "setting up a database of monitors....etc.." Well now you
    > know why Microsoft charges for Windows. They had to do that. That is part
    > of the cost of Windows.


    Really? Because to get my monitor to be recognized by windows I had to
    use a CD from the manufacturer with the correct driver, oddly enough,
    Ubuntu reports it correctly without the driver so I am not sure the
    Windows CD is worth the price of admission.

    > Obviously the Linux community cannot do that. But
    > there is a great deal that it can do to make setting the system up.
    > However, the community is going to have to decide, do you want to be some
    > kind of techie exclusive club (this reminds me of the old amateur radio
    > geeks or Hams who insisted on using Morse Code) or do you want to be a
    > bit more inclusive and bring in a much larger base. I hope it is the
    > latter.


    You've got it backwards. Users need to flock to hardware that is
    compatible with Linux of to manufacturers that will provide the
    appropriate documentation and reject those that wont/don't. Windows
    publishes a compatibility list, if you stray from it and attempt to
    configure unapproved hardware you get warnings six ways to Sunday. Both
    OS's have compatibility issues, the fact that Windows may have less is
    because of hardware manufacturers not because MS charges for their OS.

    > BTW, just because someone disagrees or presents a cogent argument for a
    > change of the status quo does not make them a troll.


    True, but in some cases me thinks thou doth protest too much and in
    those cases, if it walks like a duck...

    --
    David | Fight Back!
    Tu bi or not tu bi


  15. Re: What Linux needs "Even Ubuntu"

    On Sat, 16 Aug 2008 18:18:23 -0500, SINNER wrote:

    > Really? Because to get my monitor to be recognized by windows I had to
    > use a CD from the manufacturer with the correct driver, oddly enough,
    > Ubuntu reports it correctly without the driver so I am not sure the
    > Windows CD is worth the price of admission.


    Well I have a Samsung SyncMaster 191t that is now about 4-5years old and
    it did not recognize it when I installed Ubuntu, either 7.10 and 8.04. On
    my XP machine it recognized the monitor. My XP machine also recognized a
    brand new Samsung 205BW (about 6 months ago). Samsung has the major share
    of the market for LCD monitors, and it seemed odd to me that Linux did
    not recognize the monitor. I had to tell it what monitor I had, then it
    found it in its database. Does this little childish outburst from me
    prove anything, Not really.

    "You've got it backwards. Users need to flock to hardware that is
    compatible with Linux of to manufacturers that will provide the
    appropriate documentation and reject those that wont/don't. Windows
    publishes a compatibility list, if you stray from it and attempt to
    configure unapproved hardware you get warnings six ways to Sunday. Both
    OS's have compatibility issues, the fact that Windows may have less is
    because of hardware manufacturers not because MS charges for their OS."

    Windows and Mac users don't have to do ANYTHING OF THE SORT! Users want
    to do work and not get enmeshed in hardware! Gamers may want to do that,
    but the vast majority want a system to JUST WORK. And by the way, Linux
    fills that bill very well. I am not arguing here for the superiority of
    Linux over Windows or Windows over Linux (same goes for Apple). It goes
    back to what I asked before, do you want to be an exclusive club with
    small membership or do you want to include a larger group of users. I
    admit it much more fun to be very, very exclusive and point your fingers
    at those outside the club and tell each other how smart we all are and
    those people outside are just dumb jerks. Is that what the Linux
    community really wants?

  16. Re: What Linux needs "Even Ubuntu"

    * LittleGorm wrote in alt.os.linux.ubuntu on 2008-08-16:

    > "You've got it backwards. Users need to flock to hardware that is
    > compatible with Linux of to manufacturers that will provide the
    > appropriate documentation and reject those that wont/don't. Windows
    > publishes a compatibility list, if you stray from it and attempt to
    > configure unapproved hardware you get warnings six ways to Sunday. Both
    > OS's have compatibility issues, the fact that Windows may have less is
    > because of hardware manufacturers not because MS charges for their OS."


    > Windows and Mac users don't have to do ANYTHING OF THE SORT! Users want
    > to do work and not get enmeshed in hardware!


    Yeah well I want to be a millionaire but it doesn't come easy. If you buy
    hardware that is not compatible with the software you want to use on it,
    you are out of luck, this goes for ALL the available OSen you can find.
    You are looking at this from the perpspective of someone that buys a
    system with the hardware and software put together by a company not a
    user, if you are going to build, you have to make sure all the parts
    will work together. You cant just go to Fry's and throw a bunch of stuff
    in the basket and expect it all to work when you get home, you seem to
    be missing this very obvious point.

    > Gamers may want to do that,
    > but the vast majority want a system to JUST WORK. And by the way, Linux
    > fills that bill very well. I am not arguing here for the superiority of
    > Linux over Windows or Windows over Linux (same goes for Apple). It goes
    > back to what I asked before, do you want to be an exclusive club with
    > small membership or do you want to include a larger group of users.


    We don't want either. The aim of a Linux user is not to expand the
    user base, that's up to large corporations that are looking to make a
    profit. Users want something that works and Linux Users want something
    that isn't bound by the proprietary monster corporations that promote the
    user as being a beta tester for production software that they have no
    control over.

    > admit it much more fun to be very, very exclusive and point your fingers
    > at those outside the club and tell each other how smart we all are and
    > those people outside are just dumb jerks. Is that what the Linux
    > community really wants?


    You completely miss the point, as above, we are not evangelical, we just
    want to use our PC the way WE want, not the way some company tells us
    to.
    --
    David | Fight Back!
    SEMPER UBI SUB UBI!!!!

    [ Always wear underwater ]

  17. Re: What Linux needs "Even Ubuntu"

    LittleGorm wrote:

    >
    > "You've got it backwards. Users need to flock to hardware that is
    > compatible with Linux of to manufacturers that will provide the
    > appropriate documentation and reject those that wont/don't. Windows
    > publishes a compatibility list, if you stray from it and attempt to
    > configure unapproved hardware you get warnings six ways to Sunday. Both
    > OS's have compatibility issues, the fact that Windows may have less is
    > because of hardware manufacturers not because MS charges for their OS."
    >
    > Windows and Mac users don't have to do ANYTHING OF THE SORT! Users want
    > to do work and not get enmeshed in hardware! Gamers may want to do that,
    > but the vast majority want a system to JUST WORK. And by the way, Linux
    > fills that bill very well. I am not arguing here for the superiority of
    > Linux over Windows or Windows over Linux (same goes for Apple). It goes
    > back to what I asked before, do you want to be an exclusive club with
    > small membership or do you want to include a larger group of users. I
    > admit it much more fun to be very, very exclusive and point your fingers
    > at those outside the club and tell each other how smart we all are and
    > those people outside are just dumb jerks. Is that what the Linux
    > community really wants?



    You have to remember the history of the computer world. MS ruled
    everything for quite awhile. The manufacturers were bullied for quite
    awhile by MS not to support anything that wasn't MS.
    The only reason MACs got around that is that is they refused to let
    their programing be used on anything else or no one else could clone
    their system. So no threat to MS. You could clone an MS system if you
    bent over.
    Now that MS is starting to loose its grip you are starting to get more
    manufacturers that support Linux.
    Until they all do that is not Linux's fault. Problem yes. Fault no.
    I even read on the last issue of Windows Secrets where some in the
    Windows world are starting to complain that MS wants to make every
    decision for them and they don't like it. They want to be able to tweak
    their machine the way they want and they can't anymore.
    caver1

  18. Re: What Linux needs "Even Ubuntu"

    On Sat, 16 Aug 2008 13:30:11 +0000, Jose wrote:

    > On Sat, 16 Aug 2008 06:57:50 +0000, Moog wrote:
    >


    >> Whilst a sample file would possibly help, it would be very difficult to
    >> cover all bases. There's a lot of none standard hardware out there. It
    >> would take more than a sample file. You'd need a full blown database.

    >
    > Exactly. I didn't want to actually post a full blown database to the
    > newsgroups. But the linux community would benefit by such a database.


    I guess you haven't heard of MonitorsDB?
    http://direct2dell.com/one2one/archi...onitorsdb.aspx



    --
    ** Posted from http://www.teranews.com **

  19. Re: What Linux needs "Even Ubuntu"

    Jose wrote:
    > On Fri, 15 Aug 2008 17:53:09 +0000, Moog wrote:
    >
    >>> It's not the using of a config file that is the
    >>> barrier, it's the knowing what to put there.

    >> Hello Jose,
    >>
    >> Nice little discussion here.
    >>
    >> Well. Let's look specifically at your last statemnt.
    >>
    >> How do you resize a partition in Windows, Linux, OSX? How do you
    >> install a video driver in Windows, Linux OSX? How do you output
    >> the contents of a specific system log in Windows, Linux, OSX?
    >>
    >> You see, you need to have knowledge of the system to complete
    >> the task. The tasks are the same, the methods different.
    >>
    >> If you don't like tinkering with config files, then use an
    >> all-in-one interface such as webmin.

    >
    > I don't know the answers to these questions off the top of my head
    > (though I could look them up). It's not so much how to do it
    > that's the hard part, but what values to put in, and what switch
    > settings to use, and what jumpers to jump, etc.
    >
    > To take the video driver issue for example (since that's the one
    > that first bit me), Windows auto-detects the new card and asks me
    > where to find the install files (if I bought a new card that came
    > with instructions, I follow them, otherwise I let Windows "search
    > for the best driver"). I click OK and it runs.
    >
    > This is probably in part because video card makers write drivers
    > for Windows.
    >
    > In Linux, auto-detect didn't work, and I had to edit a config
    > file. This is ok, I can edit text, and at least I know what is
    > happening when I do so. Stuff like HorizSync 30-95 VertRefresh
    > 50-160 make sense to me. But I have to know first that 1: these
    > are the parameters that need to be set, and 2: these are the
    > values they need to be set to.
    >
    > THAT is the stuff that's hard to find. THAT is the kind of thing
    > that could be made much much easier with a "this is what to do if
    > you run into trouble" file which should be supplied with Ubuntu.
    > Sure, it's on the web... somewhere... probably... or in a
    > newsgroup (if people even know about newsgroups any more). But if
    > we want to make Linux easy to learn (note I said easy to =learn=,
    > not just plain easy)... then this file would go a long way.
    >
    > Sample entry:
    >
    > IF YOU HAVE TROUBLE WITH: Video cards or screen resolution You can
    > edit the configuration file by hand. [instructions about backing
    > up and using sudo and text editing... then] The video card needs
    > to know the horizontal and vertical frequency range that the
    > monitor can handle, so that it can drive the monitor properly. It
    > is located in the "Monitor" Section of the configuration file
    > mentioned above.
    >
    > A sample entry would be: HorizSync 30-95 VertRefresh 50-160
    >
    > The following values should be used for the following monitors
    > (list current as of ...) Dell D1626HT HorizSync 30-117 VertRefresh
    > 50-180 Dell D1226H monitor, used HorizSync 30-95 VertRefresh
    > 50-160 Sampo AlphaScan GL HorizSync 30-65 VertRefresh 50-90 etc...
    > (each monitor, and there would be hundreds, would also be linked
    > to its nicknames, and be presented in a reasonable order), and
    > ideally there would also be a web link to the manufacturer, or to
    > some other website with more info about that monitor... but the
    > user would not need to go there to simply set the config file.
    > =That= is the key. The information exists... let's put it in
    > front of the newbie so they don't feel helpless having opened the
    > config file and then not knowing what to do with it.
    >
    > This whole thing reminds me of the old DOS days of installing
    > modems and hard drives, where one had to set dip switches a
    > certain way to make it work, and unless you bought the card new,
    > you couldn't find out what the settings were. It really shouldn't
    > be like that.
    >
    > Jose


    Jose, isn't your own wishful thinking only compounding bloat that
    "shouldn't" be here?

    What do you think of Windows newbies who, with arrogance exceeded
    only by their ignorance, proclaim, inappropriately and repeatedly,
    how they know best what Microsoft should be doing?

    If you were genuinely concerned about the fate of Linux newbies,
    wouldn't you, being a newbie yourself, best enter the Ubuntu
    community with the question, "How can I help?" ?
    http://www.ubuntu.com/community/participate

    BTW, there is a place in the Ubuntu community *dedicated* to wishful
    thinking:- http://ubuntuforums.org/forumdisplay.php?f=306

    --
    Bob
    "I don't believe in evil, I believe in right and wrong, and very
    often they are the same thing"-Paul Theroux, in Milroy the Magician.

  20. Re: What Linux needs "Even Ubuntu"

    Jose wrote:

    > On Fri, 15 Aug 2008 15:01:51 +0000, SINNER wrote:
    >
    >> You arent born with that knowledge in Windows either.

    >
    > Yes, but Windows users aren't expected to edit config files manually. It
    > can be done if necessary, but usually isn't, because driver support is
    > good.
    >


    Windows driver support is universally abysmal! Particularly if you're
    trying to use the "latest and greatest" Vista.

    Quick "usability" testing of Vista with a dozen standard PCs showed that
    *all* of them had hardware driver "issues", some of which made Vista
    completely un-runnable!

    Installation of Ubuntu 8.04.1 on all the same hardware met 100% success -
    without having to seek out driver disks or obscure driver files from the
    internet.

    There is no comparison anymore!

    C.

+ Reply to Thread
Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 LastLast