Linked by Thom Holwerda on Wed 16th Nov 2011 23:38 UTC, submitted by sb56637
SuSE, openSUSE And another popular Linux distribution pushes a new release out the door. This time around, it's openSUSE, as they just released version 12.1. Other than the usual latest and greatest version of all the open source desktops and associated tools, there's a few other interesting tidbits in this release as well.
Order by: Score:
KDE
by Jason Bourne on Wed 16th Nov 2011 23:53 UTC
Jason Bourne
Member since:
2007-06-02

Speaking of OpenSUSE... I just switched my production machine to Kubuntu 11.10. I have hit a spot that either THIS IS IT or definitely back to Windows 7. I couldn't stand Unity for a couple of days. I couldn't stand GNOME Shell for more than one day. I won't be trying Mint and its hacks. So KDE is all there's left. I may upgrade my hardware or buy a modest Nvidia GPU, if I have to.

I'm on a good oldie AMD 780G/SB700 (Radeon HD 3200). It's running fine, but not that snappy. I'm using the radeon open source driver. Not installing fglrx because certainly will disable splash screens and cause some bugs.

All I ask from KDE developers is... please, don't do any more stupid moves. Keep this environment better and better. I have criticized KDE many times, and KDE has lost ground for GNOME 2. However, KDE based distros may be a great camp for GNOME Shell refugees. GNOME guys really really blew our ex-usable, ex-stable and ex-reliable desktop.

Reply Score: 1

RE: KDE
by churlish_Helmut on Thu 17th Nov 2011 00:03 UTC in reply to "KDE"
churlish_Helmut Member since:
2010-04-12

You should be happy with opensuse 12.1 - now shipping with brand new KDE 3.5 :-D

Awesome, huh? (well i use it)

Reply Score: 4

RE[2]: KDE
by lemur2 on Thu 17th Nov 2011 05:00 UTC in reply to "RE: KDE"
lemur2 Member since:
2007-02-17

You should be happy with opensuse 12.1 - now shipping with brand new KDE 3.5 :-D


Excuse me?

http://en.opensuse.org/12.1

"KDE introduces Oyranos, Apper and Plasma Active
openSUSE 12.1 ships the KDE Plasma Desktop 4.7 as default workspace and is the first major Linux distribution to ship the new KolorManager + Oyranos color management tools. Another major new addition is KPackageKit replacement Apper, simplifying installation and removal of applications. "


Awesome, huh? (well i use it)


What might be of interest in terms of keeping up to date is Tumbleweed.

http://news.opensuse.org/2011/11/16/opensuse-12-1-all-green/

"Keep tumblin’ and rollin’!

openSUSE 12.1 can of course also move to Tumbleweed, our cutting-edge rolling release repo which contains the latest stable versions of all software. Tumbleweed lessens the significance and change impact of major releases by updating systems continuously."


Apparently, Tumbleweed turns OpenSuSe 12.1 into a rolling-release distribution.

Reply Score: 4

RE[3]: KDE
by yoshi314@gmail.com on Thu 17th Nov 2011 07:30 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: KDE"
yoshi314@gmail.com Member since:
2009-12-14

FYI opensuse 12.1 does have KDE 3.x option.

http://en.opensuse.org/Product_highlights#KDE_3

Reply Score: 4

RE[4]: KDE
by lemur2 on Thu 17th Nov 2011 08:53 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: KDE"
lemur2 Member since:
2007-02-17

FYI opensuse 12.1 does have KDE 3.x option.

http://en.opensuse.org/Product_highlights#KDE_3


Yes. But FYI the default desktop for OpenSuse 12.1 is KDE SC 4.7.2.

Reply Score: 4

RE[5]: KDE
by yoshi314@gmail.com on Thu 17th Nov 2011 10:52 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: KDE"
yoshi314@gmail.com Member since:
2009-12-14

i stand corrected on that one.

although it seems gnome version is just as official as kde. the rest is under 'derivatives'.

Reply Score: 1

RE[3]: KDE
by churlish_Helmut on Thu 17th Nov 2011 13:56 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: KDE"
churlish_Helmut Member since:
2010-04-12

It doesn't matter which is the standard Desktop : All of them are pretty good included. So choose KDE 3 FTW =)

Edited 2011-11-17 13:59 UTC

Reply Score: 2

RE: KDE
by Drumhellar on Thu 17th Nov 2011 01:09 UTC in reply to "KDE"
Drumhellar Member since:
2005-07-12

The splash screen may work with fglrx. I've got Kubuntu, and I get the splash. Though, I do get a couple stray lines of kernel output, but my el cheapo laptop has weird issues with the graphics outside of windows in general, so your mileage may vary. It's worth trying, though, since fglrx generally performs better and supports more features.

Reply Score: 3

RE[2]: KDE
by Jason Bourne on Thu 17th Nov 2011 14:08 UTC in reply to "RE: KDE"
Jason Bourne Member since:
2007-06-02

True. I have just installed the fglrx driver from "Apper" (the kpackagekit replacement), so far I have got no problem with plymouth. And the performance really got better.

But I'm really wanting to get a new low end GPU, any recommendations?

Reply Score: 2

RE[3]: KDE
by 1c3d0g on Thu 17th Nov 2011 20:16 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: KDE"
1c3d0g Member since:
2005-07-06

Geforce 520. Or at least, anything with an NVIDIA name attached to it, as it'll save you tons of headaches, trust me.

Reply Score: 2

RE[4]: KDE
by Jason Bourne on Fri 18th Nov 2011 00:59 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: KDE"
Jason Bourne Member since:
2007-06-02

Does this card have a low power consumption? Is it low end?

Reply Score: 2

RE[5]: KDE
by 1c3d0g on Fri 18th Nov 2011 02:00 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: KDE"
1c3d0g Member since:
2005-07-06

Oh yes, it's Fermi-based, but very low power. I have the ASUS version, which comes with a passive heatsink, so that makes it inaudible as well.

Reply Score: 2

RE[6]: KDE
by Jason Bourne on Fri 18th Nov 2011 13:31 UTC in reply to "RE[5]: KDE"
Jason Bourne Member since:
2007-06-02

Looks like this is what I am doing. I started to get black halts and unresponsive system logging out & shutdown after and installing fglrx.

Edited 2011-11-18 13:32 UTC

Reply Score: 2

RE: KDE
by Soulbender on Thu 17th Nov 2011 01:13 UTC in reply to "KDE"
Soulbender Member since:
2005-08-18

I just switched my production machine to Kubuntu 11.10.


I fail to see how that relates to the release of OpenSUSE.

Reply Score: 8

RE[2]: KDE
by Jason Bourne on Thu 17th Nov 2011 14:10 UTC in reply to "RE: KDE"
Jason Bourne Member since:
2007-06-02

It's related because I was looking for a Ubuntu 11.04 replacement. Many were waiting for OpenSUSE, but along the way came Kubuntu too which is KDE-based distro. Last time I knew, OpenSUSE was a KDE-based distro...unless it changed.

Reply Score: 1

RE[3]: KDE
by rtfa on Thu 17th Nov 2011 16:52 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: KDE"
rtfa Member since:
2006-02-27

opensuse does KDE and GNOME and 2 other desktops, but KDE is the default

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: KDE
by tylerdurden on Thu 17th Nov 2011 22:08 UTC in reply to "RE: KDE"
tylerdurden Member since:
2009-03-17

He was just letting us know that "production machine" does not mean what he thinks it does...


Kids these days and their buzzwords.

Reply Score: 2

RE[3]: KDE
by Jason Bourne on Fri 18th Nov 2011 01:01 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: KDE"
Jason Bourne Member since:
2007-06-02

Ok mr. sympathetic. I will take that back. My main computer will please you better... These IT god-types...ugh.

Reply Score: 2

RE: KDE
by ebasconp on Thu 17th Nov 2011 01:25 UTC in reply to "KDE"
ebasconp Member since:
2006-05-09

Give a try to Xubuntu!!! I used KDE a lot of time and I am happily using XFCE ;)

Reply Score: 4

RE: KDE
by marcus0263 on Thu 17th Nov 2011 02:19 UTC in reply to "KDE"
marcus0263 Member since:
2007-06-02

Been using KDE 4.6 for a few months now, it's OK. I've been messing with Mint's Debian edition with Gnome 2, like it, like it allot. I'll be transitioning over to it shortly.

Unity, sucks balls as a Gnome 3 hack wanna be
Gnome 3, blows
KDE, not bad and it is at least usable
XFCE4, it's alright and usable

Gnome 3 and Unity is a tablet/phone interface, One has to give credit to KDE to separate their Desktop and Tablet/phone interface.

Reply Score: 3

RE[2]: KDE
by Jason Bourne on Thu 17th Nov 2011 15:09 UTC in reply to "RE: KDE"
Jason Bourne Member since:
2007-06-02

There are improvements on 4.7.3

So far we're short on choices.

Mostly because of cowardly & uninterested developers. The ones who can code good code and criticize, won't touch MATE or fork GNOME, or fork GNOME 3 itself to make it through the mainstream.

Reply Score: 2

RE: KDE
by unclefester on Thu 17th Nov 2011 06:19 UTC in reply to "KDE"
unclefester Member since:
2007-01-13

Just install Ubuntu 10.04 LTS. Gnome 2 in all it's glory. Supported until April 2015.

Reply Score: 3

RE[2]: KDE
by Jason Bourne on Thu 17th Nov 2011 14:11 UTC in reply to "RE: KDE"
Jason Bourne Member since:
2007-06-02

Oh yes, and when I rename something in Nautilus in list-view I get the extension renamed too. Or perhaps when I try to open a device from the desktop area, I have to actually try it twice for it to open in Nautilus.

Sorry, I'm not living anymore with those bugs.

Reply Score: 2

RE: KDE
by OSbunny on Thu 17th Nov 2011 07:40 UTC in reply to "KDE"
OSbunny Member since:
2009-05-23

Kubuntu is slow because it's the red-headed stepchild of Canonical. If you want KDE go with the traditional KDE distros like OpenSUSE and Mandriva. These are the vendors that work on optimizing their distros for KDE.

Reply Score: 3

RE[2]: KDE
by Straho on Thu 17th Nov 2011 11:48 UTC in reply to "RE: KDE"
Straho Member since:
2011-09-30

Absolutely, I ran openSuse 12.1, PCLinuxOS KDE and Pardus with Virtual Box on my office Win7. They perform better than Xubuntu, especially Pardus.

Reply Score: 1

RE[3]: KDE
by suryad on Thu 17th Nov 2011 15:57 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: KDE"
suryad Member since:
2005-07-09

I think you guys are right. I am currently running Kubuntu and it was nowhere near as snappy as Ubuntu 11.04 was and I am running 11.10 right now. I am going to give OpenSuse a shot when I get my new work laptop. Too much hassle to reinstall and set up all my development tools.

Reply Score: 2

RE[4]: KDE
by ggeldenhuys on Fri 18th Nov 2011 22:11 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: KDE"
ggeldenhuys Member since:
2006-11-13

Too much hassle to reinstall and set up all my development tools.

I know that feeling, that is why I switched to Slackware. It comes with all the development tools as standard. All I need to do on a new install is clone my git repositories and away I go!!! Live is good in Slackware!

Seeing that Linux is known to be more for the "techie" style people, why don't more distros include development tools as standard. Beats me!

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: KDE
by Jason Bourne on Thu 17th Nov 2011 14:14 UTC in reply to "RE: KDE"
Jason Bourne Member since:
2007-06-02

I have found no differences of performance between Fedora, Kubuntu and even Arch KDE's. Arch which was supposed to be the "faster" KDE, it's really not. It is just the same to me. Now I am a bit glad that I got fglrx working alright in Kubuntu. But Kubuntu took the lead because it ships the Ubuntu fonts, which I find them really nice for the UI, whereas other distros are using weird fonts.

I still see some shortcomings with KDE, but it's just some PolicyKit crashes, the plain X non-aliased fonts, and minor configuration as defaults. If one can spend the time to overcome this, it's actually better than GNOME.

Edited 2011-11-17 14:17 UTC

Reply Score: 2

RE: KDE
by No it isnt on Thu 17th Nov 2011 11:45 UTC in reply to "KDE"
No it isnt Member since:
2005-11-14

I found KDE 4.6 to be a lot smoother and snappier when I turned off VSync under Desktop Effects -- > Advanced. I think this has to do with the way Mesa/Gallium3d or whatever handles VSync. I don't really notice any more tearing without it, just an increase in speed. Oh and this is with the open radeon drivers on a 5770.

Reply Score: 5

RE[2]: KDE
by boudewijn on Thu 17th Nov 2011 16:20 UTC in reply to "RE: KDE"
boudewijn Member since:
2006-03-05

Hey, thanks! That was a good tip, at least until 4.8 is released. I have a high resolution display and an uninspired intel gpu, which means that until I disabled vsync using effects was way slow. Now it's fine and I can have shadows. (There's also an ati gpu in this laptop, but if I enable that, the power draw is too big to run the cpu at max speed, and I compile all day long.)

Reply Score: 2

RE: KDE
by searly on Thu 17th Nov 2011 18:33 UTC in reply to "KDE"
searly Member since:
2006-02-27

So basically you are using a post about the new OpenSUSE release to troll about Gnome Shell ... great, well done. Honestly I wish people would stop using this hyperbole whenever Gnome Shell or Unity is talked about - "Unusable" maybe for you (and others) but that does not mean for everybody ... I happen to like Gnome Shell (as do others) and it is very usable for me and will be improving with time. Rough edges or lack of features are to be expected for the first few releases. I also like the Gnome Vision about Gnome OS and the plans for the new Gnome Applications all nicely integrated.

Apart from that there are many other DEs, not just KDE that may cater for your needs (XCFE or LXDE to mention only two) - nothing against KDE of course, but to call it the only possible refuge, such bollocks/Hyperbole again, but I forgot you possible just wanted to Troll.

But hey please feel free to return to Windows (is that supposed to be a threat? Only asking because it seems to be used a lot in discussion around different DEs, "... right that's it I will return to Windows!") - You hate Gnome Shell? Well I am sure you will love Windows 8 :-)

Edited 2011-11-17 18:38 UTC

Reply Score: 4

RE: KDE
by historyb on Thu 17th Nov 2011 20:57 UTC in reply to "KDE"
historyb Member since:
2005-07-06

How about trying XFCE it is good

Reply Score: 2

RE: KDE
by OSGuy on Sat 19th Nov 2011 10:49 UTC in reply to "KDE"
OSGuy Member since:
2006-01-01

Too bad I can't mod you up. Either way, I was like you until about 3 hours ago when I tried Xfce 4.8 on Fedora 16 and PCLinuxOS Phoenix Edition (XFCE). I think you should try Xfce. I personally believe you will like it. It's much better and professional looking than GNOME 2.x and the performance is also very good. I now need to make a decision between Fedora 16 and PCLinuxOS Phoenix. They both have great packagers managers: Synaptic and yum. Don't know which one is better as a desktop.

Edited 2011-11-19 10:58 UTC

Reply Score: 2

Comment by Radio
by Radio on Thu 17th Nov 2011 00:14 UTC
Radio
Member since:
2009-06-20

Speaking of color management, maybe it is the good moment to tell everybody that a british electronician is making the first batch of an open source display colorimeter, the ColorHug (yeah camelcase!):

http://hughski.com/

If you are serious about photo, video, design or just colors, please help him.

Reply Score: 9

RE: Comment by Radio
by Luminair on Thu 17th Nov 2011 10:49 UTC in reply to "Comment by Radio"
Luminair Member since:
2007-03-30

wtf amazing. where did this come from. considering all colorimeters are pieces of shit, this is intriguing

Reply Score: 2

RE: Comment by Radio
by 1c3d0g on Thu 17th Nov 2011 20:19 UTC in reply to "Comment by Radio"
1c3d0g Member since:
2005-07-06

Now THIS is an informative post...thank yo so much for sharing that!

Reply Score: 2

Comment by Radio
by Radio on Thu 17th Nov 2011 00:21 UTC
Radio
Member since:
2009-06-20

Oh, and, by the way: long live opensuse, one of the best, innovative and solid distros.

Reply Score: 6

RE: Comment by Radio
by riversj on Sun 20th Nov 2011 09:03 UTC in reply to "Comment by Radio"
riversj Member since:
2011-03-18

I started with version 9.0, was really ahead of it's time among the distro's I thought. I've moved on to Debian since due to liking the package tools better but I do miss SuSE / opensuse.

Reply Score: 1

Well, it looks nice...
by fasted on Thu 17th Nov 2011 02:24 UTC
fasted
Member since:
2006-11-09

but the drivers for my dwa-160a2 wireless dongle didn't load. No wireless. Getting spoiled with 'buntu I guess! Off to find the fix, then give it a proper try. Alot of improvements I'd like to see first hand, Snapshot's, improved boot speed, ect. I'm using Gnome 3, getting used to it even though I'm not prone to change , like most. The whining about Unity, Gnome shell, and KDE4 is just nauseating . People realize that these are free operating system's , right? I mean if you forked out 250 bucks and it sucked, I could see you being upset, but that's what pushed me to Linux in the first place. It's also taught me more about computer's than I would have ever imagined, so that's worth alot to me.
If I hear one more person threaten to go back to Win 7, she's hurl time. I , personally, will miss you. Kidding.

Reply Score: 1

RE: Well, it looks nice...
by avgalen on Thu 17th Nov 2011 07:44 UTC in reply to "Well, it looks nice..."
avgalen Member since:
2010-09-23

Let's say that trying out a distribution takes an evening to download and install, another evening to configure everything the way you want it and then a couple of evenings to discover the good and the bad....that is a lot of wasted time if it turns out there is not enough good.

So if you are having a nicely setup Windows 7 environment (or any other OS) that does most of the things you want and does it well (after at least the same amount of evenings invested) then every other OS will have to bring a lot of good to the table to convince me to switch or at least multi-boot.

So far I have spend about 100 evenings on distributions ranging from RedHat 5.2 (yes, a century ago) until the latest Ubuntu and it NEVER supports all my current hardware (ranging from standard Compaq Deskpro's to home-build whiteboxes to laptops to netbooks now)

Linux is surely getting better and better and it seems to work well for others. But Windows always seems to be ahead in hardware support and most of the better Open Source programs actually run better on Windows than on Linux. I would like to have a free OS without 5 update-cycles after a fresh install, but my almost free Windows is just working better.

.....yet I keep trying a couple of times every year when I hear about the newest generation of Linux Distributions constantly setting myself up for disappointment. But at least I am not "just another dumb Windows user".

Reply Score: 1

RE[2]: Well, it looks nice...
by unclefester on Thu 17th Nov 2011 08:34 UTC in reply to "RE: Well, it looks nice..."
unclefester Member since:
2007-01-13

The solution:

a) Buy Linux compatible hardware.

b) Find a distro you like and stick with it.

I use Ubuntu LTS. It takes an hour to install and an hour or two to tweak once every 2-3 years.

Reply Score: 6

RE[3]: Well, it looks nice...
by AmigaRobbo on Thu 17th Nov 2011 08:48 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Well, it looks nice..."
AmigaRobbo Member since:
2005-11-15

User error huh?

Reply Score: 2

RE[3]: Well, it looks nice...
by avgalen on Thu 17th Nov 2011 11:45 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Well, it looks nice..."
avgalen Member since:
2010-09-23

uhm, as you read I have tried to install on different branded desktops, custom built desktops, laptops, netbooks and there is always some sort of hardware that isn't supported (Wifi, tv-card, raid, sound) while there are always drivers available for Windows that work just fine. An OS should support hardware, hardware shouldn't support an OS. Especially on Linux it seems that all drivers are in the kernel, that every distribution uses those some kernels....and still people (in this thread) say that in distribution X their Wifi worked and in distribution Y it doesn't.

I liked Corel Linux a lot back in the days, but sticking with it didn't work (it died). Puppy is the only distribution that I use once in a while for recovery work where "all drivers working" isn't important. But even for that I prefer Hiren, BartPE or WinPE.

Reply Score: 0

RE[4]: Well, it looks nice...
by unclefester on Thu 17th Nov 2011 21:13 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Well, it looks nice..."
unclefester Member since:
2007-01-13

If your hardware doesn't work blame the manufacturer for not writing drivers.

Windows has extremely limited native driver support for hardware. Apple has even less.

Reply Score: 4

RE[5]: Well, it looks nice...
by Slambert666 on Fri 18th Nov 2011 03:53 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: Well, it looks nice..."
Slambert666 Member since:
2008-10-30

If your hardware doesn't work blame the manufacturer for not writing drivers.


The case is not usually missing drivers but that the drivers has been designed and tested for a different version of the kernel (then something changed and now it does not work).

So if the hardware does not work, blame the kernel developers for being unprofessional emo kids, or the distros for releasing crap unto the masses.

Reply Score: 1

RE[5]: Well, it looks nice...
by ggeldenhuys on Fri 18th Nov 2011 22:21 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: Well, it looks nice..."
ggeldenhuys Member since:
2006-11-13

+1
Out of the box, Linux beats any OS hands down on hardware support. Installing say WinXP on my ageing Dell Inspiron 9100 laptop, and nothing works out of the box. Crappy display resolution, no sound, no bluetooth, no wireless, no networking. I have to install driver after driver, and reboot after reboot before they all work. Install Ubuntu 10.04 LTS on that same laptop, and all the above hardware works out of the box (and in under 40 minutes)!

Reply Score: 4

RE[6]: Well, it looks nice...
by Hiev on Fri 18th Nov 2011 22:52 UTC in reply to "RE[5]: Well, it looks nice..."
Hiev Member since:
2005-09-27

The problem with Linux is that if it doesn't detect lets say your wireless card, you are pretty much screwed, you need to google for a How to guide and even compile it from source and edit config files and even so it will hardly work, In windows you just need the installer from the vendor and that's it.

Reply Score: 2

RE[7]: Well, it looks nice...
by ggeldenhuys on Sun 20th Nov 2011 09:31 UTC in reply to "RE[6]: Well, it looks nice..."
ggeldenhuys Member since:
2006-11-13

In windows you just need the installer from the vendor and that's it.

Then start bitching to the Vendors and demand that you want Linux drivers from them too. Why must Linux devs always reverse engineer every damn driver without any help from the vendors. Simply because those Vendors are too damn stuck-up, and closed minded!

Either way, the Linux devs have done an excellent job doing what they are doing.

Reply Score: 2

RE[3]: Well, it looks nice...
by testman on Sun 20th Nov 2011 03:16 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Well, it looks nice..."
testman Member since:
2007-10-15

a) Buy Linux compatible hardware.

If you want to knowingly limit your options, why not just get a Mac?

Alternatively, buy Windows and have a wide range of hardware and software to choose from.

Reply Score: 2

RE[3]: Well, it looks nice...
by riversj on Sun 20th Nov 2011 09:14 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Well, it looks nice..."
riversj Member since:
2011-03-18

Not hard to find compatible hardware either.
When you consider most recent kernels support masses of hardware out of the box without having to obtain drivers separately it's also a plus. I just wish the quality of the wireless drivers were a little better.

Reply Score: 1

RE[4]: Well, it looks nice...
by Dave_K on Sun 20th Nov 2011 15:33 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Well, it looks nice..."
Dave_K Member since:
2005-11-16

Not hard to find compatible hardware either.


Maybe if you're building a desktop PC for Linux, but I don't think that's true if you're looking for a laptop. There are a couple of distributions tailored for specific netbooks, but apart from that it can be very hard to determine whether a particular laptop will be fully supported.

By fully supported I don't just mean Linux installing and booting to the desktop (which is all that some people seem to do before declaring a laptop "Linux compatible"). I mean things like the special buttons and pointing devices features (trackpoint scrolling, trackpad gestures etc.) working properly, and most important of all fully functioning power management.

I'm amazed at how many Linux users see broken sleep/hibernate and significantly reduced battery life as minor little annoyances that aren't worth mentioning...

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: Well, it looks nice...
by ricegf on Thu 17th Nov 2011 11:45 UTC in reply to "RE: Well, it looks nice..."
ricegf Member since:
2007-04-25

You love Windows so, yet you've had 25 flings over the past 10 years with various Linux products? You philanderer, you! :-D

Oddly, I've had exactly the opposite experience with hardware. Linux works out of the box with almost everything I've tried, while Windows has generally required that I search out and install at least one or two drivers per install (either that or dig through the dusty CD bin). We have very different tastes in hardware, I suppose.

One of the great things about libre software is that it tends to run on every platform we use. Of course, we've discovered the same is now true (at least for Windows and Red Hat) for most commercial software that we use - other than Microsoft Office or the occasional vertical app, app needs favor Windows far less frequently than in the Red Hat 5.2 days. Benchmarks show our apps run much faster under Linux, though, which is certainly driving our architecture.

This is important, as the ongoing mobile revolution is shaking up the market dramatically. It's interesting to see Microsoft following Ubuntu's lead in moving to a mobilesque shell on their primary product. This is a particularly good time to broaden your experiences beyond the WIMP paradigm, as the big UI innovators now are Android and iOS, driving touch to laptops and desktops - who hasn't absently tried to move a window or activate a button on a laptop screen with their finger yet?

OS philandering is important to any self-respecting geek. Heck, you should spend 4 evenings with Haiku - you never know who might steal your heart! ;-)

Reply Score: 4

RE[2]: Well, it looks nice...
by No it isnt on Thu 17th Nov 2011 12:13 UTC in reply to "RE: Well, it looks nice..."
No it isnt Member since:
2005-11-14

That's strange. I've set up two Windows 7 desktops for my parents the last year, one Asus and one HP, and both took longer to configure for first boot than doing a complete installation of whatever Linux distro I've tried (possibly excluding Arch). That's for pre-installed OEM versions of Windows 7, and not considering all the crapware and demo versions of constantly malfunctioning virus scanners you have to uninstall to make the computer usable (I don't know why they all seem to prefer crap to the functional Microsoft Security Essentials), or downloading and installing various apps that come with the Linux distro.

Of course, if you disregard the fact that Windows actually needs to be installed and configured and pretend this is something uniquely Linux-y, then Windows wins, hands down. Then again, that's disingenuous.

Reply Score: 5

RE[3]: Well, it looks nice...
by avgalen on Thu 17th Nov 2011 14:38 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Well, it looks nice..."
avgalen Member since:
2010-09-23

I never said that Windows supports all hardware out of the box. I mostly have to use Driver-CD's or go online but all the drivers ARE available. For Linux they just aren't, not for all the hardware.

And Windows isn't shorter than Linux to setup, I actually said both take a couple of evenings to do it properly. For Windows it helps a lot to use a "clean" CD, not the Rescue-Partition that contains 25 trials for everything. Then it is a matter of updating the drivers (cd/usb/windows update) and ninite.com for all the basics. After that some tweaking to make everything look, feel and act like I want to and installing some big tools (Visual Studio, Office) and of course waiting a long time for all the updates to download AND install and reboots

Linux installs in roughly the same time, finding some tools in the repisotories and installing them is easy and fast (latest version, no endless updating) but drivers (even after lots of searching and "helpdesking" I still can't get it to work) take much longer and making every look and work the way I want to is hard (or impossible with the latest Ubuntu's on a 1024x600 netbook display)

I have used Beos in the past and it was fast and beautiful and lacked any security and multi-user and 10 years later Haiku isn't much better (and hardware support......hahahahaha)

I can get work done on Linux and Windows, but not on any other OS. And given that hardware support is task 1 for an OS and Linux still fails on that (again, on many different types of hardware over a 15 year period) I keep being disappointed. I love the Open Source philosophy but am still choosing to run lots of closed source productivity tools on a closed source OS because it just .... is more productive. And since I can use so many Open Source programs on Windows anyway AND there isn't much that I am missing on Windows it is working fine

....but I am a geek that loves trying new stuff and with Linux there is new stuff to try out every couple of months while with Windows things come in major waves

Reply Score: 1

RE[2]: Well, it looks nice...
by Dave_K on Thu 17th Nov 2011 16:41 UTC in reply to "RE: Well, it looks nice..."
Dave_K Member since:
2005-11-16

That mirrors my experiences with Linux almost perfectly, right down to Redhat 5 being my first distribution.

I must have installed 50 different Linux distributions on 20 different computers without it ever working perfectly. Admittedly quite a few of those were laptops (I've spent 30+ hours just trying to get Linux working well on my Thinkpad), but even the generic desktops always have issues that need fixing, or hardware that simply isn't supported.

About 95% of my computing time is spent using Windows, but easily 95% of the time I spend researching and solving problems is down to Linux. It's interesting that Linux just works for some people, but that's a completely alien experience to me.

I'm enthusiastic enough that I don't mind wasting some time playing with Linux when a new distribution catches my interest (I'll probably give OpenSUSE 12.1 a try later and see how far I get), but I'm glad to have an easy to use OS like Windows available when Linux gets frustrating and I don't want the hassle.

Reply Score: 2

RE[3]: Well, it looks nice...
by jessesmith on Thu 17th Nov 2011 20:29 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Well, it looks nice..."
jessesmith Member since:
2010-03-11

I think that's interesting. My experience has been almost exactly the opposite to yours. My Linux installs, at least the big-name distributions, typically "just work". On the other hand, I'm constantly trying to fix or correct things on Windows. I imagine hardware accounts for a lot of the difference.

At any rate, I'm trying out openSUSE 12.1 now and it's been a solid experience thus far. If you hardware is compatible, I suspect you will enjoy it.

Reply Score: 2

RE[3]: Well, it looks nice...
by unclefester on Fri 18th Nov 2011 07:11 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Well, it looks nice..."
unclefester Member since:
2007-01-13


I must have installed 50 different Linux distributions on 20 different computers without it ever working perfectly. Admittedly quite a few of those were laptops (I've spent 30+ hours just trying to get Linux working well on my Thinkpad), but even the generic desktops always have issues that need fixing, or hardware that simply isn't supported.


You must be the world's unluckiest person! /sarc.

No one else seems to have the same mysterious hardware problems on generic desktop hardware - at least not in the last decade.

Reply Score: 3

RE[4]: Well, it looks nice...
by avgalen on Fri 18th Nov 2011 08:57 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Well, it looks nice..."
avgalen Member since:
2010-09-23

What a nonsense. In this thread alone somebody mentions that his wifi doesn't work, I mention that I have had problems on lots of different hardware and the poster you replied to mentions that he is having problems as well. But YOU decide that none of that happens anymore since the last decade.

I am going to try OpenSuse tonight on 2 of my machines, a 1.5 year old netbook (Asus Eee PC 1005PE) and a brandnew Dell 6520. Let's see how much of the hardware will be supported and how much won't be.

I will also make it easy for the installers. I will start with the Windows Partitions already present but if they have problems with setting up a multi-boot I will allow them to entirely take over the harddisk

fingers crossed, weekend starts in 8 hours and I am feeling geeky

Reply Score: 1

RE[5]: Well, it looks nice...
by unclefester on Fri 18th Nov 2011 10:22 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: Well, it looks nice..."
unclefester Member since:
2007-01-13

What a nonsense. In this thread alone somebody mentions that his wifi doesn't work, I mention that I have had problems on lots of different hardware and the poster you replied to mentions that he is having problems as well. But YOU decide that none of that happens anymore since the last decade.


Try reading what I said before commenting.

I said that generic desktop hardware doesn't have a problem.

Reply Score: 2

RE[6]: Well, it looks nice...
by avgalen on Fri 18th Nov 2011 17:26 UTC in reply to "RE[5]: Well, it looks nice..."
avgalen Member since:
2010-09-23

And I said that a Compaq Deskpro didn't work and neither did an Asus Netbook and an IBM Thinkpad was mentioned as well. Please define generic.

I will repeat it one more time: OUT OF THE BOX Windows might or might not support the hardware, but there is always a driver-cd, windows update driver or a driver on the manufacturers website so you WILL get ALL your hardware working.
OUT OF THE BOX Linux might or might not support the hardware, by searching online or adding alternative repositories (binary drivers) you can add some more driver support but I have NEVER gotten ALL hardware working

Reply Score: 1

default linux file system?
by Bill Shooter of Bul on Thu 17th Nov 2011 04:32 UTC
Bill Shooter of Bul
Member since:
2006-07-14

No. There really isn't one. I think you meant " one most chose by desktop/server GNU/Linux distros to be the default". We've gone from EXT2 to Reiser 3 to Ext3 to XFS to Ext4, as the sweet spot moves for different situations. BTRFS looks good, but the benchmarks have yet to catch up to ext4 for most tests. Sure it has some compelling features which will make it nice for some applications, but a "default" would have to be best for most situations. Which BTRFS is defiantly not right now and to reach that might require some compromise for other io workloads. You just never really know where one is headed performance wise, until it reaches production level readiness and people start relying on certain performance quirks.

Reply Score: 4

RE: default linux file system?
by lemur2 on Thu 17th Nov 2011 05:05 UTC in reply to "default linux file system?"
lemur2 Member since:
2007-02-17

No. There really isn't one. I think you meant " one most chose by desktop/server GNU/Linux distros to be the default". We've gone from EXT2 to Reiser 3 to Ext3 to XFS to Ext4, as the sweet spot moves for different situations. BTRFS looks good, but the benchmarks have yet to catch up to ext4 for most tests. Sure it has some compelling features which will make it nice for some applications, but a "default" would have to be best for most situations. Which BTRFS is defiantly not right now and to reach that might require some compromise for other io workloads. You just never really know where one is headed performance wise, until it reaches production level readiness and people start relying on certain performance quirks.


When I installed OpenSuse on a test machine, it found the existing Linux partitions, and it even figured out whhich should be root and which should be /home. It kept /home unchanged, re-formatted / but kept it as ext4, and it found the Windows 7 partitions and worked out which was which, and suggested a mount point /windows/C for the correct C: drive partition.

The defaults were absolutely spot on for me, I didn't have to touch a thing when the installation came to disk partitioning and formatting.

Reply Score: 1

RE[2]: default linux file system?
by silviucc on Fri 18th Nov 2011 08:07 UTC in reply to "RE: default linux file system?"
silviucc Member since:
2009-12-05

Oh it's not that spot on. I have 4 HDDs on my system. A few of them are home to Linux distros. The installer has a mind of it own and won't let me create my own partitioning scheme even if I tell it I want to.

If I go into manual partitioning mode and choose to edit a mount point like /boot it says it's already taken cause, well cause it used it when it suggested the partitioning scheme.

It also insists to install GRUB on /dev/sda even it I want it on /dev/sdc and I'm perfectly fine with choosing to boot from that disk when starting my system and pressing F8 but SuSE won't let me. WTF?!

Reply Score: 1

RE[3]: default linux file system?
by blitze on Sun 20th Nov 2011 06:45 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: default linux file system?"
blitze Member since:
2006-09-15

Yeap, YAST was pathetic with my wanting to install on a partition I had made from my laptop system drive. Wouldn't write anything so I make 3 partitions from Windows and then when it comes time to install GRUB, No joy there either.

I can't remember any other distro I have tried being so helpless in drive management. Just wanting to install Suse in a dual boot config with Windows 7 on my laptop but... Not happening. As for RTFM, go jump - if this requires time and hurdles for the computer literate to deal with then you have lost your cause and user base.

Reply Score: 2

RE: default linux file system?
by stabbyjones on Thu 17th Nov 2011 05:31 UTC in reply to "default linux file system?"
stabbyjones Member since:
2008-04-15

No. There really isn't one. I think you meant " one most chose by desktop/server GNU/Linux distros to be the default". We've gone from EXT2 to Reiser 3 to Ext3 to XFS to Ext4, as the sweet spot moves for different situations. BTRFS looks good, but the benchmarks have yet to catch up to ext4 for most tests. Sure it has some compelling features which will make it nice for some applications, but a "default" would have to be best for most situations. Which BTRFS is defiantly not right now and to reach that might require some compromise for other io workloads. You just never really know where one is headed performance wise, until it reaches production level readiness and people start relying on certain performance quirks.


I've gone from ext2, to ext3 to ext4, Seems pretty sane to me.

Ext2 was released the same year as NTFS and there have been 5 versions of that since it was released.

BTRFS can't even fsck yet so i wouldn't worry about it defaulting on distros yet.

Reply Score: 2

RE: default linux file system?
by Lennie on Thu 17th Nov 2011 14:21 UTC in reply to "default linux file system?"
Lennie Member since:
2007-09-22

What major distribution has selected anything else than ext4 as their default currently ?

I think Oracle announced they would make btrfs their new default (soon). But to call Oracle's Linux a major distribution is probably stretching the thruth.

Here is what Google choose for their filesystem to store all their data (they also employ the creator and some other developers of ext4):

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wp5Ehw7ByuU

hint: it was ext4 without journaling

Reply Score: 2

Bill Shooter of Bul Member since:
2006-07-14

Part of the point I was trying to make is that Linux is a kernel that is used in Desktops and Servers along with a mostly standardised Gnu tool chain, but also in many different embedded scenarios.

There obviously can't be an official default for all of linux, as there isn't a single body that can speak for all of linux. So the only way something ends up being a defacto default is by its own merits. And BTRFS has not yet merited defacto default status, and I question if it ever will.

But for the pedantic among us, here is a review of the default File systems found on Linux Distros:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_Linux_distributions#Tech...

Reply Score: 2

openSUSE Better Than Ubuntu
by howardfci on Thu 17th Nov 2011 07:10 UTC
howardfci
Member since:
2011-06-04

While Ubuntu flails around with drastic changes -- some good, many bad -- openSUSE just keeps on trucking. A few well-thought-out improvements and solid work on fixes. Thank you, openSUSE!

Reply Score: 3

RE: openSUSE Better Than Ubuntu
by SustainedHavoc on Thu 17th Nov 2011 08:59 UTC in reply to "openSUSE Better Than Ubuntu"
SustainedHavoc Member since:
2011-09-15

I truly wish I could figure out why I hate Unity SO much, when I used and enjoyed Ubuntu for so long. Those very changes drove me to move to Mint, and I'll never go back. OpenSUSE was a pleasant surprise to try, and I'll be using both now.
Unlike so many complain, the mainstream distros have become a Windows user's dream, really plug-n-play stuff and unless you really want to change things up no need to dally in command line. If you just want them to work, they just work.

Reply Score: 5

Comment by OSbunny
by OSbunny on Thu 17th Nov 2011 07:36 UTC
OSbunny
Member since:
2009-05-23

I am using OpenSUSE 11.4 and it's still not stable enough on my machine. I keep getting problems after resuming from hibernation. So I won't be upgrading to 12.1 any time soon. I will wait until it's been through a few months of bug fixes.

Almost all desktop Linux distros seem to suffer from bugs which is sad because there was a time when Linux on the desktop was touted as being more stable than Windows. It's no longer the case I'm afraid. If you want stability you have to go with an outdated server distro like CentOS.

Reply Score: 1

Colour Management
by daedalus on Thu 17th Nov 2011 09:09 UTC
daedalus
Member since:
2011-01-14

Very interesting, since colour management is something which forces me to still use Windows. I've never managed to get it working properly under Ubuntu LTS and Gnome... I must give it a try and see how it fares in that department. Does anyone know how well CUPS deals with printer colour profiles, if at all? I never even got that far...

Reply Score: 1

RHEL6 clones are today's best option...
by Caraibes on Thu 17th Nov 2011 11:30 UTC
Caraibes
Member since:
2007-08-06

You should try Gnome 2 with RHEL 6 clones such as Scientific Linux 6 or CentOS 6... I am very happy with it on the laptop...

Reply Score: 2

v One word...
by antik on Thu 17th Nov 2011 12:26 UTC
RE: One word...
by daedalus on Thu 17th Nov 2011 14:18 UTC in reply to "One word..."
daedalus Member since:
2011-01-14

I'm probably just feeding the troll here, but anyway...

Have you considered the possibility that the OpenSUSE installer might be quite different to that of the basic installation you carried out to get your certificate? I'm not saying you're computer illiterate, but I know people with driving licences who are rubbish drivers, or don't know what all the buttons do in their car. It could also be some sort of issue with some funky Dell hardware in that XPS.

Anyway, it's probably a little early to be shouting FAIL at the distro, if some other likelihoods haven't been ruled out first...

Reply Score: 1

RE: One word...
by avgalen on Thu 17th Nov 2011 16:42 UTC in reply to "One word..."
avgalen Member since:
2010-09-23

Many of your points are valid, but this one is absurd:
"Autopartitioning shrinked my old windows ntfs partition- nay I want TO DELETE IT dumbass"
If you think that the default value of an auto partitioner should be to delete partitions then I know who the dumbass really is

Could you imagine how many support calls that would give? "I wanted to try this new distro and now all my previous data is gone"

Reply Score: 1

Comment by bolomkxxviii
by bolomkxxviii on Thu 17th Nov 2011 12:33 UTC
bolomkxxviii
Member since:
2006-05-19

I've been using linux since the days of Corel linux. Suse is one distro I have never been able to use since I was never able to get all the hardware working regardless of which machine I installed it on. Debian, Mandrake and Redhat either had no problems or had problems easy to solve. I may try once again with this new distro but I am not holding my breath.

Reply Score: 1

RE: Comment by bolomkxxviii
by ricegf on Thu 17th Nov 2011 13:31 UTC in reply to "Comment by bolomkxxviii"
ricegf Member since:
2007-04-25

And I still have my Corel Linux beanie baby sitting on my desk. You'll get an old man reminiscing here if you aren't careful! ;-)

Reply Score: 2

here's a suggestion
by unclefester on Fri 18th Nov 2011 10:26 UTC
unclefester
Member since:
2007-01-13

Here's a suggestion for those idiots who can't get their Linux to work.

RTFM


If your hardware isn't supported don't waste your time downloading and installing the distro.

It is that fscking simple.

Reply Score: 1

RE: here's a suggestion
by antik on Fri 18th Nov 2011 10:44 UTC in reply to "here's a suggestion"
antik Member since:
2006-05-19

"Here's a suggestion for those idiots who can't get their Linux to work.

RTFM"

OK, let's assume that I am an idiot. BUT why on same hardware Ubuntu works and OpenSUSE fail?

Debian works
FreeBSD works
OpenBSD works
Windows XP works
Windows Vista works
Windows 7 works

And where are those magical SuSE FUcking manuals that I must read before installing on perfectly working and everywhere supported notebook?

Reply Score: 3

RE[2]: here's a suggestion
by unclefester on Fri 18th Nov 2011 10:57 UTC in reply to "RE: here's a suggestion"
unclefester Member since:
2007-01-13

And where are those magical SuSE f--king manuals that I must read before installing on perfectly working and everywhere supported notebook?


a) Try reading the Openuse HCL before installing.

b) Submit a bug report.

c) Stop complaining about something you got for free.

Edited 2011-11-18 10:59 UTC

Reply Score: 2

RE[3]: here's a suggestion
by antik on Fri 18th Nov 2011 11:09 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: here's a suggestion"
antik Member since:
2006-05-19

"You get something for free and then complain if it doesn't support every bit of hardware.

Here's some suggestions.

a) Buy a netbook that supports Linux (they exist).

b) Write your own fucking drivers.

c) Stop complaining."

Am I complaining? NOO I am telling that OpenSuse sucks ass because developers fucked up standard Intel 945 drivers that works on every other Linux distribution and BSD.

Back to BSD folks.

Reply Score: 4

RE: here's a suggestion
by Dave_K on Fri 18th Nov 2011 11:37 UTC in reply to "here's a suggestion"
Dave_K Member since:
2005-11-16



RTFM


If your hardware isn't supported don't waste your time downloading and installing the distro.


Even after researching what is and isn't compatible, it isn't always obvious whether a particular Linux distribution will work properly or not, let alone how much hassle it'll be to get it fully functional.

For example, my Thinkpad was listed as Linux compatible, but many things just didn't work after installing Mint.

Suspending to RAM initially seemed to function, until I tried to wake the laptop and nothing happened. Hibernating to disk didn't even get that far, simply crashing the system when activated. Even after spending a week getting power management more-or-less working there were still issues (i.e. compared with Windows the laptop runs hotter and noisier, and drains much more power even while asleep).

All the laptop specific features needed manual configuration after installation. For example, some of the special keyboard buttons didn't function, and while the trackpoint worked as a basic pointing device, some features still don't work properly after hours of research and config file editing. This is stuff that could be sorted out with a couple of clicks in a control panel in Windows.

After all that work Linux is just about usable on the laptop (I guess the people who reported it as compatible are happy with it like that), but it still doesn't work as well as Windows does. Maybe it's possible to fix the remaining issues, but when the suggestion for my power management problems is to compile a custom kernel (that may or may not work) it does dent my enthusiasm a bit.

Even with the desktop computers it wasn't obvious just from RTFM that not everything would work. For example, one problem with my main PC is that my E-mu sound card doesn't work properly. Again some people seem to have managed to get this working, there have been drivers written for it, but on my installation I get serious sound glitches.

On my secondary PC the only problem is that USB 2 doesn't work. Of course Linux can support USB 2, but for some reason on that system I'm stuck with USB 1.1 speed. When a quick search didn't turn up a solution I didn't have any incentive to waste more time trying to solve it.

There have always been at least some little issues like that on every desktop I've used with Linux. Of course that's nothing compared with the problems I've had trying to install Linux on laptops, but it still means time spent solving problems, or money spent replacing hardware.

Reply Score: 3

in summary
by unclefester on Fri 18th Nov 2011 10:47 UTC
unclefester
Member since:
2007-01-13

The topic so far. Linux is a piece of shite because:

a) It doesn't support my obscure bit of hardware.

RTFM. If the hardware isn't supported don't try and install Linux.

Guess what. Windows out of the box has basically zero hardware support. To run Windows you need to download drivers.

b) Linux can't autodetect my four separate disks with 27 partitions and six different distros properly.

Ever heard of a virtual machine?

c) Linux didn't set up my partitions the way I wanted.

The installer isn't a fscking mind reader. You usually need to manually partition using something like Gparted for an unusual setup.

d) My distro is unstable.

Don't use the latest bleeding edge distro if you want stability.

e) Linux won't play my .wmv encoded porn.

Why are you using Fedora or Opensuse?

Reply Score: 4

RE: in summary
by silviucc on Fri 18th Nov 2011 17:36 UTC in reply to "in summary"
silviucc Member since:
2009-12-05

Dude, i never said it failed to detect anything. It found partitions just fine. I was complaining about the fact that even if I chose to do my own partitioning, the installer would not let me assign mount points because it had assigned those earlier, while it was being "smart"

I would have expected it to "unset" anything it had set and let me do my own thing.

I was also complaining that it would not let me set the drive where I wanted (while still being in manual partitioning mode) to install GRUB. It wanted to go to /dev/sda and that's that.

Also, a virtual machine is not an option. If I want to test how well stuff runs under say, Crossover Games, I would not get very far now, would I.

PS: Any idea on why the heck it assumes that my machine time is in UTC even though the checkbox for this option is not checked ?

Yeah, I know,I did not RTFM...

Strange how some distros manage to make installing fast and almost idiot proof while still allowing for flexibility when it is needed and some make you fight them even while attempting installation. Must be a "for the pros thing".

Reply Score: 2

RE: in summary
by avgalen on Fri 18th Nov 2011 17:38 UTC in reply to "in summary"
avgalen Member since:
2010-09-23

a) No, we are not complaining that OBSCURE pieces of hardware aren't working. We are complaining that perfectly normal and common pieces of hardware aren't working (Intel ICH5R comes to mind immediately, Intel 945 on Suse was mentioned). But most importantly, we are complaining that hardware that IS working on Windows is NOT working on Linux.
[copy/paste]I will repeat it one more time: OUT OF THE BOX Windows might or might not support the hardware, but there is always a driver-cd, windows update driver or a driver on the manufacturers website so you WILL get ALL your hardware working.
OUT OF THE BOX Linux might or might not support the hardware, by searching online or adding alternative repositories (binary drivers) you can add some more driver support but I have NEVER gotten ALL hardware working

b/c) No, the complaint wasn't that the installer couldn't partition 27 partitions according to what he had in his mind. The complaint was that the installer crashed in several modes and when it finally wanted to work it messed up the partitioning!

d) don't mark a product as final when it isn't stable

e) so I can download and watch porn without having to be afraid of viruses ;)

Reply Score: 1

RE[2]: in summary
by unclefester on Fri 18th Nov 2011 21:07 UTC in reply to "RE: in summary"
unclefester Member since:
2007-01-13

How can you possibly blame Linux because Intel doesn't provide drivers?

Reply Score: 2

RE[3]: in summary
by avgalen on Fri 18th Nov 2011 21:49 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: in summary"
avgalen Member since:
2010-09-23

I am not blaming Linux, I am just trying to use it, seeing that my hardware doesn't work, trying to find some way to make it work and eventually have to give up on Linux.
This isn't a matter of blaming Linux. It is a matter of "too bad, doesn't work on my hardware, back to Windows".

and Intel IS making drivers for lots of their hardware. They also DID make drivers for the ICH5R and Linux and then the kernel changed so much that "softraid" basically became impossible. Not going to go through that piece of history now but it wasn't pretty. Intel also did make drivers for the 945 but as somebody mentioned they work on some dists, but not on others

Reply Score: 2

nice improvements...
by csynt on Fri 18th Nov 2011 20:53 UTC
csynt
Member since:
2006-03-19

I am glad to see that a lot of things are working *perfect* on OpenSUSE 12.1 (my setup is KDE4/ x64)
examples:

* Bluetooth can send/receive files from Android mobile.
(under KDE only.. gnome/xfce cannot.. (x64 versions))
* Native drivers for my Laser printer (samsung SCX-3200)
* Xsane recognizes the scanner (the above printer) (something that DID NOT work under Fedora16-x64 !!!)

very good and serious work there!

Reply Score: 1

how many of you donate
by unclefester on Fri 18th Nov 2011 21:15 UTC
unclefester
Member since:
2007-01-13

I would be very interested to discover how many of the people complaining here about Linux ever donate money to any FOSS project.

IMHO complaining (as distinct from constructive criticism) about FOSS software is extremely disrespectful to those companies and individuals who go to the expense and effort of providing you something for nothing.

I have never expected Linux to be be bug free. I have never expected it to support a wide range of hardware.

If you want a good Linux experience you need to think before you act. You need to buy fully supported hardware. You need to choose your distro carefully.

Edited 2011-11-18 21:16 UTC

Reply Score: 2

RE: how many of you donate
by avgalen on Fri 18th Nov 2011 23:05 UTC in reply to "how many of you donate"
avgalen Member since:
2010-09-23

I have bought CD's for RedHat in the past, about 60 Dollar or so. I have send money to many of the free programs that I use (VLC, Total Commander, IrfanView) and never cared if they were free, gratis or FOSS. Companies that I have worked for have payed money and contributed to Apache and either JBOSS or TomCat (can't remember anymore)

I complain about things when they aren't good, sometimes I offer my time to help improve them (testing), sometimes I just file bugreports and sometimes I just bitch about things to my friends. Just because something is gratis doesn't mean I lose the right to mention things that are not working correctly and I am surely not doing it in a disrespectful way. So far I have gotten a lot more disrespect in this thread from others and not 1 single piece of advice other than "buy hardware that is supported by Linux".

I already have hardware and it is very expensive and troublesome to replace. And I mostly use laptops so I don't have much influence on the exact components. But as long as I run Windows everything has always worked and whenever I use Linux there is always 1 or more things that I can't get to work. These are cold hard facts. The most basic function of an OS is too support the hardware! Windowmanagers are optional, hardware support isn't

Reply Score: 1

RE[2]: how many of you donate
by unclefester on Sun 20th Nov 2011 07:00 UTC in reply to "RE: how many of you donate"
unclefester Member since:
2007-01-13

The only reason Windows "just works" is because the various hardware manufacturers provide the drivers.

You can't blame Linux if manufacturers won't write drivers or provide documentation for FOSS drivers.

Try and run any non-approved hardware on a Mac. You will really have something to complain about.

Reply Score: 2

RE[3]: how many of you donate
by ggeldenhuys on Sun 20th Nov 2011 09:42 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: how many of you donate"
ggeldenhuys Member since:
2006-11-13

+1
You hit the nail on the head. The problem comes down to the Vendors, not to the people that write the OS. But even saying so, Linux devs have done a brillant job supporting masses of hardware, often without any help from the Vendor of that hardware!

Reply Score: 2

RE[3]: how many of you donate
by Dave_K on Sun 20th Nov 2011 16:01 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: how many of you donate"
Dave_K Member since:
2005-11-16

You can't blame Linux if manufacturers won't write drivers or provide documentation for FOSS drivers.


It's a shame that some hardware manufacturers don't even offer documentation to Linux developers, but I don't think it's reasonable to expect them to produce drivers for a tiny market like desktop Linux. Things would probably change if Linux ever reached a 5-10% desktop market share.

I don't think anyone here has disputed the reasons behind Windows' superior hardware support. Unfortunately, allocating blame for Linux's issues doesn't change the user experience of installing and configuring it. As a user what matters to me is which OS works best on the hardware I use, regardless of the reasons for that.

Reply Score: 2

disappointed by all distros
by Jason Bourne on Sat 19th Nov 2011 01:25 UTC
Jason Bourne
Member since:
2007-06-02

Today I just bit the bullet.
Installed ARCH and carefully installed Xorg, gnome-shell and I have spent 2 hours tweaking the system. From today, I expect no longer to make another installation again unless someone distro takes the lead on stability.

Both Kubuntu with KDE and Fedora with gnome-shell sported major huge crashes on me. So far ARCH is doing fast.

PackageKit works really well under GNOME 3.

My wife will life with fallback mode from now on.

Edited 2011-11-19 01:26 UTC

Reply Score: 2

Not Bad
by AnythingButVista on Sun 20th Nov 2011 21:28 UTC
AnythingButVista
Member since:
2008-08-27

I installed OpenSuSE 12.1 last night and for the most part, I liked what I see. The biggest fault came in the installation of the bootloader. If you'd rather keep the Windows 7 bootloader and have OpenSuSE's bootloader installed on its "/" partition, YaST will do that, but will also kill the MBR, leaving you with an unbootable system. You'll need a Windows 7 repair disc to restore the Windows bootloader, then you can add OpenSuSE to the boot menu using a BCD editing tool.

Other than that, their repositories seem a bit limited in available software. Packages easily found in Ubuntu, and even Mandriva are missing in OpenSuSE.

Reply Score: 1