Linked by Thom Holwerda on Thu 5th Jul 2007 09:11 UTC, submitted by Tim Alson
Hardware, Embedded Systems Dell has taken the unusual step - for a PC vendor of its size - of toning down its sales pitch for Microsoft's Vista operating system and warning businesses of the migration challenges that lie ahead for them. The step is particularly unusual because one of the issues the hardware vendor is warning business about is the extra hardware they will need to buy.
Thread beginning with comment 253222
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
cyclops
Member since:
2006-03-12

"First of all, GNU has nothing at all to do with Linux drivers. Secondly, I wasn't arguing that Linux does not in fact solve all the worlds problems, or that vista is not in fact, the anti-christ. "

The only thing you can say is the "FSF" hasn't done a lot of code in GNU's kernel, and it hasn't. I am not talking about a kernel. I'm talking about the OS.

The only think you are arguing is that Vista's still being in beta, and having poor hardware support is excusable, which its not. You say its not the fault of Microsoft and *try* and use Gnu's kernel as an example of poor hardware support when Gnu has both excellent hardware support even with limited access to hardware; 70,000 employees, Billions in the bank...and lets face it being a Monopolistic OS.

You continue by perpetuating the lie that on Linux you have to *compile* stuff to get things working in the kernel, and you lie that common devices don't have support under Gnu.

Edited 2007-07-05 20:44

Reply Parent Score: 3

google_ninja Member since:
2006-02-05

The only thing you can say is the "FSF" hasn't done a lot of code in GNU's kernel, and it hasn't. I am not talking about a kernel. I talking about an OS.


The GNU kernel is called Herd, and it has been in development for so long it has kind of become a joke. And you were talking about a kernel, because we were discussing Linux's driver model. For someone who is such a huge fan of Linux, you really need to get your facts straight.

The only think you are arguing is that Vista's still being in beta, and having poor hardware support is excusable, which its not. You say its not the fault of Microsoft and *try* and use Gnu's kernel as an example of poor hardware support when Gnu has both excellent hardware support even with limited access to hardware; 70,000 employees, Billions in the bank...and lets face it being a Monopolistic OS.


I didnt argue anything about Vista. I am not talking about vista. I am talking about using a HAL for everything as opposed to having drivers run in kernel space. I didn't say it had poor hardware support, I listed several common types of devices that linux devs have had trouble supporting through no fault of their own.

Please do a better job reading my posts before flaming me.

You continue by perpetuating the lie that on Linux you have to *compile* stuff to get things working in the kernel, and you lie that common devices don't have support under Gnu.


Binaries don't magically compile themselves, they have to come from somewhere. In the OSS world, the source is there so it is no problem, in the commercial world, that task is placed on individual vendors.

As for common devices, it is hard enough to reverse engineer hardware you dont have specs for. It is insanely hard when half the processing is done on the hardware, the other half is done with software which is embedded in the drivers, as is the case with the stuff I mentioned.

Reply Parent Score: 2

cyclops Member since:
2006-03-12

"The GNU kernel is called Herd, and it has been in development for so long it has kind of become a joke. And you were talking about a kernel, because we were discussing Linux's driver model. For someone who is such a huge fan of Linux, you really need to get your facts straight. "

I think your talking about "Hurd". http://www.gnu.org/software/hurd/hurd.html and If the kernel was the *only* part of the *modular* operating system I use. You might have a point, unlike Vista users I have a *choice* between kernels, based on my *my* requirements. I simply chose one that comes under a GNU license. That just happens to be the best.

I am perfectly willing to discuss the Open development development model that attracted Linus to use the Gnu License in the first place over choosing a more proprietary License but you only seem interested in spreading lies about Gnu compatibility, and making poor excuses for Vista's shameful hardware support.

Binaries do come from somewhere, normally from what is know in the Gnu World as a Distribution, which in essence provides a bundled choice of a variety of applications; kernels; desktop etc etc, and normally includes a package manager to add your own. All the main Distributions OpenBSD; Ubuntu; Fedora; Novell etc come in binary form. Open source just allows you see the source, but it does not mean you have to compile it yourself. In fact these distributions are made up of Free software as well, this does not mean you don't have to pay for it, but means you can run, copy, distribute, study, change the code. It does not force you to do things however. They also include applications *only* available in binary form.

Often hardware specifications are *available*; Work on Gnu's kernel is predominately done by companies(read commercial) with Hobbiests only producing 3.5% of the work. Please to not lie about its development. In fact you should support those companies that, support open-source, becuase it improves *your* chance of this hardware having continued support in future, continuous improvements; compatibility etc etc. Otherwise you end up with major regressions or your hardware not being supported at all like under Vista.

Edited 2007-07-05 21:34

Reply Parent Score: 1