OSNews

The article questioned the quality of linux drivers, not the quantity, and that's a valid point. I think the author did a decent job of clarifying the point with his examples.

Aside from the author's point about drivers not being able to support the full functionality of hardware, there is also the issue of drivers that become stale in the kernel because they have no maintainers and suffer regressions when other subsystems change in the kernel, in part due to the "we can change the internal API's at will" mentality of the devs. This is a point that Andrew Morton himself brought up, that many of the devs work on newer and sexier projects rather than the grunt work of maintaining the older stuff and the number of bugs and regressions is increasing because of that.

I commend the kernel devs and respect the work they have done with providing drivers, particularly when they require reverse-engineering, and I'm certainly grateful for the ability I have to run linux on most systems I install it on. That level of development support is something that is so far above my own ability to contribute towards that I won't dare judge. I also understand the challenges they have with hardware vendors not releasing specs, or not even having access to the hardware that users are requesting support for. Their challenges are going to become even more apparent as development efforts move towards things like power efficiency, which is difficult to implement without vendor support. So don't take this as condemnation of the effort and work the devs have done to this point, that's not my intent.

But pretending the problem doesn't exist doesn't make it go away. Yes, linux may support more hardware than Windows does, but Windows (and OSX) generally has better support for hardware than linux does. There is a difference. It's not criticism of linux or praise of Microsoft/Apple, just a reality that we need to figure out how to best address.

only place i have seen issues with lack of full feature support are in the area of video card drivers, and then its about stuff like built in tv out chips and similar.

thing is, thats mostly a Xorg issue, not a kernel issue, as its Xorg that does the desktop work.

and given that in windows and osx, the programmers of the drivers have full access to the docs of the hardware (if it exists. i have seen some horror stories that even the companies themselves use reverse engineering like techniques at times because the doc and the chip dont match at all when done) and therefor dont have do bothersome trial and error.

that linux, despite this, support as much hardware as it does, is impressive imo. and buts vista in a even worse light then before.

I think it's more applicable to state the following:

Linux supports a wide variety of hardware, and supports it well.

The more 'mainstream' hardware is what it has a hard time dealing with - such as full support for WiFi adapters, a multitude of web cameras, soft-printers/scanners/multi-function hardware.

Seriously - who uses EISA or VLB anymore? Linux driver development needs to get more mainstream if it's going to survive with new hardware that doesn't exist yet.

For crying out loud, my USB Missile Launcher NEEDS TO WORK FROM MY CUBICLE!

The "pack"? How do you define "the pack"? OSX and Vista? Is there some reason we should be content to aim for mediocrity? What's your agenda?

I'm wondering if you actually bothered to read the article. I didn't find it to be excessively negative at all, and I think the writer has good examples and valid points. What are we supposed to do, pretend this issue doesn't exist? Exploring the issue and honest criticism will only serve to make the Linux platform stronger. Sometimes it's hard to accept, but this isn't an arena for shrinking violets.

Lol seriously, show some numbers otherwise shutup. What you are saying is ridiculous. Windows has more market share (meaning more 3rd party developers want to develop for it) and in addition it doesnt require developers to open source drivers (i.e. there is a relatively stable ABI they can develop with against) again meaning they will want to produce drivers for Windows and less so for Linux. What I have said is just common sense.

No.

With Vista, Microsoft doesn't write the drivers. OEM's write the drivers.

Drivers for Windows XP and earlier, for the most part, don't work for Vista.

For any piece of hardware that has gone out of production before Vista release, there is no point in the OEM writing a driver for Vista for it. It is out of production ... the OEM won't make any more money out of it.

The driver is OEM proprietary. Microsoft couldn't write a Vista driver for it even if they wanted to.

Ergo, for most of the hardware in use, that had gone out of production prior to the release of Vista, there will likely never be a working driver for Vista for it.

This situation doesn't pertain to Linux. For the most part, Linux drivers aren't written by the OEM (exception being video cards, but even that is changing ... I am running an open source Radeon driver right now, for example).

In fact, I am running Kubuntu 64-bit. When I look at the "restricted drivers" system setting, it reports to me "Your system does not require any restricted drivers".

Virtually all drivers in Windows Vista are restricted drivers.

What is even more interesting is going to be the transition to 64-bit OS. Since Microsoft doesn't write the drivers, and most CDs that come with hardware do not include a Windows 64-bit driver, then the transition to 64-bits Windows is going to be even messier than the XP to Vista transition, when it comes to lack of drivers. It will be similar to the 16-bit Windows 3.1 to 32-bit Windows 95 transition all over again.

Once again, this situation doesn't pertain to Linux, which has the source code for most of it's drivers. For 64-bit Linux, it is mostly just a matter of a re-compile of the 32-bit driver. My own system is already a testament to that.

It is just common sense, really. It is always better to have the source code.



Lol. You seriously did not think that through, did you?

Edited 2007-10-28 09:55

You have no idea what you are talking about.

If a site such as "OSNews" were to simply hold different Operating Systems to the same standards of criticism, then I would be happy.

I never understood the idea that if someone likes Coke they have to put down Pepsi. No one is trashing Linux. Criticism such as this exists because people want to make Linux as good as possible. It's not always about Microsoft. if you don't like Vista, don't use it, but if you want Linux to succeed, then look at it's warts as well as its fine points and try to make it as accessable to as many people as possible.

Linux is already there. I am simply objecting to those with an agenda to try to make it appear as though it isn't.

Linux will succeed with or without me. It will succeed no matter what you or I say. It will succeed if barely anyone can see beyond the media advertising and hype and misdirection, and thereby escape from the Windows treadmill. Linux will succeed beyond all efforts to make it fail, or make it seem as though it is failing.

It is one of those "you can't fool all of the people all of the time" things, you see.

"I cannot see any point in criticizing Linux for an area where it actually leads the pack. There is a far wider variety of supported hardware and better quality drivers for Linux that there is for either OSX or Vista."

I agree with you as far as Vista goes, but OS X has no need to support the full range of hardware Linux and Windows needs to support, because OS X is not supposed to be used on anything other than Apple hardware. On Apple hardware, the supported devices usually work better than anything else you'll find, under any operating system.

Edited 2007-10-28 12:33

Not even. I have vista, and I dont think there are any linux drivers of better quality, except those put out by the manufacturer. There are oss drivers of comparable quality, but not better. My graphics card has half the features in linux and is twice as hard to configure (for example)

I totally dig it. Stuff like this really got my back up too.


What in the world do you want? Anything short of an article saying "Linux is perfection itself" is an attack to some people.

The problem is not quantity. Linux supports way more stuff out of the box, but that's not the point. The point is that if I find a device somewhere buried in my collection of computer crap, I'm 90% certain I can get it working on Windows XP, and about 80% sure I could get it working on Windows Vista [well, seeing my Vista laptop's battery and charger died, I won't get it running on Vista at all ]. I can just go to the manufacturer's website, and most likely, I can find a nice driver installer there et voilà.

With Linux, it's a hit and miss thing. If it isn't recognised by default, I'm kind of in trouble. There's a big chance the manufacturer's website won't list Linux as an option at all on their driver page, and even if they did, driver installation on Linux is STILL a total pain in the ass. You have to have the right module for your kernel type, load it in, set it up to load automatically, etc.

The first problem (the hit-and-miss situation) is not Linux' fault at all, of course. The Linux devs have done an amazing job at supporting all my modern hardware, but obviously, if device manufacturers don't help out, it's an ever continuing battle, with no end in sight.

The second problem (driver installation and kernel compatibility issues) is of course the full responsibility of Linus & Friends, and until they get this utter mess sorted out, the first problem will remain.



Ah the usual OSNews-eats-babies-and-kills-panda-bears accusation. Couldn't you have posted this at the beginning, so I wouldn't have had to waste my precious time on writing a reply?

Edited 2007-10-28 12:33 UTC

the most interesting thing is that one can often find that one driver under linux supports multiple hardware from many companies, because the chip itself comes from the same subcontractor.

so often one does not really need to find the driver at the company page. instead one hit the net and see if someone have id'd the chip used in hardware X.

and manually loading a driver? cant say i have done so in ages. my experience is that if the chip can be id'd, the driver will load on boot.

one may at times pass arguments to the driver tho. to get my onboard sound chip volume control working nicely with alsa i had to make snd-hda-intel see the model as generic. that way i read the info of the chip verbatim rather then try to apply some preset setup. sadly that generic option can be a hit or miss experience.

all in all i think the bigger issue is that people is to used to dance the windows way (hardware company for drivers, download.com and friends for programs) but thats not the linux dance, at all.

Edited 2007-10-28 14:48

Mmm, mmm - love that minced-words pie!

oh noes! Eugenia and Thom are out to single handedly destroy Linux's reputation by posting only articles criticizing it! They never post articles criticizing Windows or OSX or the BSDs!