Linked by Thom Holwerda on Sun 1st Mar 2009 17:26 UTC, submitted by kaiwai
Hardware, Embedded Systems Long-time OSNews reader Kaiwai has written down his experiences with his Acer Aspire One, Linux, and Windows. He concludes: "After a hectic few weeks trying to get Linux to work, I am back to square one again - a netbook running Windows XP SP3 as it was provided by Acer when I purchased it. I gave three different distributions a chance to prove themselves. I expected all three distributions to wipe the floor with Windows XP - after all, these are the latest and greatest distributions the Linux world have to offer. There has been at least 7 years since the release of Windows XP for Linux to catch up to Windows XP and from my experience with Linux on this said device - it has failed to step up to the plate when it was needed."
Thread beginning with comment 351426
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
segedunum
Member since:
2005-07-06

This is a complaint about Acer, not as you seem to imagine a complaint about "the Linux world".

Tut, tut. Stop blaming the manufacturer please. This is a complaint about the Linux world, and the complaint is that you cannot easily add hardware and software support to any distribution as easily as he has laid out there with the Windows alternative.

Why?

1. Desktop development is piss-poor in the Linux world as it is, and certainly with what some have chosen to use.

2. Getting third-party software available in a sane format is not possible on any distribution. This has nothing to do with a standard package format as manufacturers would do it if it was available in even one distribution.

3. Getting third-party software installed for an end user is a whole world of hurt unless it comes within a repository somewhere - if you're lucky.

I'm afraid this is not good enough.

Reply Parent Score: 2

moleskine Member since:
2005-11-05



1. Desktop development is piss-poor in the Linux world as it is, and certainly with what some have chosen to use.

2. Getting third-party software available in a sane format is not possible on any distribution. This has nothing to do with a standard package format as manufacturers would do it if it was available in even one distribution.

3. Getting third-party software installed for an end user is a whole world of hurt unless it comes within a repository somewhere - if you're lucky.

I'm afraid this is not good enough.


What do you mean by "third-party software"? One could argue that on Linux pretty well all software outside of, perhaps, the kernel and a tool chain is third-party software. A couple of examples, perhaps?

Maybe there is an element of horses for courses here. If a platform doesn't offer the software you require, then no need for a drama, just use another platform. Better to do that, surely, that get stuck with all the hype and a platform that doesn't do what you want.

The great thing here is that there's more than one platform. Poor software - exclude clearly flagged alphas, betas and suchlike - is the developers saying "Your time and convenience are worthless to us" to which the only answer unless you're a masochist is "No thanks and bog off".

Reply Parent Score: 2