Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 19th Apr 2010 13:10 UTC
Linux We all know Synaptics, the company that seems to produce just about every touchpad you can get your hands fingers on. Their touchpads also do a lot of multitouch and gesture stuff, but up until now, their set of gestures, the Synaptics Gesture Suite, was only available on Windows. Luckily, they've ported it over to Linux, and made it available for OEMs building Linux laptops.
Thread beginning with comment 419972
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[4]: Comment by spinnekopje
by bornagainenguin on Tue 20th Apr 2010 23:48 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Comment by spinnekopje"
bornagainenguin
Member since:
2005-08-07

spiderman declared...

That is because you purchased a computer for Windows and tried installing linux on it.


I'm sorry, but that's a bad assumption on your part.

I have an ASUS eeepc 901L, the L stands for Linux and my eeepc came with Xandros installed. The hardware should be completely supported then, right? I mean, it has Linux in the name, right?

Not so much... First off the Xandros installed was the same version in use on the 701 models, which ran an entirely different processor! Skipping past the whole issue of how quickly ASUS dropped support for their Linux models once Microsoft made them an offer they couldn't refuse...I quickly installed Ubuntu Hardy 8.04 on the netbook and made use of the community provided kernel put together by Adam McDaniel. That lasted until Jaunty 9.04, where upon he declared there was now sufficient support in the native kernel and we should all use that.

Except the drivers Ralink released aren't free enough, so they were quickly yanked and now I am unable to get a good WiFi connection on my eeepc without running an increasingly depreciated and duct-taped older versions of Ubuntu. The drivers are available on the Ralink site, if I follow the instructions I can have a working WiFi that will work quite well--until there is a kernel update and once again I have to fiddle with the whole make make install thing again. I couldn't do it at all if it weren't for instructions on the Ubuntu Forums...

Then there's the whole loveliness that was the Intel drivers fiasco. I specifically got a laptop with Intel video because I wanted to have good Linux support, cleanly in the kernel without having to have binary blobs... For years the community said "Give us the specs and we'll write the drivers ourselves!" and so Intel obliged them. And before you even try to deflect, I do not have a poulsbo chipset, I have an Intel 945GSE, which should have been supported by now. Yet I suffered the regression there and across every distro that wasn't using alpha quality drivers rushed out the door early.

Those are just two examples of the issues I've had on this "Linux netbook" that I researched ahead of time and confirmed all hardware was working at the time of purchase. I just didn't anticipate the kernel developers and the distro makers working so diligently to break compatibility after the fact...

--bornagainpenguin

PS: I am hardly the only one who has purchased hardware known to work with Linux and be "Linux compatible" only to have that compatibility be broken at a later time. Ask yourself how many others simply walked away when their installs broke and never said anything beyond grousing "This Linux junk don't work!" and resolving not to waste their money on the "inferior copy" and to just buy Windows next time?

Edited 2010-04-20 23:51 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[5]: Comment by spinnekopje
by spiderman on Wed 21st Apr 2010 05:43 in reply to "RE[4]: Comment by spinnekopje"
spiderman Member since:
2008-10-23


I have an ASUS eeepc 901L, the L stands for Linux and my eeepc came with Xandros installed. The hardware should be completely supported then, right? I mean, it has Linux in the name, right?

I've got pentium 133 machine. It came with windows 95. So it should be compatible with Windows right? I mean it is sold with windows so it should be compatible right? Wrong! I tried to put Vista on it and nothing works! And do you remember the "vista compatible" logo? How has it worked out?
Your computer was compatible with the Xandros distro that came with it. It was not supposed to run Ubuntu. The vast majority of the people who bought this exact same model stick to the system that came installed with it. If you want to hack the system, it is at your own risk.

Reply Parent Score: 2

bornagainenguin Member since:
2005-08-07

spiderman retorted...

I have an ASUS eeepc 901L, the L stands for Linux and my eeepc came with Xandros installed. The hardware should be completely supported then, right? I mean, it has Linux in the name, right?

I've got pentium 133 machine. It came with windows 95. So it should be compatible with Windows right? I mean it is sold with windows so it should be compatible right?


Indeed it should be Windows compatible, with like systems within its system specifications. So by all means you should be able to update it to Windows 98, (although if you do might I recommend the wonderful 98Lite tool by Shane Brooks, or that you hunt down a copy of "Revenge of Mozilla" before you do so?) or even Windows NT 3.x to WIndows NT 4.0. If you wanted to run Windows 2000 on it you might be stressing things a bit, but if you check out Fred Vorck's site he can tell you how to create a disc without IE intergrated that will run much smoother for you.

I should know--my first computer was an 133mhz pentium! ;)

spiderman retorted...
Wrong! I tried to put Vista on it and nothing works!


Oh c'mon now! That's hardly comparing apples and apples! You're not even comparing apples and oranges here, this is more like trying to compare apples and watermelons! It doesn't fit!

If you simly must make a Windows analogy then the situation is more comparable to the switch-over from Windows XP to Windows XP SP2... Minor revisions of the same codebase that nevertheless left many people with broken systems or significantly reduced performance over driver issues. Or are you seriously going to try to argue that the upgrade from Ubuntu Hardy Heron 8.04.x to Ubuntu Karmic 9.10 is that huge of a leap it should be compared with going from Windows 95 to Vista?

Bear in mind that Ubuntu does not use version numbers, those are the month and year of the date of release...

Bear in mind also that this is hardware that is les than two years old, not hardware over a decade old...

Yeah...not exactly comparing apples and apples are we?

spiderman retorted...
And do you remember the "vista compatible" logo? How has it worked out?


What does that have to do with the price of a haircut in Taiwan? (I can make non sequiturs too!)

spiderman retorted...
Your computer was compatible with the Xandros distro that came with it. It was not supposed to run Ubuntu.


Your reading and comprehension skills leave something to be desired, as I said in my first post the version of Xandros that came with the eeepc 901 was the same version that came with the 701. The two devices came with different chipsets! The Xandros version on it was nearly useless as it was nearly impossible to add applications to its menus and would have been little more than a toy otherwise.

As it is I've been a happy Ubuntu user for nearly all of my two years with my eeepc, while there were some issues with powermanagement in the beginning Grigori Goronzy's eee-control swiftly fixed things there, as did the aforementioned array.org kernel from Adam McDaniel. No, it may have come with Xandros, but it was sold as a Linux machine. I know that I and many others' attraction to the eeepc wasn't just in its tiny size, or its wonderful battery life (still getting about five hours or more on a single charge here!) but also on the fact it did not come with the Microsoft tax.

spiderman spouted...
The vast majority of the people who bought this exact same model stick to the system that came installed with it.


Actually the vast majority of those who bought the model I did are using either some form of Linux (ArchLinux, Ubuntu, Mandriva, Debian, etc all the majors seem to be represented) or have installed Windows XP or higher on their eeepcs. A small majority have put on a version of OSX86 after replacing the SSD that came with the system. There are some who choose to run with Xandros, but even of those who do, they run an updated version of the distro maintained by the community, not the abandonned and bitrotted version that came out of the box.

spiderman trolled...
If you want to hack the system, it is at your own risk.


What?? Now installing Linux on a netbook is hacking???

Okay, good one. I see that I've fed you quite a bit with these posts by taking you seriously. My bad. I'll try not to feed the trolls next time...

--bornagainpenguin

PS: I notice you didnt bother to address any of my main points in my earlier post, but I guess that's par for the course when dealing with a troll.

EDIT: fixed hanging quote x2

Edited 2010-04-21 15:08 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 2