Linked by Thom Holwerda on Wed 29th Aug 2012 22:52 UTC
Linux Miguel de Icaza: "To sum up: (a) First dimension: things change too quickly, breaking both open source and proprietary software alike; (b) incompatibility across Linux distributions. This killed the ecosystem for third party developers trying to target Linux on the desktop. You would try once, do your best effort to support the 'top' distro or if you were feeling generous 'the top three' distros. Only to find out that your software no longer worked six months later. Supporting Linux on the desktop became a burden for independent developers." Mac OS X came along to scoop up the Linux defectors.
Thread beginning with comment 533229
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[5]: Comment by woegjiub
by gilboa on Thu 30th Aug 2012 12:12 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: Comment by woegjiub"
gilboa
Member since:
2005-07-06

I didn't say that or claim it.


"We are talking about Drivers not your pet projects".

Oh well.

Your comments still aren't relevant to the topic, no matter our experience level with the Linux Kernel API.


Unlike *your* comment, my comment was right on the spot.
Somehow, there's a stupid notion that the lack stable *driver* API makes Linux far harder to support on *the desktop*, even though this claim have been called BS by many out-of-tree kernel developers (E.g. nVidia kernel engineers interview @Phoronix).

Now, unless you have a *personal* experience in supporting out of tree drivers and/or have any evidence (personal or other-wise) to counter-my, and, say, nVidia kernel engineers' personal experience *, I doubt that you have something meaningful to contribute to this sub-thread.

- Gilboa
* Keep in mind that my job is 100 times easier than that of nVidia kernel engineers. GPUs are far more complex than say, network drivers.
Beyond that, I wasn't required to take Windows drivers and turn them into multi-platform capable drivers...
(So if they say the Linux kernel API is a non-issue...)

Edited 2012-08-30 12:20 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 4

RE[6]: Comment by woegjiub
by lucas_maximus on Thu 30th Aug 2012 12:50 in reply to "RE[5]: Comment by woegjiub"
lucas_maximus Member since:
2009-08-18

Changing the goalposts with a changing interface is a bad idea, no other operating system does this and they have far more consistent driver support.

Oh well, Linux users are well known for making lots of excuses for Linux's problems.

nVindia drivers btw won't have KMS support and replaced a lot of the libraries on the system to do with DRI and what not so it isn't a problem for them because they install their own damn libraries.

Edited 2012-08-30 12:51 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[7]: Comment by woegjiub
by gilboa on Thu 30th Aug 2012 14:21 in reply to "RE[6]: Comment by woegjiub"
gilboa Member since:
2005-07-06

So in short, you couldn't really put up a factual rebuttal so you switched to "You Linux users always making excuses".

Good luck with that.

- Gilboa

Reply Parent Score: 4

RE[7]: Comment by woegjiub
by tonny on Thu 30th Aug 2012 16:36 in reply to "RE[6]: Comment by woegjiub"
tonny Member since:
2011-12-22

Your comments still aren't relevant to the topic, no matter our experience level with the Linux Kernel API.

I suggest you read again your and his (gilboa) post, still can safe your face ;)

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[6]: Comment by woegjiub
by ze_jerkface on Thu 30th Aug 2012 13:08 in reply to "RE[5]: Comment by woegjiub"
ze_jerkface Member since:
2012-06-22

Somehow, there's a stupid notion that the lack stable *driver* API makes Linux far harder to support on *the desktop*


It's not stupid at all. Fixing an in-tree driver in Linux involves a submission/approval process and then you have to wait for the distros to pick up the change. A simple bit flip can take months to get to users.

In Windows you can fix a driver and then immediately publish to the web server. You can in fact automate the entire process with a single click.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[7]: Comment by woegjiub
by gilboa on Thu 30th Aug 2012 14:27 in reply to "RE[6]: Comment by woegjiub"
gilboa Member since:
2005-07-06

"Somehow, there's a stupid notion that the lack stable *driver* API makes Linux far harder to support on *the desktop*


It's not stupid at all. Fixing an in-tree driver in Linux involves a submission/approval process and then you have to wait for the distros to pick up the change. A simple bit flip can take months to get to users.

In Windows you can fix a driver and then immediately publish to the web server. You can in fact automate the entire process with a single click.
"

Try downloading a driver code from the Internet, compile for say, Windows 7 x86_64 or Windows 2K8 and install it and let me know how it goes. *

- Gilboa
* Hint: nothing. (As in driver-not-load-nothing)

Edited 2012-08-30 14:29 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 2