Hey,
>> And Mike is right about the platforms, too.
>> OSs (plural) for the x86 platform should be able to
>> support all the hardware available for the platform.
> But it isn't the responsibility of the OS company to support all
> hardware. All hardware for the x86 platform should support every OS
> available. So while I'll agree with you, I'll disagree about who is to
> blame. A decent hardware company should support every OS they can.
OK, sorry, you are right, I didn't put my thoughts to paper correctly.
I meant that every device should have support under every OS, not
saying it's the OS's job. It's not the OS's job to do so. But Linux
won't get far unless someone persuades the companies to make drivers
for Linux, too.
>> And they should start with the most common. I'd like Linux to
>> support my Matrox Marvel G400, PS/2 mouse, CD-RW and HP DeskJet 930
> The OS company may not know a single thing about the Matrox Marvel G400.
> On the other hand, the most OSs have published documentation on creating
> device drivers for the OS.
But if the OS company wants to succeed it has to convince to the
companies to use their specs and write a driver. I can program an OS,
too (well, I can't), and put my specs out but why should the companies
care ? That's the problem. If Linux wants to be mainstream it has to
be attractive to the companies.
>> I am much like Mike I guess - I like computers and love to learn about
>> them no matter what platform or OS, but I want my mouse to work.
> Then buy a better mouse. :)
I am fine with this one. It's great when it works.
> If you buy a new tire for your car and the car starts pulling so bad
> that you can't keep it on the road, who is to blame? Don't blame the
> car manufacturer just because the car doesn't support whatever tire you
> want to buy.
Well if 80% of the cars support it then I guess I will choose the car
which supports the biggest variety of tires.
Roman
