Hey Tom,
Is it true about hardware providers paying fees to M$ so that Windows
supports or approves their hardware? In other words, no fee - no
drivers. Have you ever heard about this? I just wanted to clear that up.
Roman
Tom Brinkman wrote:
>
> A lot has been said about 'when Linux is ready for the average
> users desktop'. Mostly inferring that this is a good idea to begin
> with. I think not.
>
> What needs to be happening (IMO) is the users and desktop need to
> get ready for Linux, et al. It appears, most seem to think that Linux
> has come a long way in the last few years. Some in a Winblows sense.
> I sort'a kind'a agree. Linux use to (only) run on quality, standard
> hardware. Now it's tryin to run on any ol' thing ... kind'a like a
> Wintendo clone. Lin-modems, lin-printers, lin-sound, lin-video,
> lin-mice, lin-...., etc.
>
> While Linux and most other Un*x flavor OS's have progressed
> remarkedly in the last few years, the desktop systems have been goin'
> further an' further south. Most of y'all recognize the 'winmodem'
> situation, but fail to see that this is only the tip of the iceberg.
> There's a sh!+load'a win-hardware out there now, and the situation's
> become worse and worse over just the last few years. Many of y'all are
> tryin to run Linux on win-hardware. Specially those that post " but it
> works great in Win..." This is a USER problem, IMO.
>
> Keep this in mind when you evaluate Linux's climb in usability.
> It's been a real hard up hill climb against hardware that is more'n
> more intended, and designed _only_ to be used with Windoze. IOW's,
> goin' south. Hell, a lot of it won't even work with NT or DOS. Heck, a
> lot of it doesn't work too well with Winblows!
>
> Situation's becoming so bad that even Wintendo 95 thru ME is havin'
> problems runnin on the newest hardware offerings. While I'm convinced
> that the BIG ready mades (ie, Dell, Gateway, Compaq, etc) are the most
> overpriced cheap junk fosted on the unsuspecting public .... they have
> one MAJOR factor goin for them. They all design their limited,
> substandard, proprietary crap ... to work with Winblows.
>
> *This makes most of the people happy, most of the time.*
> What I believe many of y'all think of as 'ready for the desktop'
>
> Windoze doesn't work with any hardware... any hardware is intended
> to work with Winblows. Well, sort'a. In the last year or so with the
> advent of 'Moore's Law' processors, and chipset/ram/motherboard/
> peripheal's inabiliity to adequately keep up, the public (read, USER)
> who's willing to accept this as progress, and also accept cheapness,
> corner cutting, substandard (read, 'onboard' or 'built-in') hardware as
> OK ...... IMO, that's the bigger PROBLEM.
>
> I fault *uncle billy* for fostering this whole mess, and y'all that
> blindy suck in the advertised latest and greatest (cheapest?) hardware
> without really investigating it. This is the main reason that I
> believe I'm in the majority when I suspect *USER*, hardware, operating
> software (_in that order_) as the cause of most computing failures,
> _any_ OS.
> --
> Tom Brinkman [EMAIL PROTECTED] Galveston Bay
--
Roman
Registered Linux User #179293
