Re: Open Source Supported Graphics Cards
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Mon, Aug 14, 2006 at 12:53:12PM -0500, Seth Goodman wrote: On Monday, August 14, 2006 11:52 AM -0500, Albert Dengg wrote: ... At least they can do it, whether we approve of the results of not. That's not the case for Debian. If you have to hire a sysadmin to install and maintain the system, it is hardly free. Sure, it works well for any institution large enough to have an IT staff. Everyone else is effectively excluded unless they are willing and able to become computer jocks rather than doing their actual jobs. I really think we're unnecessarily excluding the largest group of people who could benefit from free, open-source software. I don't think we want to be saying that computers should only be used by those with access to competent IT staff. If that's the club's charter, I'm not a member. well, in my opinion in a lot of cases it would be advisable to have an expirienced person doing the more complicated tasks then trying to do it on your own if you do not have sufficient knowlege of what you are doing. my time is valuable and it is more efficient if you do all by yourself. while i would be able to do all repair on my mtb on my own i let experts do some of them because centering a wheel would take me about 2 hours while the expert can do it much faster and while i have to pay him, i can do something other meanwhile... and the other point: i _have_ installed debian before really knowning debian (before d-i came up, using old boot floppis installer) and have seen others doing the same. _if_ they do it with the (open) docu and read the messages and questions carefully it is quite possible to get a working system (not some fancy server of course but a normal desktop is possible), unless of course you have some problematig hardware, but for example my pc make bigger problems installing winxp then debian (the via sata controller is supported by d-i, but for winxp i have to install a floppy drive and create a driver disk to be able to do the install) ... my point is, there are different distros with different goals and also i have 2 normal users here using debian without any problems (both don't know pcs worth a damn and would also have problems with windows)...i do the system administration and for them it just works (and for me it is less work them administrating a xp home install which does not have fs permissions where i have to reconstruct all sort of system files they alter/delete be accident... :-) ) You are the sysadmin for these two Windows-type users, which is the only environment in which they can realistically use Debian. Take away the sysadmin or Linux mentor and the chances of them being able to configure a system that is as useful to them as their Windows boxes are slim to none. Your example makes my point quite well. Unsophisticated users attempting to use Debian need an experienced user or sysadmin to show them how to do anything that is not quickly accessible through a GUI. Unsophisticated users can and do successfully configure and use Windows (and Mac) boxes every day without the benefits of sysadmins. They can't do a domain controller, LDAP or a mail server, but they can construct a functioning peer-to-peer network, share printers, access the internet and get their email. The fact that the resulting system is insecure is due to the horrific quality of the underlying operating system implementation, not the fact that there are sufficiently simple wizards and GUI's to allow them to configure their own systems. a well but the problem is _not_ only the problem of the OS sw quality but also a problem of decisons like always install nearly everything and also enabling it, and sw is per definition not withount errors... not OSS, and not closed source sw... and if you do read the docu you should be able to set up the named things under debian with webmin and swat, seting up thunderbird is no different in debian then in windows and the network setup is well documented... even though i do not think you should use computers only when you are an expert but i do think that it is not a real problem for the read a bit of docu and think before you do something... one point is of course that to use some peripherals you have to do a bit more reading under linux then under windows since you have to look for yourself what software to use to access you digicam for example rather then installing the simply installing the sw the vendor sold you with it, and of course some hw does not work with linux as it does with windows due do missing vendor support, though i had it also the other way around, my tv card works better under linux then under windows... ;) yours albert - -- Albert Dengg [EMAIL PROTECTED] -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFE4MNThrtSwvbWj0kRAtjHAJwNjE6DANqE8ZaI5kCRI6ofRJCg3wCfXcPI FpIPSF6bYy05axwib/0o5Ts= =a7hG -END PGP SIGNATURE- --
Re: Open Source Supported Graphics Cards
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Mon, Aug 14, 2006 at 08:43:14PM -0500, Owen Heisler wrote: ... I very much agree. To me the Linux distribution that Debian has become is very impressive, and I hope that continues. And if Debian is able to become more user-friendly, that is good. Seth, I agree with you as well, so long as user-friendliness does not interfere with powerful and secure as stated. It might be good to consider how many Windows users are capable of installing Windows... I know many people who use Windows but are not, however, capable of reinstalling Windows. I think that Debian at its current state is capable of replacing Windows in that way. The user would have to learn a bit, but how much are users going to have to learn in order to use Vista? Hi well, with installing there is another point: because things like partitioning came up... most first time linux installs are dual boot, witch makes it more complicated...wereas with a stand alone install things like automatic partioning are/would be possible and setting up bootloaders and the like has become quite easy (d-i most of the time does it correctly be itself (the last time i had problems was due to a setup with serial console and lvm and linux sw raid which is a quite unlikely setup for a causual pc users...) yours Albert - -- Albert Dengg [EMAIL PROTECTED] -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFE4vGShrtSwvbWj0kRAkDyAJ0RrwBPkGIKnM5s8ROiuyApr9GOrwCeKrvF AA+OhdQvx9EGuCdTUi8RVr0= =0eMp -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Open Source Supported Graphics Cards
On Tue, 15 Aug 2006 11:45, Seth Goodman wrote: Nothing would make me happier than if I believed this. Unfortunately, they continue to do one thing right where the non-commercial Linux distros have consistently failed, and this prevents the scenario that you suggest from happening. That is, they provide a platform that the non-technical user can install and maintain without a guru at their disposal. That is just so wrong.My father runs XP. He is constantly ringing me up because he's 'lost' files, or something doesn't work, and this is almost always because Windows hides *everything* from the user - so he's never grasped the difference between data files and programs, or the concept of a directory structure. He just expects to click on an icon and whatever he wants will happen. The problem is not that Windows caters for the ignorant - it's that it *encourages* ignorance and makes it deliberately difficult for a user to know what's going on. There's a certain minimum level of knowledge required to operate a computer - any computer - and Windows (in a misguided attempt to make itself suitable for morons) does its best to ensure that users never acquire any expertise at all. cr -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Open Source Supported Graphics Cards
Seth Goodman wrote: Does that represent the Debian position? I'd very much like to know. If so, I'll continue to use it in server applications and stop recommending it to friends who are not computer professionals. That would certainly make my life easier and Microsoft more profitable. It represents _my_ position, which is all I will ever claim to represent (unless I have to.) I'm afraid you are missing my point, though. I genuinely did agree with that statement. Not because I wanted to insult Windows users, nor because I look down on the Linux distributions that try to cater for them. My point was that you should choose the right tool for the job. Other Linux distributions specifically cater for fresh beginners / former Windows users. Debian, on the other hand, has other objectives. (Believe it or not, there are more important things for an OS to do than to try and make it easy for Windows users to use it.) Finally, if you are recommending a Linux distribution to your friends that you know is currently unsuitable for them, then you are doing Linux a disservice. Where does that leave open-source software? Well, I guess that will stay limited to the 10% market share reserved for any product designed for the cognoscenti. We can keep our install CD's right next to our Sony Beta-Max tapes. Whatever. ;-) Best regards, -- George Borisov DXSolutions Ltd signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: Open Source Supported Graphics Cards
Wow, I fully agree what cr stated there. I have people calling upon me all the time to solve their Windows problems and difficulties. For one, if GNU/Linux was to be sold in stores on pre-installed system, such as in Future Shop and Circut City, GNU/Linux would gain more popularity. Since GNU/Linux is somewhat easier to maintain than a Windows system. GNU/Linux is virtual free of Viruses and Spyware because of it's advance file/user permissions. Users who use GNU/Linux would never have to worry as much about scanning their computer for viruses, and spending hard earned cash on Virus Scanning Software licenses. GNU/Linux is also a special purpose Operating System as well. GNU/Linux doesn't have to used for Desktop and/or Server applications. GNU/Linux is seen everywhere from embedded systems to PDAs to advanced tablet PCs. Even though most users don't really know that GNU/Linux exists all around. Possibily even using it everyday without evening knowing so, that's something positive to think about. At the moment, the best we can think is positive about the currently developments of GNU/Linux and Open Source in general. Many company's have used the GPL or LGPL licenses for some of the software which they created. At this point, GNU/Linux is just beginning to gain wide acceptence. Hardware manufactures are starting to notice GNU/Linux and printing it on their product boxes, that it is Linux compatible. Another great note to also think about, GNU/Linux has been maturing quite fast lately in many different areas. It's rate of maturing is accelerating. Has anyone heard about Hollywood and Linux? At quite a few Hollywood studios, all their systems dual-boot from Linux and Windows. For example, the recent comedy released 'Super Ex-girlfriend' was created using the power of both worlds. As I said before, even though -most- users don't know it, their either watching work which has been crafted using GNU/Linux technology, or perhaps use it in their everyday life without evening knowing it even exists. My point is, do users really need to know that GNU/Linux exists? Is it not enough that most people possibly use and/or watch technologies crafted with the powerful GNU/Linux operating system? I am not a huge fan of Bill Gates nor Microsoft, but I do believe one day they will finally get themselves into something they cannot get out of. It's actually quite interesting to see how many lawsuits that company has been through and is still quite respected and followed as a software leader. I am quite surprised that people still trust them. This trust/bond which Microsoft has with it's customers is getting thin, some of customers are already making the switch to either Sun's Solaris, Novell SuSE, and other non-Microsoft Operating Systems. Giving enough time, and patience, Microsofts customers will soon see them for who they really are. On Wed, 16 Aug 2006 07:22:08 +1200 cr [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Tue, 15 Aug 2006 11:45, Seth Goodman wrote: Nothing would make me happier than if I believed this. Unfortunately, they continue to do one thing right where the non-commercial Linux distros have consistently failed, and this prevents the scenario that you suggest from happening. That is, they provide a platform that the non-technical user can install and maintain without a guru at their disposal. That is just so wrong.My father runs XP. He is constantly ringing me up because he's 'lost' files, or something doesn't work, and this is almost always because Windows hides *everything* from the user - so he's never grasped the difference between data files and programs, or the concept of a directory structure. He just expects to click on an icon and whatever he wants will happen. The problem is not that Windows caters for the ignorant - it's that it *encourages* ignorance and makes it deliberately difficult for a user to know what's going on. There's a certain minimum level of knowledge required to operate a computer - any computer - and Windows (in a misguided attempt to make itself suitable for morons) does its best to ensure that users never acquire any expertise at all. cr -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Open Source Supported Graphics Cards
On Mon, Aug 14, 2006 at 07:52:03PM -0700, Paul Johnson wrote: On Monday 14 August 2006 19:02, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Mon, Aug 14, 2006 at 08:10:48PM -0400, Ishwar Rattan wrote: On Mon, 14 Aug 2006, Seth Goodman wrote: desire to learn, and some are here to teach as well. I'm also saying that most non-technical computer users are not capable of learning Debian, as it exists today. While some may disagree, I consider that a problem. Your words of wisdom have been noted. Now Stick with windoz and stay happy forever. The question is whether you do your learning up front, or later. With Debian, it's up front. With Windows, it's later. Not the Windows installation is easier than Debian's -- it isn't. But the store you buy the computer at usually installs it for you. You can get Debian pre-installed. http://www.us.debian.org/distrib/pre-installed I see one vendor on the list preinstalling Debian in all of Canada, and none in Montreal where I live. There are thousands who preinstall Windows. The store I used to go in Montreal to that preinstalled Linux has gone bankrupt. To be honest, there are others, not on the list, and stores that do claim to support Linux are starting to pop up. But walk into an average computer store, and they still day you're on your own with Linux. The day the average computer store asks its customers, Do you want to pay $250 or so for Windows or get Linux free isn't here yet. (whereupon the customer will say, what's Linux?) -- hendrik -- Paul Johnson Email and IM (XMPP Google Talk): [EMAIL PROTECTED] Jabber: Because it's time to move forward http://jabber.ursine.ca/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Open Source Supported Graphics Cards
On Mon, Aug 14, 2006 at 07:30:11PM -0700, Paul Johnson wrote: On Monday 14 August 2006 11:04, Seth Goodman wrote: On Monday, August 14, 2006 6:20 AM -0500, George Borisov wrote: Anthony M Simonelli wrote: I just get a little upset when people want to mold Debian into something like a Windows clone. If you want that, try a Debian-derivative such as Linspire or Xandros. Spot on, dude. Does that represent the Debian position? I'd very much like to know. If so, I'll continue to use it in server applications and stop recommending it to friends who are not computer professionals. That would certainly make my life easier and Microsoft more profitable. Why? Microsoft Windows is considerably more difficult and takes longer than Debian to install and configure properly. Because the computer store will install Windows. Never mind that it has to be redone every few months. (The store will do that, too) The beginner will never get to the point of discovering that Linux doesn't need to be reinstalled every few months. There's a peculiar phenomenon I discovered in the late 70's. People who have trouble with their computers (in the places I dealt with it was large mainframe CDC machines) are very reluctant to switch, because they see themselves having to go through the whole ordeal again -- at least they *know* how they have to twist themselves into weird shapes to get along on the old systems. They just won't believe things could be better with another system. Only when they are forced to switch by powerful external forces (in my cases, this was usually to a VAX. IN one case even a PDP-11 runing Unix was superior to a CDC mainframe) will they realize what a trap they had been in. -- hendrik -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Open Source Supported Graphics Cards
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Mon, Aug 14, 2006 at 07:30:11PM -0700, Paul Johnson wrote: On Monday 14 August 2006 11:04, Seth Goodman wrote: On Monday, August 14, 2006 6:20 AM -0500, George Borisov wrote: Anthony M Simonelli wrote: [snip] There's a peculiar phenomenon I discovered in the late 70's. People who have trouble with their computers (in the places I dealt with it was large mainframe CDC machines) are very reluctant to switch, because they see themselves having to go through the whole ordeal again -- at least they *know* how they have to twist themselves into weird shapes to get along on the old systems. They just won't believe things could be better with another system. It's called: the Devil you know is better than the Devil you don't know. A very powerful, and often practical, mindset. Only when they are forced to switch by powerful external forces (in my cases, this was usually to a VAX. IN one case even a PDP-11 runing Unix was superior to a CDC mainframe) will they realize what a trap they had been in. - -- Ron Johnson, Jr. Jefferson LA USA Is common sense really valid? For example, it is common sense to white-power racists that whites are superior to blacks, and that those with brown skins are mud people. However, that common sense is obviously wrong. -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFE4drSS9HxQb37XmcRAmI9AKDVQvKp0aohkUwcKY7tknNYjtosbwCfZLxA 4cL3roQ4Wk4KVDQFoWStBZ8= =CdCz -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Open Source Supported Graphics Cards
Paul Johnson wrote: Someone needs to go read the Advocacy HOWTO again. http://ursine.ca/cgi-bin/dwww/usr/share/doc/HOWTO/en-html/Advocacy.html -- Paul Johnson Email and IM (XMPP Google Talk): [EMAIL PROTECTED] Jabber: Because it's time to move forward http://jabber.ursine.ca/ I am amazed at some of the links you dig up, you have a lot of knowledge just waiting to be unleashed. Very good link thanks a lot! Now my 2 bit's, I don't need to get into a tit for tat, but if people are complaining about the install of a given Distro, have they tried to install Windows lately? Let's just say that if you think people have problems with apt-get then installing Windows would be a major no no. Especially if they have new hardware, and require a boot disk, what happens if they don't have a floppy drive? Let it suffice it to say, that some people could not or would not install an OS. In that case they have their segment of the market, I have a friend that won't change the default password on her wireless router because it is too difficult to know what IP address to put into the browser. Luckily she lives in a neighborhood that is not tech savvy, and most of the neighbors are honest type of folk, and will not want to hack into her network. Gnu_Raiz -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Open Source Supported Graphics Cards
On Tue, Aug 15, 2006 at 09:31:46AM -0500, Ron Johnson wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Mon, Aug 14, 2006 at 07:30:11PM -0700, Paul Johnson wrote: On Monday 14 August 2006 11:04, Seth Goodman wrote: On Monday, August 14, 2006 6:20 AM -0500, George Borisov wrote: Anthony M Simonelli wrote: [snip] There's a peculiar phenomenon I discovered in the late 70's. People who have trouble with their computers (in the places I dealt with it was large mainframe CDC machines) are very reluctant to switch, because they see themselves having to go through the whole ordeal again -- at least they *know* how they have to twist themselves into weird shapes to get along on the old systems. They just won't believe things could be better with another system. It's called: the Devil you know is better than the Devil you don't know. A very powerful, and often practical, mindset. But it often works out as the Devil you know is better than the angel you don't know. -- hendrik P.S. There's room for a long off-topic rant about demons being fallen angels, but it might be better not to pursue it -- unless, of course, it has some relevance to Debian. Only when they are forced to switch by powerful external forces (in my cases, this was usually to a VAX. IN one case even a PDP-11 runing Unix was superior to a CDC mainframe) will they realize what a trap they had been in. - -- Ron Johnson, Jr. Jefferson LA USA Is common sense really valid? For example, it is common sense to white-power racists that whites are superior to blacks, and that those with brown skins are mud people. However, that common sense is obviously wrong. -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFE4drSS9HxQb37XmcRAmI9AKDVQvKp0aohkUwcKY7tknNYjtosbwCfZLxA 4cL3roQ4Wk4KVDQFoWStBZ8= =CdCz -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Open Source Supported Graphics Cards
Anthony M Simonelli wrote: I just get a little upset when people want to mold Debian into something like a Windows clone. If you want that, try a Debian-derivative such as Linspire or Xandros. Spot on, dude. -- George Borisov DXSolutions Ltd signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Debian target audience ( was Re: Open Source Supported Graphics Cards)
On Tuesday, August 08, 2006 6:43 PM -0500, Paul Johnson wrote: I thought the niche Debian was trying to fill was rock solid stability and reliability in a 100% free software format. If I'm confused, let me know. Add support for multiple architectures and I will agree with you 100% :-) Seth Goodman wrote: That's a reasonable goal, even a good goal, if you are willing to remain a small, exclusive club. If you believe that people who use Debian need to be comfortable with the command line, consider natural language as a second language behind PERL and be fluent in regexp's, then it will remain a terrific operating system for the few. Maybe this is what most people in Debian want. I'm relatively new here, so if that's the case, please educate me. Since you asked... :-) I think Paul gave a pretty good summary of Debian objectives (as I understand them anyway.) I can not speak about other people (never a good idea, by the way) but I use Debian because it is an operating system I can _trust_ and it is 100% free as in speech and beer (to me, the speech bit is actually more important.) It is also more powerful that Windows, easier to administer properly and does not tell me to contact the network administrator when there is a problem. Just for the record: no, I don't know any Perl (unfortunately) and yes, I think the command line is superior to GUIs for most administrative tasks. We presently _require_ people who use Debian to do this, or they are effectively hamstrung once it's installed. The software is free, if you are willing to devote a significant portion of your waking hours to learning the intricacies of an admittedly arcane system. It is a different operating system. You have to learn to do things differently. It is not a requirement, it is just how it is. If some things are similar, well that's a bonus. It certainly should not be an expectation that your current skill set will apply. Anyway, IMVHO, Windows is not easier to administer than Linux. It is easier to administer Windows _badly_. Good administration is still beyond the average Windows user. Yes it is becoming easier, but at the expense of extra restrictions (and the fact that is something does actually go wrong, it is much, much harder to fix, even if you are well above the average skill level.) Hope this helps, -- George Borisov DXSolutions Ltd signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: Debian target audience ( was Re: Open Source Supported Graphics Cards)
George Borisov wrote: I can not speak about other people And yet, as I read your comments, I almost thought it was me speaking. I use Debian because it is an operating system I can _trust_ and it is 100% free as in speech and beer (to me, the speech bit is actually more important.) Ditto. It is also more powerful tha[n] Windows, easier to administer properly and does not tell me to contact the network administrator when there is a problem. Yep. Just for the record: no, I don't know any Perl (unfortunately) and yes, I think the command line is superior to GUIs for most administrative tasks. That's me. Yes [Windows] is becoming easier, but at the expense of extra restrictions (and the fact that is something does actually go wrong, it is much, much harder to fix, even if you are well above the average skill level.) Absolutely!! I turn down so much money that I could be making fixing people's broken Windows setup, because I've learned that if I charge what I'm worth the time it takes to fix it is way more than a new computer is worth (which is just a vicious cycle) and I don't want to gouge people so I just generally turn them down (and tell them to save themselves a lot of headaches by getting a Mac), or that the setup simply can't be fixed and all you can do is wipe/reinstall. Windows is a horrible OS from the standpoint of maintenance and repair. Horrible. -- Kent -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Open Source Supported Graphics Cards
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Sat, Aug 12, 2006 at 02:07:43AM -0500, Seth Goodman wrote: On Friday, August 11, 2006 10:39 PM -0500, Anthony M Simonelli wrote: That's a reasonable goal, even a good goal, if you are willing to remain a small, exclusive club. Actually, Debian is one of the fastest growing distribution according to Netcraft: http://news.netcraft.com/archives/2005/12/05/strong_growth_for_debian.ht ml and Linux in general is making it's mark with companies such as HP, IBM, and Google and around the world. The first line of that article is: Debian is currently the fastest growing Linux distribution for web servers, with more than 1.2 million active sites in December. This reinforces my point, which is that Debian, in its present form, will find use primarily among technically adept users, which are a minority in the computer market. The same goes for its adoption at large IT companies. The fact that Debian is taking web server market share from Red Hat does not indicate that it is making any inroads into becoming a usable desktop for average users. well, were is the problem with that? and also debian is much easier to install now with d-i then it used to be... i actually like debian for asking me what really to install...i have a problem with distros like suse where it is hard to set the computer up _without_ X and so on and there are areaes where i just don't need it. I'm arguing to consider the point of view of would-be Windows defectors. I don't believe the Debian project is not meant to be a Windows replacement. I don't even think it exists to compete with MS Windows, but to provide a free(dom) operating system for everyone. It may be free for everyone, but they can't use it. You can, I can, but the average Windows user can't. That's like saying that anyone is free to buy a Mercedes, all you need is the money. Here are a couple of cases for things that casual users can manage in Windows PC's but would have great difficulty in Debian. The following is not meant to say that Windows is good. It's not: it's crap. But they did do some things right, and we ought to take notice. You can get books that help. In fact, the Debian GNU/Linux 3.1 Bible (ISBN 0-7645-7644-5) is a great book for those just getting started with Debian and Linux and answers the first two common tasks they'd need to know as well as installation help and getting a desktop up and running. They also discuss Internet and Intranet services such as web servers, printing, file servers, FTP, etc, and it's only $40.00 (hey, you're not paying for the operating system!) I don't need books like that because I can read the documentation. The average Windows user is not going to read it. They don't need to read books to fire up their Windows boxen, and they don't expect to read books to move to Linux. If it were up to snuff, they wouldn't need to. You're preaching to the choir by telling me that a technically adept person can make Debian do most common tasks without inordinate difficulty. The average computer user, OTOH, is a completely different story. well, the average windows install done by an average user does not really work as it should, give all the security problems and worm distribution, which is at least partly due to the fact that with windows, everybody thinks they can do it themselves and know what they are doing. ... my point is, there are different distros with different goals and also i have 2 normal users here using debian without any problems (both don't know pcs worth a damn and would also have problems with windows)...i do the system administration and for them it just works (and for me it is less work them administrating a xp home install which does not have fs permissions where i have to reconstruct all sort of system files they alter/delete be accident... :-) ) yours Albert -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED] - -- Albert Dengg [EMAIL PROTECTED] -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFE4KpLhrtSwvbWj0kRAvBzAJ9XHmKapr9KxENn+tBkeuBSPSbYMwCfXdOd zhEEZCCYBmS8ok9IplF2xrM= =jmak -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Open Source Supported Graphics Cards
On Monday, August 14, 2006 11:52 AM -0500, Albert Dengg wrote: On Sat, Aug 12, 2006 at 02:07:43AM -0500, Seth Goodman wrote: On Friday, August 11, 2006 10:39 PM -0500, Anthony M Simonelli wrote: ... You can get books that help. In fact, the Debian GNU/Linux 3.1 Bible (ISBN 0-7645-7644-5) is a great book for those just getting started with Debian and Linux and answers the first two common tasks they'd need to know as well as installation help and getting a desktop up and running. They also discuss Internet and Intranet services such as web servers, printing, file servers, FTP, etc, and it's only $40.00 (hey, you're not paying for the operating system!) I don't need books like that because I can read the documentation. The average Windows user is not going to read it. They don't need to read books to fire up their Windows boxen, and they don't expect to read books to move to Linux. If it were up to snuff, they wouldn't need to. You're preaching to the choir by telling me that a technically adept person can make Debian do most common tasks without inordinate difficulty. The average computer user, OTOH, is a completely different story. well, the average windows install done by an average user does not really work as it should, give all the security problems and worm distribution, which is at least partly due to the fact that with windows, everybody thinks they can do it themselves and know what they are doing. At least they can do it, whether we approve of the results of not. That's not the case for Debian. If you have to hire a sysadmin to install and maintain the system, it is hardly free. Sure, it works well for any institution large enough to have an IT staff. Everyone else is effectively excluded unless they are willing and able to become computer jocks rather than doing their actual jobs. I really think we're unnecessarily excluding the largest group of people who could benefit from free, open-source software. I don't think we want to be saying that computers should only be used by those with access to competent IT staff. If that's the club's charter, I'm not a member. ... my point is, there are different distros with different goals and also i have 2 normal users here using debian without any problems (both don't know pcs worth a damn and would also have problems with windows)...i do the system administration and for them it just works (and for me it is less work them administrating a xp home install which does not have fs permissions where i have to reconstruct all sort of system files they alter/delete be accident... :-) ) You are the sysadmin for these two Windows-type users, which is the only environment in which they can realistically use Debian. Take away the sysadmin or Linux mentor and the chances of them being able to configure a system that is as useful to them as their Windows boxes are slim to none. Your example makes my point quite well. Unsophisticated users attempting to use Debian need an experienced user or sysadmin to show them how to do anything that is not quickly accessible through a GUI. Unsophisticated users can and do successfully configure and use Windows (and Mac) boxes every day without the benefits of sysadmins. They can't do a domain controller, LDAP or a mail server, but they can construct a functioning peer-to-peer network, share printers, access the internet and get their email. The fact that the resulting system is insecure is due to the horrific quality of the underlying operating system implementation, not the fact that there are sufficiently simple wizards and GUI's to allow them to configure their own systems. -- Seth Goodman -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Open Source Supported Graphics Cards
On Monday, August 14, 2006 6:20 AM -0500, George Borisov wrote: Anthony M Simonelli wrote: I just get a little upset when people want to mold Debian into something like a Windows clone. If you want that, try a Debian-derivative such as Linspire or Xandros. Spot on, dude. Does that represent the Debian position? I'd very much like to know. If so, I'll continue to use it in server applications and stop recommending it to friends who are not computer professionals. That would certainly make my life easier and Microsoft more profitable. Where does that leave open-source software? Well, I guess that will stay limited to the 10% market share reserved for any product designed for the cognoscenti. We can keep our install CD's right next to our Sony Beta-Max tapes. -- Seth Goodman -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Open Source Supported Graphics Cards
I'm guessing that there really isn't one POV within the debian community about debians place in the linux world or as a replacement for windows. I am an ambulatory linux user. I can debug perl, but I don't write in it yet, because I can still get away with awk and sed. I use the command line alot (like right now when I'm using mutt) because keystrokes are almost always faster than mouse clicks. I use debian not just because it's free, but because, even with its drawbacks, it is the best linux distro for me. The drawbacks I perceive are: 1. Relatively long time between stable releases. This is actually shrinking, but is acute right now because amd64 is not part of stable, and I continue to have some annoying, low-level problems. 2. A fairly rigid treatment of 32- and 64-bit applications in the amd64 architecture. I'm not expecting relief here because the developers have decided that cleanliness is next to ... Actually I think they have reversed the order. I also understand that this is a temporary aggravation of a standard linux annoyance... that new technology enters the linux world about 6 months after it enters the windoze world. However, the path taken for this example sets debian apart, and is emblematic of why it would not be a choice for new linux users. The chroot is, I suppose, a rather elegant solution. The chroot leads to a clean path to pure 64-bit as well as a possibly cleaner set of library directories. But I have to tell you that when I'm installing a chroot, I feel like a homeowner from the 1950's, crawling under my house with a flashlight looking for the fuse-box! It's not even that I can't do it. It's just that I've had enough. I would rather spend time doing science, than dealing with relatively low-level administration. So, am I not part of the debian target audience? If not, your target is really narrow. If research scientists are simply too administratively wimpy because we do value ease of use, then you, the developers, seem to be going to an awful lot of trouble for such a small target. I would like to see debian have a long-term goal of windoze replacement. The hardware world is slowly reckoning with linux, so the delay's may become vanishingly small. I just purchased a Samsung laser printer and the list of compatible OS's (on the outside of the box!) has gone from two to roughly ten, including debian. As entire countries opt for open source, conceiving linux as a replacement is simply prudent, and debian should be a major player. Rightly, debian values elegance. However, elegance and utility, even for the average user, need not be mutually exclusive. For example, an installer can be composed of elegant code and still be transparent. It's important to realize that the latter is actually harder than the former because programmers have a hard time imagining the average user's needs and questions. It wouldn't be a bad idea for developers to query the user base as they are forming policy. They might even think of mechanisms for changing policies that don't work for a large portion of the user base. Art Edwards On Mon, Aug 14, 2006 at 06:52:27PM +0200, Albert Dengg wrote: On Sat, Aug 12, 2006 at 02:07:43AM -0500, Seth Goodman wrote: On Friday, August 11, 2006 10:39 PM -0500, Anthony M Simonelli wrote: That's a reasonable goal, even a good goal, if you are willing to remain a small, exclusive club. Actually, Debian is one of the fastest growing distribution according to Netcraft: http://news.netcraft.com/archives/2005/12/05/strong_growth_for_debian.ht ml and Linux in general is making it's mark with companies such as HP, IBM, and Google and around the world. The first line of that article is: Debian is currently the fastest growing Linux distribution for web servers, with more than 1.2 million active sites in December. This reinforces my point, which is that Debian, in its present form, will find use primarily among technically adept users, which are a minority in the computer market. The same goes for its adoption at large IT companies. The fact that Debian is taking web server market share from Red Hat does not indicate that it is making any inroads into becoming a usable desktop for average users. well, were is the problem with that? and also debian is much easier to install now with d-i then it used to be... i actually like debian for asking me what really to install...i have a problem with distros like suse where it is hard to set the computer up _without_ X and so on and there are areaes where i just don't need it. I'm arguing to consider the point of view of would-be Windows defectors. I don't believe the Debian project is not meant to be a Windows replacement. I don't even think it exists to compete with MS Windows, but to provide a free(dom) operating system for everyone. It may be free for everyone, but they can't use it. You can, I can, but the
Re: Open Source Supported Graphics Cards
Seth Goodman wrote: On Monday, August 14, 2006 6:20 AM -0500, George Borisov wrote: Anthony M Simonelli wrote: I just get a little upset when people want to mold Debian into something like a Windows clone. If you want that, try a Debian-derivative such as Linspire or Xandros. Spot on, dude. Does that represent the Debian position? I'd very much like to know. If so, I'll continue to use it in server applications and stop recommending it to friends who are not computer professionals. That would certainly make my life easier and Microsoft more profitable. Where does that leave open-source software? Well, I guess that will stay limited to the 10% market share reserved for any product designed for the cognoscenti. If that were true, the vast majority of us, who used to be Windows users, wouldn't be here. You can add your lone voice to the increasingly agitated Microsoft endorsers, as you see fit - we're all for free speech here, but I don't think it's going to slow the gradual migration percentage away from Windows considerably. Microsoft's present marketing-blurb overtures in the direction of free/open source scream that they are aware of it also. Even that will quieten down, when the effluent from the quagmire of their own creation fills their mouths, as they go under for the final time. Regards, -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Debian target audience ( was Re: Open Source Supported Graphics Cards)
Kent West wrote: George Borisov wrote: I can not speak about other people And yet, as I read your comments, I almost thought it was me speaking. I use Debian because it is an operating system I can _trust_ and it is 100% free as in speech and beer (to me, the speech bit is actually more important.) Ditto. It is also more powerful tha[n] Windows, easier to administer properly and does not tell me to contact the network administrator when there is a problem. Yep. snip For those who are, as yet, unaware of it... http://computerworld.co.nz/news.nsf/NL/5488FB441D1E157FCC2571CA00151652 Regards, -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Open Source Supported Graphics Cards
On Mon, Aug 14, 2006 at 13:04:45 -0500, Seth Goodman wrote: On Monday, August 14, 2006 6:20 AM -0500, George Borisov wrote: Anthony M Simonelli wrote: I just get a little upset when people want to mold Debian into something like a Windows clone. If you want that, try a Debian-derivative such as Linspire or Xandros. Spot on, dude. Does that represent the Debian position? I'd very much like to know. If so, I'll continue to use it in server applications and stop recommending it to friends who are not computer professionals. That would certainly make my life easier and Microsoft more profitable. The official Debian position can be found here: http://www.debian.org/social_contract Achieving world domination by providing a drop-in replacement for Windows is not on the agenda. Don't get me wrong, you raise many good points, but I don't understand why the task to provide an operating system for Aunt Tilly should be assigned to Debian. There are already a number of Debian-derived distros which do quite a reasonable job at that. The ideal operating system should of course be easy, powerful and secure, but in real life you have to focus on two of these three properties and make sacrifices with respect to the third. I much prefer if Debian continues to emphasize being powerful and secure. -- Regards, Florian -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Open Source Supported Graphics Cards
Seth Goodman wrote: You are the sysadmin for these two Windows-type users, which is the only environment in which they can realistically use Debian. Take away the sysadmin or Linux mentor and the chances of them being able to configure a system that is as useful to them as their Windows boxes are slim to none. When I started out, all I had to master were the intracacies of apt-get. Gnome gave me everything else I needed to be productive. If I needed a word processor or spreadsheeting facility, it was there. Frankly, I got a lot of stuff, as you do with Windows, that I didn't need. But with Gnome, I found I could remove what I didn't want, and that potential is what got me started. With Windows, you don't do that because you're not allowed to. The only things I had to go fishing for were aspects such as sound. This bothered me initially, but I've found, over time, that evolution is a process that brings its own rewards. Initially, it might seem like a big investment. But in time, if your sys admin only needs to take care of his/her server, this means a greater saving for any IT department. A 'mentor' is not a permanent position, and many of us never even had one beside this list. Regards, -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Open Source Supported Graphics Cards
On Monday, August 14, 2006 5:48 PM -0500, Katipo wrote: Seth Goodman wrote: If that were true, the vast majority of us, who used to be Windows users, wouldn't be here. Right. I use Windows for most of my work projects, and before that, I used Unix for many years. I'm not a casual computer user, and I doubt you are either. I'd wager that most people here are not typical Windows users. Are you comfortable with the concepts of DHCP, DNS and file system partitions? If so, you're not a typical Windows user. _That's_ what we're dealing with. Pretending it were not so will not make it go away. You can add your lone voice to the increasingly agitated Microsoft endorsers, as you see fit - we're all for free speech here, but I don't think it's going to slow the gradual migration percentage away from Windows considerably. I have no idea where the sentiment you are criticizing came from, but it wasn't from anything that I posted. It is very helpful, and doesn't make one an endorser, to look at what your worst enemy has done and recognize when they've done something useful. If you want to prevail over something, and it is my fondest hope that someone, _anyone_, prevails over this bunch of corporate thugs, you would do well to notice what they do that works, as well as their failures. I respectfully disagree that the lack of a reasonable installation and desktop experience for the non-technical user will not slow down the gradual migration away from Windows. It already has. Linux has established itself as the preferred choice for most server applications, and it has a good chance of dominating that market. The non-technical desktop user, who is not supported by an IT staff, is another matter and a place that we need a lot of improvement to even gain a foothold. What do you suppose would be the browser market share today for FireFox if it were released only on Linux? Microsoft's present marketing-blurb overtures in the direction of free/open source scream that they are aware of it also. Even that will quieten down, when the effluent from the quagmire of their own creation fills their mouths, as they go under for the final time. Nothing would make me happier than if I believed this. Unfortunately, they continue to do one thing right where the non-commercial Linux distros have consistently failed, and this prevents the scenario that you suggest from happening. That is, they provide a platform that the non-technical user can install and maintain without a guru at their disposal. We're not there, and I don't see much motion in that direction. If you expect the Windows crowd to start reading Linux books and becoming computer-literate, that's not realistic. There will always be more people who don't read the books than those who do, and what _they_ choose will still drive the whole system. It doesn't matter how many times we tell them why we _know_ their machines are holier than a piece of Swiss cheese. They don't understand and it's just noise to them. As long as we insist on the current paradigm, Linux will continue to be the choice of professionals and largely unusable by the general public. There's no reason we can't make the product usable for the larger, computer-as-appliance group without diluting what it does for the software professional. -- Seth Goodman -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Open Source Supported Graphics Cards
On Monday, August 14, 2006 6:23 PM -0500, Katipo wrote: Seth Goodman wrote: You are the sysadmin for these two Windows-type users, which is the only environment in which they can realistically use Debian. Take away the sysadmin or Linux mentor and the chances of them being able to configure a system that is as useful to them as their Windows boxes are slim to none. When I started out, all I had to master were the intracacies of apt-get. You just lost 80%+ of the Windows crowd right there. Gnome gave me everything else I needed to be productive. If I needed a word processor or spreadsheeting facility, it was there. Frankly, I got a lot of stuff, as you do with Windows, that I didn't need. But with Gnome, I found I could remove what I didn't want, and that potential is what got me started. With Windows, you don't do that because you're not allowed to. The only things I had to go fishing for were aspects such as sound. This bothered me initially, but I've found, over time, that evolution is a process that brings its own rewards. Initially, it might seem like a big investment. This is the attitude of most people with technical aptitude. You're forgetting that most computer users do not have technical aptitude, they have no interest in getting it and therefore they are not going to get it. For them, investing time is, sadly, a rather complete waste. They more or less refuse to learn any basics of computer technology, or if they try, they are unsuccessful, so they are unable to understand why the system operates the way it does. They can memorize a few things, if they must, like they do with their Windows boxes. Anything more than that is not going to happen, no matter how many times you and I tell them it will serve them well in the long run. But in time, if your sys admin only needs to take care of his/her server, this means a greater saving for any IT department. Most employers of mine would disagree with you. They prefer engineers to do engineering, managers to manage and customer service staff to talk to customers. Paying any of these groups to become amateur sysadmins turns out to be a rather poor investment and leaves real work undone. That's why IT departments exist. A 'mentor' is not a permanent position, and many of us never even had one beside this list. That's because you had the aptitude and desire to learn. If you didn't have this ability, you could never be self-sufficient and would always need the guru. I'd say that everybody on this list has the ability and desire to learn, and some are here to teach as well. I'm also saying that most non-technical computer users are not capable of learning Debian, as it exists today. While some may disagree, I consider that a problem. -- Seth Goodman -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Open Source Supported Graphics Cards
On Mon, 14 Aug 2006, Seth Goodman wrote: desire to learn, and some are here to teach as well. I'm also saying that most non-technical computer users are not capable of learning Debian, as it exists today. While some may disagree, I consider that a problem. Your words of wisdom have been noted. Now Stick with windoz and stay happy forever. -ishwar -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Open Source Supported Graphics Cards
On Tue, 2006-08-15 at 01:20 +0200, Florian Kulzer wrote: On Mon, Aug 14, 2006 at 13:04:45 -0500, Seth Goodman wrote: Does that represent the Debian position? I'd very much like to know. If so, I'll continue to use it in server applications and stop recommending it to friends who are not computer professionals. That would certainly make my life easier and Microsoft more profitable. The official Debian position can be found here: http://www.debian.org/social_contract Achieving world domination by providing a drop-in replacement for Windows is not on the agenda. Don't get me wrong, you raise many good points, but I don't understand why the task to provide an operating system for Aunt Tilly should be assigned to Debian. There are already a number of Debian-derived distros which do quite a reasonable job at that. The ideal operating system should of course be easy, powerful and secure, but in real life you have to focus on two of these three properties and make sacrifices with respect to the third. I much prefer if Debian continues to emphasize being powerful and secure. I very much agree. To me the Linux distribution that Debian has become is very impressive, and I hope that continues. And if Debian is able to become more user-friendly, that is good. Seth, I agree with you as well, so long as user-friendliness does not interfere with powerful and secure as stated. It might be good to consider how many Windows users are capable of installing Windows... I know many people who use Windows but are not, however, capable of reinstalling Windows. I think that Debian at its current state is capable of replacing Windows in that way. The user would have to learn a bit, but how much are users going to have to learn in order to use Vista? -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Open Source Supported Graphics Cards
Seth Goodman wrote: On Monday, August 14, 2006 6:23 PM -0500, Katipo wrote: When I started out, all I had to master were the intracacies of apt-get. snip That's because you had the aptitude and desire to learn. But wait. I thought he had the apt-get. *ducks* -- Kent
Re: Open Source Supported Graphics Cards
On Monday 14 August 2006 17:10, Ishwar Rattan wrote: On Mon, 14 Aug 2006, Seth Goodman wrote: desire to learn, and some are here to teach as well. I'm also saying that most non-technical computer users are not capable of learning Debian, as it exists today. While some may disagree, I consider that a problem. Your words of wisdom have been noted. Now Stick with windoz and stay happy forever. Someone needs to go read the Advocacy HOWTO again. http://ursine.ca/cgi-bin/dwww/usr/share/doc/HOWTO/en-html/Advocacy.html -- Paul Johnson Email and IM (XMPP Google Talk): [EMAIL PROTECTED] Jabber: Because it's time to move forward http://jabber.ursine.ca/ pgpU2sue05yic.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Open Source Supported Graphics Cards
On Mon, Aug 14, 2006 at 08:10:48PM -0400, Ishwar Rattan wrote: On Mon, 14 Aug 2006, Seth Goodman wrote: desire to learn, and some are here to teach as well. I'm also saying that most non-technical computer users are not capable of learning Debian, as it exists today. While some may disagree, I consider that a problem. Your words of wisdom have been noted. Now Stick with windoz and stay happy forever. The question is whether you do your learning up front, or later. With Debian, it's up front. With Windows, it's later. Not the Windows installation is easier than Debian's -- it isn't. But the store you buy the computer at usually installs it for you. But Windows makes the learning hard, so you learn not even to try to learn. Then, when your system goes down, you are clueless and have to call in the expert. If you are lucky, the computer store that preinstalled WIndows for you will still be in business. I have had running Linux systems for a very long time now. But when the Windows on one system failed for the second time, it became uninstallable. If I hadn't had Linux, I might have ended up buying a new machine. -- hendrik -ishwar -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Open Source Supported Graphics Cards
On Monday 14 August 2006 11:04, Seth Goodman wrote: On Monday, August 14, 2006 6:20 AM -0500, George Borisov wrote: Anthony M Simonelli wrote: I just get a little upset when people want to mold Debian into something like a Windows clone. If you want that, try a Debian-derivative such as Linspire or Xandros. Spot on, dude. Does that represent the Debian position? I'd very much like to know. If so, I'll continue to use it in server applications and stop recommending it to friends who are not computer professionals. That would certainly make my life easier and Microsoft more profitable. Why? Microsoft Windows is considerably more difficult and takes longer than Debian to install and configure properly. -- Paul Johnson Email and IM (XMPP Google Talk): [EMAIL PROTECTED] Jabber: Because it's time to move forward http://jabber.ursine.ca/ pgpK2ukSF4yc9.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Open Source Supported Graphics Cards
Seth Goodman wrote: ... Microsoft's present marketing-blurb overtures in the direction of free/open source scream that they are aware of it also. Even that will quieten down, when the effluent from the quagmire of their own creation fills their mouths, as they go under for the final time. Nothing would make me happier than if I believed this. Unfortunately, they continue to do one thing right where the non-commercial Linux distros have consistently failed, and this prevents the scenario that you suggest from happening. That is, they provide a platform that the non-technical user can install and maintain without a guru at their disposal. We're not there, and I don't see much motion in that direction. I'm seeing more motion in that direction every time I see bugs solved in Debian. Packages become easier to use, including having better defaults and documentation. If you expect the Windows crowd to start reading Linux books and becoming computer-literate, that's not realistic. There will always be more people who don't read the books than those who do, and what _they_ choose will still drive the whole system. It doesn't matter how many times we tell them why we _know_ their machines are holier than a piece of Swiss cheese. They don't understand and it's just noise to them. As long as we insist on the current paradigm, Linux will continue to be the choice of professionals and largely unusable by the general public. There's no reason we can't make the product usable for the larger, computer-as-appliance group without diluting what it does for the software professional. -- Seth Goodman It is still necessary to teach a bare minimum of computer concepts. Something that might be a useful Debian project would be to document what configuration choices and text file edits are typically needed to get from install to the kind of Debian desktop system with applications useful for Internet access, writing/dtp/composition and the like that are useful to a significant percentage of users. Arthur. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Open Source Supported Graphics Cards
On Monday 14 August 2006 19:02, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Mon, Aug 14, 2006 at 08:10:48PM -0400, Ishwar Rattan wrote: On Mon, 14 Aug 2006, Seth Goodman wrote: desire to learn, and some are here to teach as well. I'm also saying that most non-technical computer users are not capable of learning Debian, as it exists today. While some may disagree, I consider that a problem. Your words of wisdom have been noted. Now Stick with windoz and stay happy forever. The question is whether you do your learning up front, or later. With Debian, it's up front. With Windows, it's later. Not the Windows installation is easier than Debian's -- it isn't. But the store you buy the computer at usually installs it for you. You can get Debian pre-installed. http://www.us.debian.org/distrib/pre-installed -- Paul Johnson Email and IM (XMPP Google Talk): [EMAIL PROTECTED] Jabber: Because it's time to move forward http://jabber.ursine.ca/ pgpNvtfEiV5UR.pgp Description: PGP signature
RE: Open Source Supported Graphics Cards
On Friday, August 11, 2006 10:39 PM -0500, Anthony M Simonelli wrote: That's a reasonable goal, even a good goal, if you are willing to remain a small, exclusive club. Actually, Debian is one of the fastest growing distribution according to Netcraft: http://news.netcraft.com/archives/2005/12/05/strong_growth_for_debian.ht ml and Linux in general is making it's mark with companies such as HP, IBM, and Google and around the world. The first line of that article is: Debian is currently the fastest growing Linux distribution for web servers, with more than 1.2 million active sites in December. This reinforces my point, which is that Debian, in its present form, will find use primarily among technically adept users, which are a minority in the computer market. The same goes for its adoption at large IT companies. The fact that Debian is taking web server market share from Red Hat does not indicate that it is making any inroads into becoming a usable desktop for average users. I'm arguing to consider the point of view of would-be Windows defectors. I don't believe the Debian project is not meant to be a Windows replacement. I don't even think it exists to compete with MS Windows, but to provide a free(dom) operating system for everyone. It may be free for everyone, but they can't use it. You can, I can, but the average Windows user can't. That's like saying that anyone is free to buy a Mercedes, all you need is the money. Here are a couple of cases for things that casual users can manage in Windows PC's but would have great difficulty in Debian. The following is not meant to say that Windows is good. It's not: it's crap. But they did do some things right, and we ought to take notice. You can get books that help. In fact, the Debian GNU/Linux 3.1 Bible (ISBN 0-7645-7644-5) is a great book for those just getting started with Debian and Linux and answers the first two common tasks they'd need to know as well as installation help and getting a desktop up and running. They also discuss Internet and Intranet services such as web servers, printing, file servers, FTP, etc, and it's only $40.00 (hey, you're not paying for the operating system!) I don't need books like that because I can read the documentation. The average Windows user is not going to read it. They don't need to read books to fire up their Windows boxen, and they don't expect to read books to move to Linux. If it were up to snuff, they wouldn't need to. You're preaching to the choir by telling me that a technically adept person can make Debian do most common tasks without inordinate difficulty. The average computer user, OTOH, is a completely different story. I just get a little upset when people want to mold Debian into something like a Windows clone. If you want that, try a Debian-derivative such as Linspire or Xandros. Linspire wants subscription money to keep it maintained. I don't know about Xandros. Ubuntu exists by the pleasure of a single individual. Knoppix is a live system and isn't meant for permanent disk installs. This request is not for me, it's for people who are stuck on Windows because they can't deal with a very old-fashioned and arcane command line interface. Computers for them are a tool, not a hobby and definitely not a way of life. They're not going to study manuals, memorize command arguments and the eclectic organization of the file system. How can we say we've made a free operating system for everyone, when less than 10% of the computer users are capable of running it? I also don't like it when people completely ignore the accomplishments of Microsoft with Windows and rip them to shreds as if their operating system is non-functional without considering that MS made the PC and an office suite so prevalent. I don't agree with their business tactics, licensing nightmares or their monopoly in the desktop world though. They are outright predators, and their bloated code requires faster hardware every year just to break even. However, they have made an incredible contribution by making computers accessible to people who are not technically inclined. More than accessible, people (sometimes) enjoy using them. Building in that degree of user accommodation does not make something a Windows clone. It just makes it a better product. Especially if you can still drive it from a terminal to do things no one ever thought of. -- Seth Goodman -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Open Source Supported Graphics Cards
On Sat, Aug 12, 2006 at 02:07:43AM -0500, Seth Goodman wrote: On Friday, August 11, 2006 10:39 PM -0500, Anthony M Simonelli wrote: I also don't like it when people completely ignore the accomplishments of Microsoft with Windows and rip them to shreds as if their operating system is non-functional without considering that MS made the PC and an office suite so prevalent. I don't agree with their business tactics, licensing nightmares or their monopoly in the desktop world though. They are outright predators, and their bloated code requires faster hardware every year just to break even. However, they have made an incredible contribution by making computers accessible to people who are not technically inclined. Actually, I think it's Apple that did that. More than accessible, people (sometimes) enjoy using them. Building in that degree of user accommodation does not make something a Windows clone. It just makes it a better product. Especially if you can still drive it from a terminal to do things no one ever thought of. -- Seth Goodman -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Open Source Supported Graphics Cards
On Tuesday, August 08, 2006 6:43 PM -0500, Paul Johnson wrote: On Tuesday 08 August 2006 10:38, Seth Goodman wrote: Since the end-users we need to interest, if we are ever to break out of the expert niche, will run X and use GUI's for everything, being limited to low-end 2D performance will be an ongoing problem. I thought the niche Debian was trying to fill was rock solid stability and reliability in a 100% free software format. If I'm confused, let me know. OT discussion That's a reasonable goal, even a good goal, if you are willing to remain a small, exclusive club. If you believe that people who use Debian need to be comfortable with the command line, consider natural language as a second language behind PERL and be fluent in regexp's, then it will remain a terrific operating system for the few. Maybe this is what most people in Debian want. I'm relatively new here, so if that's the case, please educate me. However, if you have a desire to bring quality, free software to a wider audience, you're not likely to get there with the present vision. For the majority of casual computer users, who are hostage to a certain evil corporation, the GUI is not just a convenience to be used after fully mastering command line operation. It is the _only_ way they are comfortable interacting with an operating system. If it can't be done through the GUI, it won't get done. Reading non-hyperlinked manuals and realizing that -a is different from -A, no less remembering which is which, is simply not in the cards for these folks. We presently _require_ people who use Debian to do this, or they are effectively hamstrung once it's installed. The software is free, if you are willing to devote a significant portion of your waking hours to learning the intricacies of an admittedly arcane system. Anyone is free to do that. That's fine if you're technically inclined. If not, you will find it very frustrating and consider it a waste of your time. People are generally loathe to do things they consider a waste of time, even if they have very little money, yet that's our price. Why do we require this? It's not for technical reasons, but because we believe it is _better_ for them as computer users. That might be true if we were mentoring young people studying computer science or electrical engineering. For non-technical users, it is an artificial barrier to entry into the world of open-source. And it's exactly that attitude, unless modified, that will keep Debian a great tool for a small group of sophisticated users, and unusable for everyone else. /OT discussion -- Seth Goodman -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Open Source Supported Graphics Cards
On Friday 11 August 2006 14:41, Seth Goodman wrote: On Tuesday, August 08, 2006 6:43 PM -0500, Paul Johnson wrote: On Tuesday 08 August 2006 10:38, Seth Goodman wrote: Since the end-users we need to interest, if we are ever to break out of the expert niche, will run X and use GUI's for everything, being limited to low-end 2D performance will be an ongoing problem. I thought the niche Debian was trying to fill was rock solid stability and reliability in a 100% free software format. If I'm confused, let me know. OT discussion That's a reasonable goal, even a good goal, if you are willing to remain a small, exclusive club. If you believe that people who use Debian need to be comfortable with the command line, consider natural language as a second language behind PERL and be fluent in regexp's, then it will remain a terrific operating system for the few. Maybe this is what most people in Debian want. I'm relatively new here, so if that's the case, please educate me. It's not that hard if you use a desktop environment and use the desktop environment task during installation. Getting it installed is the tricky part, but you'll only have to do it once. And if you don't like aptitude, there's kpackage, and I'm sure there's Gnome frontends, and even a web frontend (if you're really brave or on a trusted network). However, if you have a desire to bring quality, free software to a wider audience, you're not likely to get there with the present vision. For the majority of casual computer users, who are hostage to a certain evil corporation, the GUI is not just a convenience to be used after fully mastering command line operation. Though if you were read the HTML installation manual, or even just the mastheads, you probably would have gotten a base install with KDE installed without much problem. We presently _require_ people who use Debian to do this, or they are effectively hamstrung once it's installed. Only if you aren't reading your monitor during installation is this a problem. Why do we require this? It's not for technical reasons, but because we believe it is _better_ for them as computer users. Hypothesis not supported by evidence present. Sounds more like pilot error. -- Paul Johnson Email and IM (XMPP Google Talk): [EMAIL PROTECTED] Jabber: Because it's time to move forward http://ursine.ca/Ursine:Jabber pgp1UEfQgNjwe.pgp Description: PGP signature
RE: Open Source Supported Graphics Cards
On Friday, August 11, 2006 6:23 PM -0500, Paul Johnson wrote: On Friday 11 August 2006 14:41, Seth Goodman wrote: On Tuesday, August 08, 2006 6:43 PM -0500, Paul Johnson wrote: On Tuesday 08 August 2006 10:38, Seth Goodman wrote: Since the end-users we need to interest, if we are ever to break out of the expert niche, will run X and use GUI's for everything, being limited to low-end 2D performance will be an ongoing problem. I thought the niche Debian was trying to fill was rock solid stability and reliability in a 100% free software format. If I'm confused, let me know. OT discussion That's a reasonable goal, even a good goal, if you are willing to remain a small, exclusive club. If you believe that people who use Debian need to be comfortable with the command line, consider natural language as a second language behind PERL and be fluent in regexp's, then it will remain a terrific operating system for the few. Maybe this is what most people in Debian want. I'm relatively new here, so if that's the case, please educate me. It's not that hard if you use a desktop environment and use the desktop environment task during installation. Getting it installed is the tricky part, but you'll only have to do it once. And if you don't like aptitude, there's kpackage, and I'm sure there's Gnome frontends, and even a web frontend (if you're really brave or on a trusted network). Me thinks you misunderstand. I didn't have any real problem installing a Debian server or desktop. OTOH, I don't panic when asked to grep for patterns, write a PERL script or (at least in the distant past) write SED scripts. However, casual computer users cannot and will not be able to do any of those things. Getting the desktop installed is only a small part of the battle for a typical Windows user moving to Linux. That step is probably the easiest for a computer noob, and the problems will start soon after. However, if you have a desire to bring quality, free software to a wider audience, you're not likely to get there with the present vision. For the majority of casual computer users, who are hostage to a certain evil corporation, the GUI is not just a convenience to be used after fully mastering command line operation. Though if you were read the HTML installation manual, or even just the mastheads, you probably would have gotten a base install with KDE installed without much problem. Of course I read the manuals before I did my first install. I'd give them a B+ for experienced computer users, and a D for casual computer users. They refer to all manner of things of which the casual user hasn't the faintest idea, and of the large number of concepts they don't understand, they are at a complete loss to figure out which are relevant. For example, we all understand what a kernel is, what it does and when you need to think about it, which isn't often. This is not realistic for the casual computer user. Frankly, even if we did successfully explain this in plain speak, I have no illusions that a casual user could manage to build a kernel to run on their non-compliant hardware. It's just not a reasonable expectation. For the experienced user, it's just another task, and any time spent refreshing what you've forgotten is time well-spent. In the Windows environment, hardware detection and driver installation is largely automatic. Knoppix approaches this level of hardware awareness, but Debian seems to lag in this area. We presently _require_ people who use Debian to do this, or they are effectively hamstrung once it's installed. Only if you aren't reading your monitor during installation is this a problem. That only gets you to the end of installation. Besides, the average Windows user is not going to notice when hardware detection fails or there is a broken dependency because of the hundreds of lines of, to them, gibberish that scrolls by on the screen. We can watch this, they can't. Post installation, common tasks are not easily explained, and the documentation is often inconsistent or downright misleading. That's acceptable for experienced users. We have a sense when something doesn't sound right and will look elsewhere. When something works differently from the documentation, it's a challenge, not a brick wall. It all depends on your experience and point of view. I'm arguing to consider the point of view of would-be Windows defectors. Why do we require this? It's not for technical reasons, but because we believe it is _better_ for them as computer users. Hypothesis not supported by evidence present. Sounds more like pilot error. I humbly disagree. And that attitude will hardly attract Windows users. Deny a problem exists, and if there is something wrong, it's the user. Yes, Windows users, by virtue of not understanding the insides of their PC's, do commit an astonishing number of ID10T errors. The fact that so many
Re: Open Source Supported Graphics Cards
I thought the niche Debian was trying to fill was rock solid stability and reliability in a 100% free software format. If I'm confused, let me know. Right on. That's a reasonable goal, even a good goal, if you are willing to remain a small, exclusive club. Actually, Debian is one of the fastest growing distribution according to Netcraft: http://news.netcraft.com/archives/2005/12/05/strong_growth_for_debian.html and Linux in general is making it's mark with companies such as HP, IBM, and Google and around the world. I'm arguing to consider the point of view of would-be Windows defectors. I don't believe the Debian project is not meant to be a Windows replacement. I don't even think it exists to compete with MS Windows, but to provide a free(dom) operating system for everyone. Here are a couple of cases for things that casual users can manage in Windows PC's but would have great difficulty in Debian. The following is not meant to say that Windows is good. It's not: it's crap. But they did do some things right, and we ought to take notice. You can get books that help. In fact, the Debian GNU/Linux 3.1 Bible (ISBN 0-7645-7644-5) is a great book for those just getting started with Debian and Linux and answers the first two common tasks they'd need to know as well as installation help and getting a desktop up and running. They also discuss Internet and Intranet services such as web servers, printing, file servers, FTP, etc, and it's only $40.00 (hey, you're not paying for the operating system!) I just get a little upset when people want to mold Debian into something like a Windows clone. If you want that, try a Debian-derivative such as Linspire or Xandros. I also don't like it when people completely ignore the accomplishments of Microsoft with Windows and rip them to shreds as if their operating system is non-functional without considering that MS made the PC and an office suite so prevalent. I don't agree with their business tactics, licensing nightmares or their monopoly in the desktop world though. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Open Source Supported Graphics Cards
Alan Chandler wrote: I am planning on building myself a new computer from scratch, probably based on the new Intel Core 2 Duo chips, and am seeking opinions on the best graphics chipset/card that I should use. Basic criteria are as follows 1) Must be open source driver (under linux) 2) Some 3D capability - but not necessarily the fastest, but expect to run the following in the future (not particularly tried any of these yet) - Flight Gear - Blender - KDE4 I currently am running a Gigabyte Radeon 9200 - which seems just about ideal as it has the R200 chipset which seems fully supported. I would have liked to carry it over to my new machine. Unfortunately a) It has an AGP interface - newer motherboards seem to be PCI-E b) My favoured Hardware Supplier (http://www.dabs.com) don't seem to stock any graphics cards with this chipset as its far too old. My current exploration around this subject doesn't seem to get a very clear opinion. Most reviews seem to concentrate on ATI or Nvidia chipsets, with the requirement that I would then have to choose the binary drivers from these two manufactures. This is something I would like to avoid. Looking for alternatives at the dri.sourceforge.net web site, the chipsets with full support, mainly seem to be the older ones, with possibly Intel and Matrox offerings. Not sure I understand the detail - but this seems to mean a motherboard with an intel chipset, or get a Matrox G5500 separate card. What are don't really know is will these be sufficiently performant for the tasks I need it for. What can this list advise? In the longer term, look at what http://www.opengraphics.org is working on. -- Alan Chandler [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Open Source Supported Graphics Cards
On 08/08/06 18:27 PM, Alan Chandler wrote: Where that gets me to is that the best supported stuff seems to be Intel 950GMA - but that I might get by with a Radeon X300 or similar. I would probably go with the X850. The r300 project has made some great progress. Basic DRI support is in xorg 7 and it's an active project. Status is here: http://megahurts.dk/rune/r300_status.html You can grab one from ebay for $50 or so. I have one using that driver, but it's on FreeBSD (no xorg 7 yet, no kernel DRM yet). Looks like the community with get opengl running on this box before ATI will. Mitch -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Open Source Supported Graphics Cards
For open source graphics adapter support take a look at http://dri.freedesktop.org/wiki/ Regards, Jörg-Volker. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Open Source Supported Graphics Cards
On Tuesday 08 August 2006 10:50, Jörg-Volker Peetz wrote: For open source graphics adapter support take a look at http://dri.freedesktop.org/wiki/ This was my starting point to make the comments about Intel and Matrox that I did. Most of what is supported is so old, you can't buy stuff today - especially if you need a new motherboard for the core 2 duo. Where that gets me to is that the best supported stuff seems to be Intel 950GMA - but that I might get by with a Radeon X300 or similar. -- Alan Chandler http://www.chandlerfamily.org.uk
RE: Open Source Supported Graphics Cards
On Monday, August 07, 2006 7:33 AM -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I also heard that at that time the Intel chips were available on motherboards, but not on plug-in cards. Has the situation changed? Not as far as I know. If they have made any PCI-E graphics chips, they have not yet achieved any market penetration. Integrated graphics motherboard chipsets use main memory for the video frame buffer and soak up main memory bandwidth. This was a bad idea when Apple first did it and it's still a bad idea today, but it _is_ cheap. That being said, integrated graphics motherboard chipsets do a reasonable job for many 2D applications. Still, a little bit of extra resources on the motherboard would be extremely cost-effective and you would then have little incentive to buy a separate graphics card, unless you were a hard-core gamer. Since most motherboard vendors also produce graphics cards that sell for more than the motherboard, you can see why this is not done. This creates a real problem for open-source projects, since nVidia and ATI graphics chips dominate the market for even mid-range graphics cards. Since the end-users we need to interest, if we are ever to break out of the expert niche, will run X and use GUI's for everything, being limited to low-end 2D performance will be an ongoing problem. -- Seth Goodman -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Open Source Supported Graphics Cards
On Tuesday 08 August 2006 10:38, Seth Goodman wrote: Since the end-users we need to interest, if we are ever to break out of the expert niche, will run X and use GUI's for everything, being limited to low-end 2D performance will be an ongoing problem. I thought the niche Debian was trying to fill was rock solid stability and reliability in a 100% free software format. If I'm confused, let me know. -- Paul Johnson Email and IM (XMPP Google Talk): [EMAIL PROTECTED] Jabber: Because it's time to move forward http://ursine.ca/Ursine:Jabber pgpmsEJ4OGvZr.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Open Source Supported Graphics Cards
On Mon, Aug 07, 2006 at 12:49:02PM +0100, Alan Chandler wrote: I am planning on building myself a new computer from scratch, probably based on the new Intel Core 2 Duo chips, and am seeking opinions on the best graphics chipset/card that I should use. Basic criteria are as follows 1) Must be open source driver (under linux) 2) Some 3D capability - but not necessarily the fastest, but expect to run the following in the future (not particularly tried any of these yet) - Flight Gear - Blender - KDE4 I currently am running a Gigabyte Radeon 9200 - which seems just about ideal as it has the R200 chipset which seems fully supported. I would have liked to carry it over to my new machine. Unfortunately a) It has an AGP interface - newer motherboards seem to be PCI-E b) My favoured Hardware Supplier (http://www.dabs.com) don't seem to stock any graphics cards with this chipset as its far too old. My current exploration around this subject doesn't seem to get a very clear opinion. Most reviews seem to concentrate on ATI or Nvidia chipsets, with the requirement that I would then have to choose the binary drivers from these two manufactures. This is something I would like to avoid. Looking for alternatives at the dri.sourceforge.net web site, the chipsets with full support, mainly seem to be the older ones, with possibly Intel and Matrox offerings. Not sure I understand the detail - but this seems to mean a motherboard with an intel chipset, or get a Matrox G5500 separate card. What are don't really know is will these be sufficiently performant for the tasks I need it for. What can this list advise? Of the modern graphics chips, the Intel chips are the best supported in open source as their complete drivers are in the Linux kernel and in X. The other two choices, nVidia and ATi, both require proprietary drivers to get any semblance of decent performance. Regards, -Roberto -- Roberto C. Sanchez http://familiasanchez.net/~roberto signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Open Source Supported Graphics Cards
Cary Pembleton writes: Alan, It appears most of the ATI PCIe cards support Linux. I would look at the Fire GL or X800 series. Don't these require the use of ati binary only software? Which is against my criteria. -Original Message- From: Alan Chandler [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, August 07, 2006 7:49 AM To: debian-user@lists.debian.org Subject: Open Source Supported Graphics Cards I am planning on building myself a new computer from scratch, probably based on the new Intel Core 2 Duo chips, and am seeking opinions on the best graphics chipset/card that I should use. Basic criteria are as follows 1) Must be open source driver (under linux) 2) Some 3D capability - but not necessarily the fastest, but expect to run the following in the future (not particularly tried any of these yet) - Flight Gear - Blender - KDE4 I currently am running a Gigabyte Radeon 9200 - which seems just about ideal as it has the R200 chipset which seems fully supported. I would have liked to carry it over to my new machine. Unfortunately a) It has an AGP interface - newer motherboards seem to be PCI-E b) My favoured Hardware Supplier (http://www.dabs.com) don't seem to stock any graphics cards with this chipset as its far too old. My current exploration around this subject doesn't seem to get a very clear opinion. Most reviews seem to concentrate on ATI or Nvidia chipsets, with the requirement that I would then have to choose the binary drivers from these two manufactures. This is something I would like to avoid. Looking for alternatives at the dri.sourceforge.net web site, the chipsets with full support, mainly seem to be the older ones, with possibly Intel and Matrox offerings. Not sure I understand the detail - but this seems to mean a motherboard with an intel chipset, or get a Matrox G5500 separate card. What are don't really know is will these be sufficiently performant for the tasks I need it for. What can this list advise? -- Alan Chandler [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Alan Chandler [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Open Source Supported Graphics Cards
On Mon, Aug 07, 2006 at 08:07:23AM -0400, Roberto C. Sanchez wrote: On Mon, Aug 07, 2006 at 12:49:02PM +0100, Alan Chandler wrote: I am planning on building myself a new computer from scratch, probably based on the new Intel Core 2 Duo chips, and am seeking opinions on the best graphics chipset/card that I should use. Basic criteria are as follows 1) Must be open source driver (under linux) 2) Some 3D capability - but not necessarily the fastest, but expect to run the following in the future (not particularly tried any of these yet) - Flight Gear - Blender - KDE4 I currently am running a Gigabyte Radeon 9200 - which seems just about ideal as it has the R200 chipset which seems fully supported. I would have liked to carry it over to my new machine. Unfortunately a) It has an AGP interface - newer motherboards seem to be PCI-E b) My favoured Hardware Supplier (http://www.dabs.com) don't seem to stock any graphics cards with this chipset as its far too old. My current exploration around this subject doesn't seem to get a very clear opinion. Most reviews seem to concentrate on ATI or Nvidia chipsets, with the requirement that I would then have to choose the binary drivers from these two manufactures. This is something I would like to avoid. Looking for alternatives at the dri.sourceforge.net web site, the chipsets with full support, mainly seem to be the older ones, with possibly Intel and Matrox offerings. Not sure I understand the detail - but this seems to mean a motherboard with an intel chipset, or get a Matrox G5500 separate card. What are don't really know is will these be sufficiently performant for the tasks I need it for. What can this list advise? Of the modern graphics chips, the Intel chips are the best supported in open source as their complete drivers are in the Linux kernel and in X. The other two choices, nVidia and ATi, both require proprietary drivers to get any semblance of decent performance. Last I heard, Intel had announced their intention to make their own video drivers open source in order to have a competitive advantage over nvidia and ATI, but they hadn't yet done it. I also heard that at that time the Intel chips were available on motherboards, but not on plug-in cards. Has the situation changed? -- hendrik -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
