Re: [Desktop 12.10 Topic] The future of third-party driver installation

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 I didn't see this message until after the UDS session today, but I thought I'd explain quickly why my draft design isn't like the Device Manager in Windows. Jo-Erlend Schinstad wrote on 23/0

Re: [Desktop 12.10 Topic] The future of third-party driver installation

Den 23. april 2012 08:55, skrev Martin Pitt: > Jo-Erlend Schinstad [2012-04-20 1:56 +0200]: >> If this was going to be redesigned, I would rather see it as a "Hardware >> manager". > That's exactly what I want to avoid. If anything, the UI should become > easier, not more complex. Large trees with

Re: [Desktop 12.10 Topic] The future of third-party driver installation

Jo-Erlend Schinstad [2012-04-20 1:56 +0200]: > If this was going to be redesigned, I would rather see it as a "Hardware > manager". That's exactly what I want to avoid. If anything, the UI should become easier, not more complex. Large trees with lots of technobabble and incomprehensible hardware

Re: [Desktop 12.10 Topic] The future of third-party driver installation

Jo-Erlend Schinstad [2012-04-20 4:01 +0200]: > Exactly. So why does "the driver application" currently not show any > open drivers? The only case when it does that right now is when there are open source printer drivers available on openprinting.org for a printer you are about to set up. But the

Re: [Desktop 12.10 Topic] The future of third-party driver installation

Instead, we should provide an easy way of getting to the manufacturers support site. This is helpful to the user, and illustrates who is to "blame" at the same time. That's what we call a Ubu/Ubu situation. As I mentioned, the application should have a Send To function. That would enable you to

Re: [Desktop 12.10 Topic] The future of third-party driver installation

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Martin Pitt wrote on 18/04/12 08:14: > ... > > * We install some drivers (like Broadcom wifi) straight from > Ubiquity now, which certainly makes sense for devices where there > is no free alternative. "Ubuntu uses third-party software to display Fla

Re: [Desktop 12.10 Topic] The future of third-party driver installation

Den 20. april 2012 03:05, skrev Sean McNamara: > proprietary software running on their system. A lot of people think it > is important to remind our users that the *reason* why their OS runs > so well is because the vast preponderance of its software is free and > open source software. Licensing m

Re: [Desktop 12.10 Topic] The future of third-party driver installation

On Thu, Apr 19, 2012 at 7:56 PM, Jo-Erlend Schinstad wrote: > Den 18. april 2012 09:14, skrev Martin Pitt: >> Hello Desktop fans, >> >> We have had Jockey for quite a while now to perform the installation >> of proprietary (e. g. NVidia), alternative (e. g. fglrx vs. >> fglrx-updates), third-party

Re: [Desktop 12.10 Topic] The future of third-party driver installation

On Fri, Apr 20, 2012 at 01:56:53AM +0200, Jo-Erlend Schinstad wrote: > If this was going to be redesigned, I would rather see it as a "Hardware > manager". Ubuntu is currently promoting drivers as an optional extra. > But that's not true; drivers are always necessary for all hardware. One > problem

Re: [Desktop 12.10 Topic] The future of third-party driver installation

Den 18. april 2012 09:14, skrev Martin Pitt: > Hello Desktop fans, > > We have had Jockey for quite a while now to perform the installation > of proprietary (e. g. NVidia), alternative (e. g. fglrx vs. > fglrx-updates), third-party (e. g. from openprinting.org) drivers. Hardware! Yes, that's an ar