Linux Needs to Master Hardware to Beat Windows

Page 3 - Seeking answers? Join the Tom's Hardware community: where nearly two million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Status
Not open for further replies.
rbarone69:

You dont need to write and test your drivers for 30 kind of *nix systems.
Linux just is not build like that and if you write a good device driver (and more important document it well) it will run with on any distro using the kernel you created the driver for and most of the time on newer kernels.

Here comes the kicker if your driver was created well and described accordingly you dont need to release a new version when the kernel gets a update and even if it breaks for some unknown reasons chances are some one else will fix it.

If some one makes (use of) a obscure variation of the linux kernel and some how the driver wont drive he or she should simply either go with one of the mainstream linux colors ask the development team to port the driver or port it them self.
 
[citation][nom]randomizer[/nom]To the Windows fanboys who can't use Linux because they try to use it like Windows: Ask any average user how easy Windows is to use when they stumble across a problem. If I charged friends a typical rate that a "real" tech support guy did whenever they had a problem, I'd be loaded, and they'd be living in a slum. Windows is not easier than Linux (or to be more specific, certain distributions of Linux, as some are difficult by design), it's just different.[/citation]

ask your same "friend" how to solve a problem while running linux. see how that plays out.
 
[citation][nom]x11nt4[/nom]If (and there is no reason it can't be done) they did software install like OSX, IE drag to the applications folder and you are done, I think Linux would boom. [/citation]
Isn't that what ROX filer/desktop is for? Yet that's one of the smaller desktop environments out there compared to Gnome, KDE, or Xfce...
 
[citation][nom]thomaslompton[/nom]He makes it seems like Linux is almost to the point that it is good for general consumption. It may be great for programmers who can write whatever program they are missing, but for the average user, it is more difficult than it needs to be to install anything that isn't included in an Ubuntu community. No, hardware is just the beginning of Linuxs problems in gaining general consumer acceptance.[/citation]
Nope, it's not being lazy and do a google search for a program and then research the typical 3-command line codes to install a program...
 
[citation][nom]azz156[/nom]i've seen this every year "linux is growing" "its gaining more exposure". now come on who are we fooling here. linux has been around 1% of the market for the last 15 years & it doesnt look like it will ever change.now dont get me wrong, i do use ubuntu 9.10 64bit on my laptop with no issues but i doubt linux will ever get anywhere till they get rid of those stone age terminal commands, windows still has it but u never have to use it if you dont want to.[/citation]
Get rid of the "stone age" terminal commands? WTF does that have to do with anything about setting Linux back? I use the command-line in both OSes for the advanced features and the more-control they provide which many advance users prefer...they aren't going anywhere...
 
[citation][nom]hemelskonijn[/nom]Read the comments above and you will notice lines like "sudo apt-get doesnt have everything" and "my system had a deadlock on my garbage bin".Though the first is some one that clearly doesnt understand what he is doing and only knows the result he would like to get and the second ran in to problems with user permissions on files or folders both would not be having major problems if they knew not only the end results of their actions but also what those actions did.This is where ubuntu partly fails because of their semi unique permission system.[/citation]

for me, I have gotten used to many different distro of linux but from my posts I was talking about the troubles I faces when I just started off and also problems I commonly see on the forums that I go on.

look at many support forums for linux based os, the most common questions involve how to I install this program, how do I install this driver, how do I install this codec, and through out the thread you see lots of trial and error with commands many of which were from a tutorial for installing tar.gz (and many of the files in question are tar.gz)

but in windows, you never really see anything like this, the most you see is help I installed too many programs and now something is messed up.

in linux based OS most advanced things require command line to make changes, or command line to get to root and then open a editor for some random file in order to edit somethings.

in windows probably 99.9% of the advanced things can be done through the GUI, it has gotten so easy that users who don't know what there doing may get into the settings and mess things up

most people who have computers don't use them to game because most buy pre built $500 PC that cant run any games, what they use the system for is mainly basic things that almost any OS can do, but they like windows because it is easy to use, for basic, everything is point and click. and try finding a windows app that doesn't have an installer, there very few and there often small apps made by some random person who didn't have time or didn't feel like making a GUI, but in those cases the people are always happy to provide you with a batch file and when they don't many people will create one, for example on many open source forums where there apps that need a manual installation and command line work, I will often create an installer for them and offer it as a download option, I will also make batch files which provide a GUI like interface where instead of the user trying to figure out what the program does and go through help files that tell you bits and pieces of info or worst just rely on a threat with 5095045 posts and filter through the crap in order to find out the commands that work, I will add a menu where a button can be pressed and it will start a series of commands which does the work for the user.

if a app is designed to use the GPU to generate a rainbow table and theres a limited number that it can generate, why require the users to do a 170 character line of text to get the app to generate a table when there can be a batch menu that has the commands and combination already in it and the user presses a single button and the program does the same task?

in windows, it is easy to write an installer and it is easy to write a batch file and it cuts back on complaints of people who cant get the thing working because theres no chance of human error in an automated process, it is also quicker and easier to explain.

the best way I can think of decribing the user process of windows is that everything is guided, mostly everything has a GUI and the apps them self guide you through everything, they tell you what they can do and you select from what they offer, what you want them to do, theres little to no thinking involved, this is what the majority of computer users what and this is what windows and mac os provide while linux fails to provide.

why cant linux OS have a tar.gz install wizard where if you download it and open it will have a wizard that offers a automated installation of the file, linux needs to be more guided and automated in everything it does, it benefits the novice users and it is easier on the power users also because it takes less key presses and less work to do things.

having a automated process and a manual process wont make a difference in outcome.

if you worked in a factory and every few minutes you had to run to the other side of the building to press a button on a machine, if you could build a device and program it so when ever that was needed it will press it for you so you didn't have to get up from your post, would it make a difference in the result. when a program goes through a automated install , if you were to install the app manually through command line, will the app go like "oh he manually installed me so well that I will do a extra good job, even though I was programmed to add a sidebar, I might as well also win the lottery for him since he installed me so well!!"

that just doesn't happen, if it can be automated, let it be automated, it will be easier on everyone regardless of skill level
 
though i partly agree that it is automation might be good it might be interesting to know how most if not all programs you might find distributed as a .tar.gz are used.

Both tar and gz are file compression formats and in a way you could compare them to rar and zip files gz is even short for gzip.
Just like some programs on windows are shipped or downloaded as rar or zip files.

now to unzip or in this case un-.tar.gz this can be done by simply double clicking the the .tar.gz file you downloaded and drag the folder it contains to any location you see fit.
After you do that you select the folder and press your right mouse button and select open terminal here.

Once your terminal is ready type either ./nameofthejustextractedfolder or in case the program needs to be compiled in order to run you type "./configure" let it run type "make" and finally "make install".

I know that in the second case we used 3 commands in stead of pressing next 3 times but in turn we got a program compiled for our system ready to run.

Though your right and most users would not care less it is the way to ensure the program does not have to much weight and since it is compiled on our system and we got no errors we know it will fly as fast as possible on our system.
While at the same time any missing parts will result in a readable error like gcc-x is missing or not installed.
A computer user should be able to interpret that as i need to install gcc version x.

Like i said i in part agree that things could be more automated but i would prefer using one system to do hings like this.
However most questions about installations turn out to be from users that did not read the output before they posted on fora and or forgot to sudo the actual make install.
Thus again computer users no mater how simple they would like it to be should at least read and think before they start to complain.

This is however sadly also the reason windows has the most known exploits and this wont change as long as any magic money maker 890kb free porn viewer with added bonus msn smileys is installed using 3 or 4 clicks and no one reads the text between them.

To conclusion a universal drag and drop installation type system like opted above would be awesome but only if you could force the people that uses them to read the text they might be shown and since you cant it would only mean insecure systems.

To conclusion any installation system can be as easy as pie as even if you have to type out 3 or maybe 5 commands as long as you make it a routine.
Unzipping or unrarring and pressing ok and next a few times is just as hard for a real computer newbe.
I might be as bold to say aptitude and zypper are pretty much alike and i can use them both fine to install my stuff (love the zypper) however for a newbie it could be overwhelming to learn that they are both there and while one works on some systems and the other on some others none of them work on all systems.

But like any car owner even though you don't need to be a mechanic you do need to know how to fill up on gas what type of gas and it is handy to know how to change your wipers.
When the time comes that you ever need to fill your radiator any human with an IQ over 80 should be able to figure out how to do it and if they are lucky and their IQ is over 85 they should magically know that the pressured steam in the radiator is hot.

If people cant figure basic stuff out than they should not try to do anything related to that basic stuff.
 
quality testing in matters of hardware... Well, any way I look at it, the only thing I see is the following:

- if you don't feel like tremendous IP is kept in your drivers: send a patch set to the kernel's mailing list. If it's well-written, most distros will get it by the next round of updates.

If it's written by badly behaving monkeys, it won't. Quality test one: if it gets into the kernel, it's at least half-way good. If it gets out of staging and into main branch, it's quite good.

- If, like Nvidia (Ati/AMD is ambivalent here) you fear that people will know what's in your cards if you provide a free driver, then you'll make use of dkms - which will go and compile whatever code snippet you may wish for against any kernel headers you have installed.

- if you're thinking about a wi-fi driver, a file system driver, etc. then there are interfaces in the kernel that would allow you to write a complete, feature-ladden driver with a few thousands lines of code. Which is not too hard to QA.

Instead of rewriting a complete driver+interface+system service+installer for your driver. Which you will have to QA on: Win2000sp4, WinXP SP3, Win2003sp2, Vista SP1 and Vista SP2 (or Win2008R2 RTM/SP1), Win7, in 32 and 64 bit for those that have both architectures... In total, 10 architectures to test against. In Linux, you take care about endianness and types, you're all set for ARM, x86, x86-64, PPC and most others.

So, what's best? A complete software stack that you have to test against 10 versions, some dating back 10 years, or a reduced one that you need to write once well and be done with it? On the other hand, most current distros don't go back much more than 3 years, and even then they manually backport recent code. There is, for example, no need right now to support kernel 2.6.18...
 
[citation][nom]hemelskonijn[/nom]rbarone69:You dont need to write and test your drivers for 30 kind of *nix systems.Linux just is not build like that and if you write a good device driver (and more important document it well) it will run with on any distro using the kernel you created the driver for and most of the time on newer kernels.Here comes the kicker if your driver was created well and described accordingly you dont need to release a new version when the kernel gets a update and even if it breaks for some unknown reasons chances are some one else will fix it.If some one makes (use of) a obscure variation of the linux kernel and some how the driver wont drive he or she should simply either go with one of the mainstream linux colors ask the development team to port the driver or port it them self.[/citation]

I wasnt writing software drivers, I was referring to software compatibility and interfaces with each system. Same goes for drivers... You are right, if everyone followed the same set of "best practices" it would all be good... The problem is that when you have so many versions and so many developers with little leadership saying "this is how we will standardize" you run into problems. I've been in this business for all too long to realize that Windows, even with it's flaws, is better for business due to platform standardization. They have guidance and direction from not just a bunch of engineers. Also we found that running windows, with enterprise licensing, was cheaper than the extra time spent on Linux with a previous system. (Cost of people + increased time to develop offset the costs of the licenses)

Sorry, but generally engineers just do not understand how to properly communicate with end users making their systems complicated and hard to use, but very feature rich for those who know what they are doing. They need overall direction.

I wish all the systems the best. All efforts for all the developers are greatly appreciated by all who use the systems.
 
[citation][nom]d-block[/nom]ask your same "friend" how to solve a problem while running linux. see how that plays out.[/citation]
Any reason why you question whether or not they are a friend? I don't think that's particularly relevant.

I would expect a similar problem. The issue is that there is currently no operating system that is actually easy to use for a person with no technical literacy if something doesn't work as it should. Windows is not easy, Linux is not easy, OSX I'm not sure about as I've basically never used it. People who have been using an operating system (almost) exclusively for long periods have become accustomed to dealing with certain problems and ignore their existence because they seem trivial, but to a computer illiterate, without step-by-step instructions (and sometimes even with them), they will simply have no idea what to do. That is why tech support can charge so much, because they are the "elite" few who know what to do, or so most people think.

For example, I started up 3DS Max Design 2010 today and got a crash straight up. The error was with MS Visual C++ and gave a handy description along the lines of "R6025 - pure virtual function call." Now obviously someone who uses 3DS Max would not be as computer illiterate as your grandmother, however, such an error message would still be entirely meaningless to most people unless they've already corrected the problem before. Just as most people wouldn't know what a dependency is, most people wouldn't know what MS Visual C++ is, or what a virtual function call is, or how it has anything to do with their software. They'd call their IT department if working in an office.

If you are under the illusion that Windows is somehow easy then I suggest you look at it objectively, if possible. Familiarity is not simplicity.
 
[citation][nom]dgingeri[/nom]All the stupid applets developers make for Windows shouldn't even be there. I would make exceptions for certain things, such as support for 802.11g WPA2 and such, but those IBM applets in the pic are just a bunch of arrogant developers who think they can "make it better". All they are doing is increasing complexity and causing more crashes. The idiot developers for drivers for IBM, Creative Labs, HP, and such have got to get their heads out of their behinds and just use what is there. they may find it boring, but at least it will be stable.[/citation]

Very true. Worked tech support one summer, for a well known Internet provider's residential fiber services. Wireless problems tended towards a very small set of problems; if the user hadn't forgotten their password or something stupid like that, it was often a proprietary wireless driver that didn't get along with Windows. Most of the time, shutting that driver applet off and letting XP's zero-configuration wireless service do it fixed the problem. Persistent little things too.

[citation][nom]dgingeri[/nom]If you are under the illusion that Windows is somehow easy then I suggest you look at it objectively, if possible. Familiarity is not simplicity.[/citation]

You're right, it's not. But it does vastly increase the pool of people that can help. Familiarity isn't simplicity, but it has value.
 
[citation][nom]mayne92[/nom]Get rid of the "stone age" terminal commands? WTF does that have to do with anything about setting Linux back? I use the command-line in both OSes for the advanced features and the more-control they provide which many advance users prefer...they aren't going anywhere...[/citation]

maybe i worded it wrong but what im meaning is linux should give the option of a gui instead of forcing users to use terminal. by all means keep it in linux just add a gui version
 
What we need is a spiderweb chart of pc components that works with a paticulla linux and software to scan a pc and match with the chart.+
 
please let all the 11 year microsoft idiots continue to use microsoft
 
[citation][nom]nevertell[/nom]What we really need is a law- if you produce hardware, both linux, macOS and windows must support it as long as it's meant to be installed in an x86 machine.[/citation]
Good luck with that, seeing as Linux isn't owned by anyone and is Open Source. Who exactly becomes accountable and ultimately dragged in front of a judge for not complying with the law?
err... nobody?
 
"corporate cranial-rectal inversion"

I love this term! And oh so accurate for so many practices in the corporate world.
 
What linux neads is a shot throug the head. and be decrared DEAD
Im not flaming here linux is a real $h1t OS if you ever tryed it you would find it out your self.
1. its not user friendly
2. its bin around for like ever and is going no were its just 2 open source you got more then a 100 differend versions witch all have there quarks and strongpoints. then there are differend gui's that makes an even even more complicated mess. then is you want to install some thing there are tons of differend libs that are used , then you have to find a program for your GUI.
3. there is no one at the helm steering, I sait it above every one is just doing there thing there is no standaard! witch realy makes a even bigger mess of things.


There realy sould be some one that stans up and say What the F#($()#$!
are you all doing? we are going this way. use these libs , this GUI every thing els gets booted. So mutch energie gets waisted now days

Take mac osx for example,
its unix based but when you get down to it, is the same as linux.
why is osx better to use then linux?
better hardware support? ever sinds deadmoo got his hands on a version of osx for intel machines OSX has bin running on normal PC's with drivers provided by apple and the hack community.
I got a AMD phenom2 running OSX on a ati 785 chipset. this realy was a problem for Ubunto! but with a little hack of an apple driver osx works great. Osx drivers are made easy, uses kext files that plug direct in to the kernel.

apple has a few things
1 a man ontop saying 1 this is how we do it!
2 all the people follow his set of rules
* one GUI, and a terminal box nothing else
* said to developers use xcode to make programs nothing else
3 it has standards this makes it simple to install use and maintain its true
4 you have to pay for it. lol true

Unless LINUX abandons all those distro's and commits 2 1 standard it will just go on to be a nothing serius OS
 
What linux neads is a shot throug the head. and be decrared DEAD
Im not flaming here linux is a real $h1t OS if you ever tryed it you would find it out your self.
1. its not user friendly
2. its bin around for like ever and is going no were its just 2 open source you got more then a 100 differend versions witch all have there quarks and strongpoints. then there are differend gui's that makes an even even more complicated mess. then is you want to install some thing there are tons of differend libs that are used , then you have to find a program for your GUI.
3. there is no one at the helm steering, I sait it above every one is just doing there thing there is no standaard! witch realy makes a even bigger mess of things.


There realy sould be some one that stans up and say What the F#($()#$!
are you all doing? we are going this way. use these libs , this GUI every thing els gets booted. So mutch energie gets waisted now days

Take mac osx for example,
its unix based but when you get down to it, is the same as linux.
why is osx better to use then linux?
better hardware support? ever sinds deadmoo got his hands on a version of osx for intel machines OSX has bin running on normal PC's with drivers provided by apple and the hack community.
I got a AMD phenom2 running OSX on a ati 785 chipset. this realy was a problem for Ubunto! but with a little hack of an apple driver osx works great. Osx drivers are made easy, uses kext files that plug direct in to the kernel.

apple has a few things
1 a man ontop saying 1 this is how we do it!
2 all the people follow his set of rules
* one GUI, and a terminal box nothing else
* said to developers use xcode to make programs nothing else
3 it has standards this makes it simple to install use and maintain its true
4 you have to pay for it. lol true

Unless LINUX abandons all those distro's and commits 2 1 standard it will just go on to be a nothing serius OS
 
Status
Not open for further replies.