Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

How to help / support Linux ? - your idea's

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #31
    Originally posted by Kano View Post
    I do not fully get the coincidence between stable drivers and open source drivers. I had several ati cards which had several problems with open source drivers. Even with open specs it does not mean that everything works. It is more a psychological aspect that somebody prefers open source.
    Yup, that is pure truth especially as devices get more complex.

    Comment


    • #32
      Originally posted by »John« View Post
      I completely agree. The real question is "What's the route cause of the problem (if the relatively small market share even is a problem)?"
      I would like to get one thing straight though - we obviously disagree about this, but there's definitely no reason to insult each other. I was simply presenting my opinion on the matter and tried to support it with arguments based on the view from my own perspective. If you believe I have insulted you in any way in the process, then I'm really sorry, because I definitely didn't mean to. My opinions are never final before it's proven beyond any doubt that they're right and I'm more than happy to correct them accordingly when I'm presented with relevant evidence before that happens. I honestly believe you should start treating your opinions the same way instead of calling the thoughts of the others "diatribes of drivel" because it defeats the whole point of any discussion if you don't.
      I believe there's no point in continuing this dialog unless you realize what I'm talking about and start treating other members of this forum with appropriate respect.
      Keep in mind that the developers job is to make the computer accesable to the users, not the other way around.

      Most people don't know how to get to work if you ask them for directions, what makes you think we are going to fix the other bad habits they have. That is the key and fundemental difference between MS and Apple and most of the OS community.

      Comment


      • #33
        Originally posted by Kano View Post
        I do not fully get the coincidence between stable drivers and open source drivers. I had several ati cards which had several problems with open source drivers. Even with open specs it does not mean that everything works.
        That's because there isn't an easy one, since the quality of both blobs and libre drivers can be either perfect, crap or anything in between. The only thing that's even close to coincidence is that the blobs can by fixed and improved only by their creators and as their track record clearly indicates, they can be pretty reluctant to do so. On the other hand, open specs guarantee that it's possible to reach hardware's full potential, but only as long as there's someone able and willing to do the work - other than that it's always just a matter of time, which is actually what all these problems with libre software seem to be all about.

        Originally posted by Kano View Post
        It is more a psychological aspect that somebody prefers open source.
        That's right, as every opinion is a psychological phenomenon. But it still doesn't invalidate the fact, that this opinion is probably based on many perfectly valid reasons, so the real question is "Why do all these people prefer free and open code?"
        Ask yourself if the hardware manufacturers can really be trusted to keep providing their customers with stable and secure drivers, able to make the most of their hardware (both efficiency and feature-wise), as long as they need and all things considered, the obvious answer seems to be "most likely not."
        Take GPUs as a classic example:
        Is AMD making sure that those who need it can keep using the last fglrx version working with R5?? and older GPUs? No.
        Never mind - not every GPU manufacturer out there is doing the same. For example nVidia's blob for legacy hardware still works with latest kernels and X servers. But do they keep actually maintaining it (actively optimizing it, adding new features relevant to supported hardware and scanning the code for security)? If they say so, what makes you believe them (at least for stuff that isn't trivially visible to end users)? And even if they really do, how much longer are they gonna keep it up?
        Remember the saying "If you want something done right, you have to do it yourself"? I believe it's based on a bunch of very good reasons, at least as far as my experience can tell.
        Needless to say this problem is nothing specific just for GPUs, because various degrees of closed code breakage seems to be virtually ubiquitous throughout the ICT industry as firmware, blobs, operating systems and applications all tend to go completely haywire from time to time (definitely much more often than I consider acceptable).

        Originally posted by deanjo View Post
        Yup, that is pure truth especially as devices get more complex.
        I hope it's now clear that things are a little more complicated than that, but the time requirements for getting things right (open or closed) definitely increase with device complexity.

        Originally posted by Thatguy View Post
        Keep in mind that the developers job is to make the computer accesable to the users, not the other way around.

        Most people don't know how to get to work if you ask them for directions, what makes you think we are going to fix the other bad habits they have. That is the key and fundemental difference between MS and Apple and most of the OS community.
        I tend to be rather pessimistic when it comes to trying to estimate the chances of correcting any flaws of human nature. The problem is obviously on both sides and all I'm trying to say is that I'd hate to see us screwing up technically superior solution to any problem just to make up for the incompetence of it's potential users.

        Comment


        • #34
          Originally posted by »John« View Post

          I tend to be rather pessimistic when it comes to trying to estimate the chances of correcting any flaws of human nature. The problem is obviously on both sides and all I'm trying to say is that I'd hate to see us screwing up technically superior solution to any problem just to make up for the incompetence of it's potential users.
          that pyschology goes in both directions. Technical superiority is a matter of perspective and is relatively case based.

          In most ways concerning the users Mac OSX and Ms Windows are vastly technically superior to linux.

          The question becomes, how do you want to define your argument. If the system has incapable users by and in large due to intellegence or lack of apptitude, it must adapt or it become inferior to other systems.

          Regardless of performance or liscensing arrangments.

          Comment


          • #35
            Originally posted by Thatguy View Post
            Technical superiority is a matter of perspective and is relatively case based.

            In most ways concerning the users Mac OSX and Ms Windows are vastly technically superior to linux.
            Definitely. I keep saying that it's always a matter of respective user's perspective.
            As an engineer I tend to emphasize what's hidden under the hood and the resulting real-world experience when evaluating technical superiority.
            I don't want to go into much detail here as that would probably become grounds for further misunderstanding, but believe me that both me and those following suit can see a big difference (mostly for the better, otherwise they would be back in no time) after moving to Ubuntu.
            Let me just say that GNU/Linux could use a complete overhaul of GUI subsystem (already being worked on and I'm really curious how Wayland pans out as KMS and Gallium3D already rock), much more standardization (for example userspace environment and unified package management - both in terms of package format and dependency structure) and Winblow$ should really get rid of registry, the tendency to have almost everything hardwired (including vital stuff) instead of being able to dynamically adapt to changing environment and most importantly trying to keep backwards compatibility at all cost, resulting in all sorts of dirty mess.

            Originally posted by Thatguy View Post
            The question becomes, how do you want to define your argument. If the system has incapable users by and in large due to intellegence or lack of apptitude, it must adapt or it become inferior to other systems.
            If I didn't make myself clear by now, adapting for the needs of incapable users more than what is healthy and reasonable (which is a very thin line to cross) is exactly what I'm so afraid of, because the system going down that road is bound to become a total disaster.
            Whatever happens to GNU/Linux in the future, I really hope bringing more people aboard won't make it become just a free (as in price) replacement for MAC OS or Winblow$. That said, I'm always happy to see someone bringing over anything good and maybe even taking it a few steps further - for example I just love how Winblow$' GUI subsystem is able to switch GPUs or even fail and recover without the user even noticing and I can't wait to see that coming.

            Comment


            • #36
              Originally posted by »John« View Post
              Definitely. I keep saying that it's always a matter of respective user's perspective.
              As an engineer I tend to emphasize what's hidden under the hood and the resulting real-world experience when evaluating technical superiority.
              I don't want to go into much detail here as that would probably become grounds for further misunderstanding, but believe me that both me and those following suit can see a big difference (mostly for the better, otherwise they would be back in no time) after moving to Ubuntu.

              Ubuntu hopes to reduce the fracturing in the API and the ABI that is just plain retarded. One of the giggest problems is that release quality is not prioritized over release quantity. Ubuntu is likely one of the best versions of linux out, yet it has problems with abi and api. To many tool chains kit etc. Instead of making 500 half assed versions of damn near the same thing, make 1 or 2 really good versions instead.


              Originally posted by »John« View Post
              Let me just say that GNU/Linux could use a complete overhaul of GUI subsystem (already being worked on and I'm really curious how Wayland pans out as KMS and Gallium3D already rock), much more standardization (for example userspace environment and unified package management - both in terms of package format and dependency structure) and Winblow$ should really get rid of registry, the tendency to have almost everything hardwired (including vital stuff) instead of being able to dynamically adapt to changing environment and most importantly trying to keep backwards compatibility at all cost, resulting in all sorts of dirty mess.
              Well the first thing they should stop doing it putting everything in the kernel. Not everything needs to be in the kernel. Put things in the kernel that make sense, everything else should go outside of the kernel.



              Originally posted by »John« View Post
              If I didn't make myself clear by now, adapting for the needs of incapable users more than what is healthy and reasonable (which is a very thin line to cross) is exactly what I'm so afraid of, because the system going down that road is bound to become a total disaster.
              Whatever happens to GNU/Linux in the future, I really hope bringing more people aboard won't make it become just a free (as in price) replacement for MAC OS or Winblow$. That said, I'm always happy to see someone bringing over anything good and maybe even taking it a few steps further - for example I just love how Winblow$' GUI subsystem is able to switch GPUs or even fail and recover without the user even noticing and I can't wait to see that coming.

              Let me rant back here for a minute. As a example of a WTF is wrong with linux developers.

              Application names.

              Why is a photo editing and image art creation tool called gimp. WTF. Why not call it Free Art and Image editor. Or something else. One of my big annoyances is WTF is that program and is it any good, will it break the rest of the OS by overwriting various libs.

              the list of annoying crap like that is pretty long. Obscure or obfuscated naming shcemes. Why does VLC have a traffic cone for a icon, wouldn't a dvd or video tap make alot more sense.

              Not only does the application name give no information about function but the damn icon makes no sense either.

              thens there bash with its bizzare function name.

              shit like SUDO etc.

              not to mentions settings etc that are the same damn way. So not only can things be hard to configure but the naming schemes make it worse.

              Its not always about dumbing it down, but providing a logical application and configuration naming scheme.

              for instance Grub.

              WTF

              how about

              Bootmanager or something similar. GRUB WTF does that mean anyway ?

              its bigger then a few gui tricks its a gui and useability problem from naming on up.

              Comment


              • #37
                Some more examples can be made too, like a window with four colors representing an OS, or a guy with two faces and a big nose representing the MacOS.. Also Chrome and Safari has to do with the internet?

                I also can't believe that "Starbucks" is a place you go to get coffee, and that their logo is a mermaid with a ring around it



                ..
                Okay, I just did a quick google search which revealed that:
                GIMP stands for GNU Image Manipulation Program
                sudo can be interpreted as "Substitute User DO [command]"
                GRUB means GRand Unified Bootloader

                What can I say? OSS community likes acronyms. It's culture. And it's nice

                Comment


                • #38
                  Originally posted by renkin View Post
                  Some more examples can be made too, like a window with four colors representing an OS, or a guy with two faces and a big nose representing the MacOS.. Also Chrome and Safari has to do with the internet?

                  I also can't believe that "Starbucks" is a place you go to get coffee, and that their logo is a mermaid with a ring around it



                  ..
                  Okay, I just did a quick google search which revealed that:
                  GIMP stands for GNU Image Manipulation Program
                  sudo can be interpreted as "Substitute User DO [command]"
                  GRUB means GRand Unified Bootloader

                  What can I say? OSS community likes acronyms. It's culture. And it's nice

                  When you look at a icon it should embu the viewer with the purpose of the program it is attached, a box of crayon, a video dvd, a pair of scissor, a typewriter.

                  Icons are visual identifiers and without them being properly assigned most people mentally revolt.

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Originally posted by Thatguy View Post
                    Application names.

                    Why is a photo editing and image art creation tool called gimp. WTF. Why not call it Free Art and Image editor. Or something else. One of my big annoyances is WTF is that program and is it any good, will it break the rest of the OS by overwriting various libs.

                    the list of annoying crap like that is pretty long. Obscure or obfuscated naming shcemes. Why does VLC have a traffic cone for a icon, wouldn't a dvd or video tap make alot more sense.

                    Not only does the application name give no information about function but the damn icon makes no sense either.

                    thens there bash with its bizzare function name.

                    shit like SUDO etc.

                    not to mentions settings etc that are the same damn way. So not only can things be hard to configure but the naming schemes make it worse.

                    Its not always about dumbing it down, but providing a logical application and configuration naming scheme.

                    for instance Grub.

                    WTF

                    how about

                    Bootmanager or something similar. GRUB WTF does that mean anyway ?

                    its bigger then a few gui tricks its a gui and useability problem from naming on up.
                    LMFAO, so I suppose your pets are named Cat, Dog, and Fish. What do they call you? Human?

                    GIMP = GNU Image Manipulation ProgramGRUB = GRand Unified Bootloader
                    SUDO = SuperUser Do

                    Here are a few more you to grasp

                    CPU = Central Processing Unit or do you think that should be called "The Thinker"
                    RAM = Random Access Memory or do you think that should be "Stuff that I was told"

                    VLC's icon is a bit of an Easter Egg. The cone icon used in VLC is a reference to the traffic cones collected by Ecole Centrale's Networking Students' Association.

                    As far as worrying if installing something will overwrite various system libs that is not really a concern. Package managers do a very good job of managing that.

                    Part of the joys of programming and developing is to add a bit of personality to your project and often that involves application naming often poking fun at themselves. A good example of those would be like WINE, YaST, YASM. Years ago I co-developed an application that used to restore frequency information taken from sub harmonics in music that were lost in the recording. We,with tongue in cheek. called the the algorithm S.H.I.T. (Sub Harmonic Interpolation Technology). We had a great time telling people that S.H.I.T. made their music sound better.

                    In short, your rant sounds like an excuse to just bitch.

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Originally posted by deanjo View Post
                      LMFAO, so I suppose your pets are named Cat, Dog, and Fish. What do they call you? Human?
                      Hey Person, what's wrong with a dog named Dog?

                      Now on a more serious note, that user has a point when in regards to certains aspects of the operating system. Some generic functions should have a meaningful name and icon, like "control panel", "system settings", etc (1)... but when it comes to applications it doesn't make much sense, or else we would have Text Editor, Another Text Editor, Yet Another Text Editor, That's Right This Is One More Text Editor, The Greatest Text Editor Of Them All.

                      Back to the OP, I found out that contributing to open-source is more difficult than it seems. A while back I made an init script for transmission-daemon in openSUSE 11.3 since the package didn't include one, nor was there one available on the transmission website. I contacted the transmission authors who told me that, if I wanted to contribute that init script I should talk to the distribution's package maintainer and not them (2). I talked to someone (can't really recall who it was) on the openSUSE's package maintenance side that told me I should talk to upstream and not them... Basically I got kicked around and no one cared about my init script. I guess I'm probably the only person using transmission-daemon with openSUSE. Anyway, if anyone knows the correct way to contribute to an open-source project I'm all ears (eyes?).

                      (1) This is already taken care of in most modern DEs.
                      (2) Note that they have init scripts for some distros on their site.

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        The Greatest Text Editor Of Them All.
                        Hidden reference to notepad++ detected. :P

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Funny thing is about his rant is that he uses an operating system called "Haiku". By his standards I guess we should assume that it is Japanese poetry software instead of an attempt to revive an old failed operating system called Be.

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            Originally posted by curaga View Post
                            Hidden reference to notepad++ detected. :P
                            Notepad++.... must mean I can open it up twice or something.

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              How to help / support Linux ?
                              Contact with your hardware manufacturer every time when you have any sort of problem with hardware in Linux and ask for proper Linux support.

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                @Thatguy

                                I had to register to make this post because you are either horribly misinformed or a troll. On the topic of "unifying" distros or ui toolkits, you are essentially saying someone should force developers to work on what you want rather than what they want. I wish you the best of luck convincing anyone to do that.

                                As far as "jamming everything into the kernel" and system responsiveness goes... The kernel is the best place to have hardware related software, simply so there is less overhead. I'm not sure how your system is configured but mine runs a lot smoother on Ubuntu 10.10 than it does on Windows 7, so I don't think performance is an issue.

                                You say that most average users don't want to deal with Linux because it is unpolished, but that claim is ridiculous. My own mother began using it just fine, and she didn't even know where the power button on her computer was then. Face the facts, once a user understands concepts like folders, files, and browsers, any modern day GUI is interchangeable. And somehow in this day and age you are talking about typing commands in a terminal. What would an average user need to do that for?

                                The reason Linux market share is low compared to Windows (and to some extent OSX) is because it isn't preinstalled on OEM systems with everything configured like the other two. If people had to install Windows themselves I guarantee no average person would be using a computer. They would give up while trying to get drivers for everything.

                                And the reason OEMs aren't moving to Linux has nothing to do with performance or usability anymore, it's because they are bribed with low cost Windows volume licenses. If they try to provide alternatives Microsoft just has to threaten to raise the price of their product and they cave. Why do you think Dell keeps their Ubuntu based offerings off the main page of their site? If they thought Ubuntu wasn't any good they wouldn't have offered it at all. And OSX would probably have a lower install base than Linux if it were purchased without hardware. The only reason people know it exists is because they buy Macs that come with it.

                                In most ways concerning the users Mac OSX and Ms Windows are vastly technically superior to linux.
                                Name one.

                                Ubuntu is likely one of the best versions of linux out, yet it has problems with abi and api. To many tool chains kit etc.
                                What are those problems? Do you even know? Or are you just repeating random bits of things you've heard about Linux over the years but never truly understood. If you can explain yourself I'll take that back but I really don't think you know much about Linux besides what you remember when you tried it in 2002.

                                Sorry for being offtopic

                                I would recommend getting involved in the community through bug reports, writing software, or maybe teaching people how it works by writing guides or maintaining a website/blog related to it. Contributing financially to a project might help some but I don't think it is nearly as important as being involved socially.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X