Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Ubuntu Is Looking At Offering Better WiFi Support By Using Intel's IWD

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

  • CochainComplex
    replied
    Originally posted by jo-erlend View Post

    I'm curious; did writing that make you feel like you had your bias confirmed or what was the point? I'm asking a serious question, because I see people doing this all the time, in many different contexts, and I really don't understand why they do it.
    I can only speak for myself but if I read the other comments ..I'm might not be the only one.
    On the one hand I'm really thankful that Ubuntu (Canonical) pushed the Linux System to a new audience of less technical users. This makes the Linux OS less niche and gave it more weight.

    On the other hand Canonical - as said by others tend to reinvent the wheel - instead of participating or make existing solutions better. This solutions are dismissed for the sake of implementing a new "better" solution but with CLA. Working hours of highly skilled Devs are wasted.
    And then the Project is ending up failed because it was forseenable that it is not beeing adopted as defacto standart in the Linux community because it was against the defacto principles of Linux.

    (Lately we can see that Canonical is making Gnome better because of van Vugt - very good btw!)

    Take Red Hat as an example with an equally high influence on the market. They push FOSS ideas instead of "hey here I am eat my stuff I wanna make money".
    I'm an ubuntu derivate user and I'm more on the debian side of the world - I even liked the Unity Desktop.
    But I really like how red hat is making money with their Linux Market implementation whilst keeping the spirit of FOSS.

    With canoncial what about Amazon? Was that necessary? A few more penny's but the average paranoid Linux user is pissed.
    Mir yes kewl idea but instead of putting their weight into the Wayland/Weston development and make the improvements there, Canonical has split the community and tried to force their CLA stuff again. Yes Mir has kewl ideas I know.

    Snaps cool ...but why only ONE stupid repo in the hands of canonical and again CLA? (I know I can recomplile my whole distro and then set another repo....)
    That is almost like switching off the Intel ME on my Thinkpad by overwriting the Frimwarechip - only on the software side.

    All this little but repeating and repeating patterns are just very charmless - and that being said just gives the impression of "Canonical over Community".
    In the Microsoft or Apple world that practise is common and "accepted" but Linux Users in general are really sensitive when it comes to that kind of behaviour.

    If was a former Windows user and have switched to Apple (2003) because of MS attitudes of the same kind.
    And I then have switched from Apple to Ubuntu (2012) because of this attitudes which are now going beyond that with unrepairable devices (#Right2repair).
    And now (recently) I have switched from Ubuntu to PopOS because of the crappy Snaps stuff which follows again the same attitude.

    ....it is the same pattern and you can see I hate it. Obviously I'm not the only one.

    Have a look at System76 - why are they liked by the community? Analyse and you will see because they know they can only get the linux people if they try to act in favour of the Linux FOSS philosophy.

    pop-shell - does it have any CLA? no.
    AFAIK their Telios Case is complete opensource ....without any f***** CLA thingy and they are still able to make money.

    Btw. I just switched to IWD and at the first glance it seems to be faster and more responsive then WPA_Supplicant

    edit fun reddit thread speculating of upstart would have been the defacto std like systemd if there where no CLA
    https://www.reddit.com/r/linux/comme...anonicals_cla/
    Last edited by CochainComplex; 13 August 2020, 05:57 AM.

    Leave a comment:


  • loganj
    replied
    Originally posted by starshipeleven View Post
    Did you try tweaking the BandModifier5Ghz value in the config? https://jlk.fjfi.cvut.cz/arch/manpages/man/iwd.config.5

    it should tip the scales in favor of choosing 5Ghz networks
    i did and it still default to 2ghz after a while



    Originally posted by sabian2008 View Post

    For me setting the BSSID in NetworkManager was also useful to prevent it from scanning every 5 minutes to see if a better signal version of my network was found (for roaming purposes). This is the only way I found to play online games without constant lag spikes, although I aknowledge that this might be network adapter dependent.
    i didn't use iwd with network manager. i just use it from terminal. and from the help at that time i couldn't find any option to set BSSID for it.
    right now i don't have it installed anymore but from everybodys answers it seem that there are some workarounds and no option to select a specific BSSID.

    Leave a comment:


  • grigi
    replied
    Originally posted by cynical View Post

    Seems to me you are rewriting history to fit your bias. Remind me, what was the viable solution to upstart at the time it was created?
    Huh? I was trying to provide context to answer a question.
    Please stop attacking people for perceived slights. It's not useful to the conversation.

    Leave a comment:


  • omer666
    replied
    Originally posted by cynical View Post

    Seems to me you are rewriting history to fit your bias. Remind me, what was the viable solution to upstart at the time it was created?
    It is not "rewriting history", it's just an interpretation of it, and to say the least, the most accurate. The problem is not that they go their own way, the problem is how they have been doing it. It got better recently, though.

    Leave a comment:


  • cynical
    replied
    Originally posted by grigi
    I think (s)he's alluding to the previous projects where Ubuntu went their own way when a viable solution already existed.
    Seems to me you are rewriting history to fit your bias. Remind me, what was the viable solution to upstart at the time it was created?

    Leave a comment:


  • k1e0x
    replied
    Originally posted by CommunityMember View Post

    Many access points ((nearly?) all enterprise ones, and some of the pro-sumer models) provide a hint (band steering) about preferring 5GHz over 2.4GHz, which addresses many use cases (and not just for IWD, but for other clients).

    And for IWD, there is the rank_5g_factor option which can address some other use cases.

    It should be noted that IWD already gives 5GHz some preference over 2.4GHz when things are approximately equivalent, but, of course, details always matter, which is why additional control is provided (via the rank_5g_factor option).
    Great... so my light bulb can keep disconnecting because the wap forces it up to 5g (idiotically) where it loses connection and drops back to 2.4g

    Leave a comment:


  • Danny3
    replied
    Finally!
    I've been testing it last year and it worked great, until I ran into some problems with reconnecting and on next reinstall I should wait for proper integration, which I hope it will happen now.
    I hope also that Intel continues to improve it and add more features to it.

    Leave a comment:


  • kreijack
    replied
    Originally posted by grigi View Post

    I think (s)he's alluding to the previous projects where Ubuntu went their own way when a viable solution already existed.
    Some examples are:
    * Bzr
    [...]
    Honestly, it's not that much, but they often do them for what appears to be the wrong reasons.
    I also think their insistence in having a CLA that any contributor needs to sign killed many of their projects for them.
    Even tough I agree that Ubuntu had the habit to develop new solution without a real needing of that, regarding bzr i remember a different story.

    I contributed to BZR and Mercurial at the time, so I think to know quite well what was the state. Before GIT the only big options as (D)CVS were:
    - cvs
    - subversion
    - bitkeeper (the first DCVS)

    Where bitkeeper was a big step ahead the others. However the frictions between the bitkeeper license constraints and the linux community started several projects like:
    - mercurial (written in python + some parts in C for performance purpose)
    - bazaar-ng aka bzr (written in python, but it started from the baazar/baz project written in C)
    - git (written in C + some bash scripting)

    Now GIT is definitely the winner, however in the beginning had few problems: the GIT user interface was very ugly and not very usable so some wrapper were available/needed; these wrappers provided a more user friendly interfaces (someone remember cogito /CG ?). In fact the the git-smc site[*] reports

    [...]But because Git was initially a toolkit for a version control system rather than a full user-friendly VCS, it has a number of subcommands that do low-level work and were designed to be chained together UNIX-style or called from scripts.[...]

    What I mean, is that at the time (2005), GIT was far to be what is today; so there were a number of reason to develop alternative tools. And I think that (at the time) canonical was right starting to develop BZR. To me BZR was a lot more user friendly than GIT. I think that GIT now is far superior than the others DCVS system, but at the time nobody could know that.


    -[*] https://git-scm.com/book/en/v2/Git-I...-and-Porcelain

    Leave a comment:


  • CommunityMember
    replied
    Originally posted by grigi View Post
    Honestly, it's not that much, but they often do them for what appears to be the wrong reasons.
    They typically had at least reasonable justification at the time the decision the made(*), although they (like others before them) have sometimes been resistant(**) to review that decision at an appropriate stage to confirm it is still the right choice given time and changing events.


    (*) Since it is hard to predict the future, sometimes the choices really are more of a guess about a path to take, or the need to get something done now (the perfect is the enemy of the good enough).

    (**) The term sometimes used is stubborn.
    Last edited by CommunityMember; 12 August 2020, 04:30 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • sabian2008
    replied
    Originally posted by CommunityMember View Post

    Both IWD and wpa_supplicant provide options to disable the background scanning.
    I couldn't make the option for wpa_supplicant work consistently and didn't even know about IWD (this was ~ 5 years ago). Not saying it couldn't be done, it was the only way I found. I don't know how general my experience could be, considering it was a pretty buggy adapter (in Linux at least).

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X