Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Hardware Manufacturers that Actively Support Linux?

Posted by Cliff on from the doing-more-than-paying-lip-service dept.

wirefarm asks: "I know there is are lot of well-supported pieces of hardware for Linux, but I was wondering, which vendors really go out of their way for the community? While tracking down drivers for a wireless PCMCIA card today, I found that the vendor boasted of having Linux support, but it was seemed that they were actually touting drivers that were community-developed, rather than written with any help of the company. So my question is this: Which companies really stand out when it comes to providing specs and developing drivers?"

21 of 596 comments (clear)

  1. Intel by swagr · · Score: 5, Informative

    My Compaq Evo n600c laptop had an eepro100 that wasn't supported by the kernel until 2.4.18.

    Intel had a src download driver that compiled and worked flawlessly.

    --

    -... --- .-. . -.. ..--..
  2. ATI by CynicTheHedgehog · · Score: 5, Informative

    ATI gets a lot of bad press for their drivers, but they do release the specifications for their hardware to multiple open source development groups. What you end up with is Free, open drivers that are as good as the groups that make them. This as opposed to NVidia, a company that although support Linux through binary drivers, does not release the source code or specifications.

    1. Re:ATI by CynicTheHedgehog · · Score: 5, Informative
      while ATI just says "here...good luck"


      Circa 1998, this was all anyone ever wanted. Remember the OSS (sound for linux) project? They claimed that if someone bought them a board, or gave them the specs, then they would write a driver for it. And they did, too. I suppose it's reasonable to expect a company to produce drivers for Linux, but remember, there are umpteen billion operating systems out there, and these companies don't have the time or resources to develop for all of them.

      Personally, I'd rather have the specs and free drivers that anyone could hack on. I'll bet the NVidia/AMD issue wouldn't have lasted a week (hell maybe not even a day), and with time people will hopefully no longer have a reason to bitch about drivers for ATI hardware.
    2. Re:ATI by Performer+Guy · · Score: 5, Informative

      NVIDIA actively support Linux by constantly releasing up to date drivers that are very high quality. The NVIDIA drivers are unquestionably the highest quality OpenGL implementation available on Linux without exception. ATI supply the specs but apart from that do almost nothing, they have enough trouble supporting high quality Windows drivers. The reason you need the specs is to get any kind of driver support at all, when the manufacturer is delivering full high quality up to date drivers with more OpenGL support and extension support and quality than anyone else I'd rather have that than specs and a driver development effort that can't keep up. OpenGL is not like most other driver efforts, there is a level of complexity and testing required which seems to require more support and maintenance and a higher level of expertise to get high quality than is currently applied to them by the Open Source community. I'm disappointed by people who constantly feel the need to dis NVIDIA when they do more to support Linux than any other hardware vendor, simply because the way they choose to support Linux doesn't match your philosophy.

      This is not a vendor who ignores Linux, they give Linux fantastic support at a level beyond any other hardware manufacturer due to the complexity of their effort. It also produces better results than the driver development models you espouse.

    3. Re:ATI by Fluffy+the+Cat · · Score: 5, Informative

      NVidia activey supports linux

      No, NVidia actively support Linux/x86. Want to use a GeForce in an Alpha? Oops. By releasing documentation, ATI allow their hardware to be used on all Linux platforms rather than a subset of the popular ones.

    4. Re:ATI by Hamshrew · · Score: 5, Informative

      As another person pointed out, that does little good when trying to use the Nvidia cards on another platform. While the binary driver is their choice, and I applaud the work they have done, there are other reasons to choose an open-source driver.

      As for ATI doing "almost nothing," they were, until very recently, paying developers to work on their open-source drivers, in addition to releasing specs, which was all the community asked for.

      --
      - Free tabletop fantasy gaming! Grey Lotus
    5. Re:ATI by dinivin · · Score: 4, Insightful


      Or FreeBSD.

      Or heaven forbid you want to run the latest development kernel.
      And don't even think about trying to run two nVidia cards at the same time with their driver. In fact, I couldn't even get my nVidia card to play nice with a PCI Permedia 2 card.

      Frankly, I'd rather not put up with crap like that :-)

      Dinivin

  3. Re:Not yet! by volsung · · Score: 4, Interesting
    Note to people looking for USB scanners: Epson has apparently been nice to the developers. From the SANE USB scanner list:

    Epson have[sic] been very helpful with the development of the backend, to the point of providing documentation that's not yet released.

  4. Note: by Telastyn · · Score: 5, Informative

    That just because they were community developed, doesn't mean the company didn't give out specs and info to facilatate the community's work.

    3com cards seem to work on everything
    Recent Intel network gear
    Recent Nvidia
    3dfx used to
    IBM (even before the Linux money, their laptops worked well)

  5. Creative Labs by Kaypro · · Score: 5, Informative

    I believe Creative has a dedicated site for the continued development of their sound card drivers. They even have a CVS up as well.

    http://opensource.creative.com/

    Cheers!

    --

    Eddy.WriteLinux.Com

  6. Nvidia... by ishark · · Score: 5, Informative

    Bad as it may sound, since they don't provide the source to their drivers, they seem to work seriously in improving them. I've been using them since my old TNT2 card, and the big problems present at the beginning have faded away to give place to a full featured, fast and reliable thing. I've also had answers to my mails reporting problems, which is always nice.

    Speed is now at the same level of Windows, features seem to be there as well (I don't remember if everything works at every resolution yet or no), and over time they have become stable enough to be used as primary XFree drivers (in the beginning I used them only when I needed openGL support).

    Given their work on the driver, I'm willing to live with their closed-sourceness. It's when it doesn't work and I cannot look in it to fix that I become less tolerant....

  7. 3ware by wiwo · · Score: 5, Informative

    3ware actively supports Linux as there a linux drivers on the CD you get with their RAID-Cards. Works fine, at least with SuSE 7.2+

  8. For USB scanners: Epson by Basje · · Score: 5, Informative

    According to the sane USB page they release even preliminary specs on demand: http://www.buzzard.org.uk/jonathan/scanners-usb.ht ml.

    Mandrake linux detected my 640U flawlessly, and it works great. And on top of that, it scans better and faster than my old scanner, which I killed while trying to get it working under linux :) (which I shall not name here)

    --
    the pun is mightier than the sword
  9. hit and miss... by laserjet · · Score: 4, Informative

    Linux support is kind of hit and miss right now with larger companies. For instance, HP is adding more linux support than ever to their printers, even the office jets, but if you go buy a scanner, they don't support it. Obviously, the community supports a lot of HP scanners, but not the company.

    HP is also supporting RedHat on it's new Itanium servers, and also supports RedHat with its mid-range storage arrays. They seem to be testing the waters, and I think they are doing all right for such a large and slow moving company.

    Samsung is also supporting their printers, by offering Linux drivers and Linux phone support (minimal, but it is there). This is a good thing.

    Qlogic and Emulex both support linux with some of their fibre channel HBA's.


    So as you can see, you kind of have to pick and choose who you get our stuff from. The corporations are still in the "test the waters" phase for the most part, before they dive in to linux head first. They don't want to get burned by wasting money doing all the work if it will not pay off. In another 3 years, I think Linux support will be fairly mainstream as far as business server and workstation equipment go, but it may still be hit and miss in the consumer market (i.e. webcams, cheap USB scanners, cheapo printers, etc.)

    --
    Moon Macrosystems. Sun's biggest competitor.
  10. DLink and a noname laptop by NETHED · · Score: 4, Informative

    DLink has pretty good support, especially for Linux. My dad's noname laptop came with a CD that provided Linux drivers, and they actively support them via the phone support.

    --
    --sig fault--
  11. Re:nvidia, but... by knewman_1971 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Call me crazy, or mod me as flamebait, but...

    Frankly, I couldn't care less if nvidia's drivers are open sourced. After spending months trying to play Quake II on a Voodoo5 5500, I bought a GeForceII MX 400. I was playing within 5 minutes of installing the card.

    I've owned an Intel Pocket Concert MP3 player for over a year...still can't use it on Linux...(yes, there is a project in ALPHA on freshmeat...and it's been in Aplha for the same ammount of time that I've owned the player.

    My concern with Linux drivers for hardware begins with "If the fscking thing supported at all?" and ends with "Hmmm. WHich kernel am I going to have to use today?". If a vendor actuallly takes the time to give me drivers, then fantastic. I'm just not going to quibble about the open source thing.

    I'll fight that battle when MOST vendors include drivers. Until then, I'm happy just to be able to use my shiny toys.

    --
    where is the "I feel for ya, but that's some funny ass shit" moderation?
  12. There are quite a few ! by forged · · Score: 5, Informative
    Pick one source from the following list, in no particular order:

    RedHat Hardware Channels
    http://www.redhat.com/marketplace/channel_hardware . tml
    (among others, there are Dell, Egenera ..)

    Linux Hardware
    http://www.linuxhardware.org/

    Linux at IBM
    http://www-1.ibm.com/linux/

    Linux at Compaq
    http://www.compaq.com/products/software/linux/

    It is a safe assumption that hardware from the 2 above manufacturer will be well supported, since they are supporting Linux heavilly.

    Last but not least, make sure to read the Howto:
    Linux Hardware compatibility HOWTO http://www.tldp.org/HOWTO/Hardware-HOWTO/

  13. Re:Typical response by swagr · · Score: 5, Funny

    This happened to me during an ADSL support call. They switched their DNSs and I wanted to know the new ones.

    "..I'm running on Linux..."

    "O.K. Go to Start... Settings... Control Panel..."

    "No. I'm not running Windows, I use Linux".

    "On a Mac?"

    "I just need to know the DNS numbers."

    "O.K. What's the problem again?"

    "My connection has been working fine. I ping IP addresses but can't resolve domain names. I think you guys switched your DNSs IPs."

    "......"

    "Do you have some numbers beside something that says 'DNS' or 'Domain Name Server'"

    "....... Oh yes."

    "Can I have them."

    ...

    --

    -... --- .-. . -.. ..--..
  14. NVIDIA For One.... by CDWert · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I would say NVIDIA for one, people complain constantly about closed specs etc.

    But the truth is it would be competivley BAD for Nvidia to release the specs, yes others have, they choose not to, thats fine with me, they do provide GOOD drivers, and the SRPMS, as well as tared gzipped kernel modules for you to compile on any Linux setup you wish, the actually libs are closed source but hell they DO provide drivers for an OS that accounts for a VERY small portion of their sales market.

    There are other vendors that provide Linux support, to be honest If I was in charge of a HW company, I wouldnt, I would provide the specs under some kind of closed agreement to 3rd party developers.

    NVIDIA Does provide nice linux drivers, I have, unlike other never had any problem, they release newer version and each generation (for the most part) they get better what more can you ask....(and please dont say provide the specs, if you are thinking or saying that Im betting you have no experince in engineering hardware for a commercial market where competition, especially in th 3d accel, is just downright evil)

    --
    Sig went tro...aahemmm.....fishing........
  15. Re:nvidia, but... by defile · · Score: 5, Informative

    Binary only drivers are inferior. Even when you have an open sourced kernel module to intermediate. The argument would be less unreasonable if it was source vs. open source, but it's not. It's binary only vs source available.

    In any case, nVidia wants to open source their drivers. The reason I got for them being binary only was that they licensed the AGP code from a third party which is unwilling to open their code. Too bad.

  16. Re:I second this... by Zathrus · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I think making the specs public is all we ever really asked for.

    Which is akin, in some cases, to saying "come on in and take the kitchen sink while you're at it" for hardware manufacturers.

    The Linux community (and the OSS community at large) needs to get over this. Open Source is fine and grand, but it's not always viable. With that in mind, a company should either make the interface available, or make reliable, fast, and solid drivers available on a regular basis.

    Those that choose neither may very well be reviled. Those that choose one or the other should be praised. And those that choose to reveal the interface AND help in writing the drivers should be revered.

    But bitching about a company that chooses to keep trade secrets secret is really f'ing stupid.