Slashdot Mirror


Kernel Bug Means Linux Power Usage Remains High

An anonymous reader writes "The significant Linux kernel power regression reported back in April, which ended up being attributed to PCI-E Active State Power Management, is still not resolved even as Ubuntu 11.10 and Fedora 16 approach. Until Linux is able to handle ASPM in a manner more like Windows or the device drivers explicitly set the ASPM flag, users of many modern laptops need to use the "pcie_aspm=force" option to regain much of their battery life. At least a power bug affecting newer Intel hardware with the "energy performance bias" feature has been fixed. There's more information in this LaunchPad bug report and in the latest power consumption testing."

123 of 179 comments (clear)

  1. Re:You mean Moronix, right? by CajunArson · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Phoronix has issues because the guy running it likes to oversensationalize and hyperbolize to get traffic and ad revenue... which is to say it's exactly like Slashdot with the difference being that Phoronix actually does some useful work and there are valuable facts that Phoronix discovers.

    The (multiple) kernel power bugs are a very real problem affecting a large number of Linux users and Phoronix helped to shine a light on the issue and at least get the word out about work-arounds. I don't hang on everything that Phoronix publishes, but dismissing it just shows that you want to remain wilfully ignorant about real issues surrounding Linux so that you can appear 'l33t' to your friends.

    --
    AntiFA: An abbreviation for Anti First Amendment.
  2. Finally! by jaymzter · · Score: 3

    Seems like its been so long since relevant technical submissions were made to /. I remember being able to learn so many interesting OS tricks from poster's comments to articles and hearing about new software.

    Now it's mostly just crap about who pissed on who's patents...

    --
    If thou see a fair woman pay court to her, for thus thou wilt obtain love
    1. Re:Finally! by Aighearach · · Score: 1

      Did you think the Grand Taco left for no reason?

    2. Re:Finally! by cadeon · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Unfortunately, that's what the majority of the news is these days.

      Years ago, a kernel regression that didn't result in a lockup or massive data corruption would have been borderline slow-news-day material. Today, software quality as a whole has increased, and there's not as much of that (or as many groundbreaking new features) going on. There's still some interesting stuff going on in the mobile world, but PCs and Servers have largely been figured out for the time being. At least compared to what it was a while back.

      As much as I'd like to jump on this "Blame slashdot, slashdot sucks now" bandwagon, they're just reporting what's happening, IMHO.

      And if they aren't reporting what you think is newsworthy, blame yourself for not submitting 'real' stories and/or not drinking from the firehose.

    3. Re:Finally! by djlowe · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Now it's mostly just crap about who pissed on who's patents

      Well, that's marginally better than the copyright wars that reigned here not so long ago... or the global warming debate... or... what was before that? I forget.

      I imagine, however, that those generated more revenue. Patent battles among corporations are pretty much a battle among giants, and most of us here are just nerdly peons, fairly removed from such. They're gonna do whatever they want, work it out in the end, and the rest of us will get shat upon, one way or another.

      From here in the "cheap seats"? Shit is shit, regardless of who is dumping it on you, or so it seems to me.

      Cynically,

      dj

    4. Re:Finally! by ultranova · · Score: 1

      Well, that's marginally better than the copyright wars that reigned here not so long ago... or the global warming debate... or... what was before that? I forget.

      Religion, specifically Intelligent Design. Which typically degenerated into a poo-flinging contest even faster than those two since neither side knew neither theology nor science (or at least the people who made the most noise didn't).

      My theory is that these topics get posted cyclically to keep people from getting bored. It's not unlike crop rotation, with technical articles being the equivalent of letting the field lay fallow so it may regain its strength for the next round of pageview trolling topics.

      --

      Forget magic. Any technology distinguishable from divine power is insufficiently advanced.

    5. Re:Finally! by Blaskowicz · · Score: 1

      sadly, the hockey stick is true.

    6. Re:Finally! by bryan1945 · · Score: 1

      Never noticed he left. But he had no wireless, and was lame.

      --
      Vote monkeys into Congress. They are cheaper and more trustworthy.
    7. Re:Finally! by gardyloo · · Score: 1

      ... or... what was before that? I forget.
       

      Ponies!!!11111!1 and hot grits.

    8. Re:Finally! by EsbenMoseHansen · · Score: 1

      The wildest prediction would not submerge Denmark... for instance, I am about 50m above the surface of the sea.

      The capital Copenhagen, now, would be possible, at the central parts. But as we are set for a few-metres-rise-by-2100, even most of Copenhagen will be above-sea-level. At worst, it could be a new Venedi with bad weather and international cuisine.

      --
      Religion is regarded by the common people as true, by the wise as false, and by rulers as useful.
    9. Re:Finally! by Eunuchswear · · Score: 1

      Isn't the "global warming will turn Earth into a second Venus" - belief also a kind of religion?

      I mean, hey I sure can believe that we may have a few a little-warmer-than-usual years, but if the "Hockeystick" were true, Denmark and Florida should be diving-resorts by now.

      another strawman "demolished".

      Cretin.

      --
      Watch this Heartland Institute video
  3. It is not something that can be resolved... by kvvbassboy · · Score: 5, Informative

    It's a problem with the BIOS manufacturers, and the BIOS incorrectly reporting its ASPM capability. When an OEM installs Windows on a laptop, it can correctly tune these settings. But for a fresh install of Linux that YOU performed, a database of every motherboard + BIOS combination needs to be maintained in the open to set the force PCIE ASPM flag. If set wrongly, when the BIOS doesn't support it, it could lead to locking which is far more serious.

    There are other solutions to effectively manage power in Linux, like Jupiter.

    For more (and better) information, see the following links: About the Kernel 3.0 "Power Regression" Myth and PCIe, power management, and problematic BIOSes

    1. Re:It is not something that can be resolved... by ThatsMyNick · · Score: 2

      No, not always. But in this case it *IS* someone else's fault.
      Credit where credit is due, and fault where fault is due.

    2. Re:It is not something that can be resolved... by NoSig · · Score: 1

      How about on first boot on a new motherboard, Linux tries to set PCIE on, then runs tests that are going to result in the locking you mentioned if PCIE isn't actually available. Is that possible?

    3. Re:It is not something that can be resolved... by dbialac · · Score: 1

      > I used to use linux on the desktop, then when OSX came out because I didn't have to do these kinds of adjustments.
      I used to use linux on the desktop, then when OSX came out I switched because I didn't have to do these kinds of adjustments.

    4. Re:It is not something that can be resolved... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      They have different drivers. Additionally, there are other settings that can override the auto-detection in windows that can be set by the manufacturer.

    5. Re:It is not something that can be resolved... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Why do you think Grandma wants to use Windows?

      Of the two grandmas I know, one uses Linux (a relatively frequent user), one Windows (occasionally). Both because the person they're most likely to ask in case of problems use those systems as well, and both didn't set up their systems themselves.

    6. Re:It is not something that can be resolved... by Microlith · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Just because it's possible doesn't mean the zealots actually care about even trying. It's so much cooler to play the blame game, rather than focus on what's actually important: making things work!

      I like how you come out of the gate with an insult, and expect people to fix things for you.

      PROTIP: Kernel devs would rather play it safe than risk causing data loss.

      That someone else is often Redhat or Ubuntu, which means the fixes don't travel back upstream.

      No, it's unlikely they will either. I doubt they want to start randomly crashing people's machines.

      Even though it's the BIOS makers' fault, as an end user, I don't care.

      You should. You're aware of what's going on, so you should blame the people responsible.

    7. Re:It is not something that can be resolved... by MightyMartian · · Score: 1

      Oh give me a break. When Vista first came out all sorts of people were noticing battery life decreased substantially. Linux is hardly alone in the "WTF is causing that" department.

      --
      The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
    8. Re:It is not something that can be resolved... by mabhatter654 · · Score: 1

      Sure... Then Linux takes 20 minutes to boot.

      The problem is that things like the ACPI are by chipset, and manufacturer, model and firmware rev. PCI vendor and ID strings aren't enough to just make a table to check at start... Let alone all the hardware interactions in an end user machine.

      Even trying to look up the settings on websites that track this stuff for some random PC you didn't build yourself is an hours long daunting task... And Big Box stuff often never makes those lists.

    9. Re:It is not something that can be resolved... by DarwinSurvivor · · Score: 1

      That would be like if the company that made your engine created a bug where piston 3 would miss-fire ever 8th stroke, and then YOU demanding that the ECU programmers test for the bug when you start the car and not fire the 3rd piston each 8th revolution.

    10. Re:It is not something that can be resolved... by whoever57 · · Score: 2

      This is the kind of thing that makes linux a poor choice on the desktop. While the fix is correct from a technical perspective, it fails the "Grandma Test". If you're incredibly technical, no problem. Grandma, however, isn't going to know and understand how to enable ASPM via grub.conf. Her response is probably going to be, "Why are there worms in my computer?" A better route would be to develop a test to detect the error condition on the install of the OS, then save the configuration accordingly.

      The problem has its roots in the fact that very, very few people actually install Windows. I recently installed a non-OEM (bare Microsoft disk) copy of Windows 7 on a PC and guess what? It was very unstable. Crashed at least once per day. So, I tracked down the vendor's drivers and installed the chipset driver. Now it is stable.

      If Grandma installed her own copy of Windows, this kind of problem would be fixed very quickly.

      --
      The real "Libtards" are the Libertarians!
    11. Re:It is not something that can be resolved... by jaymz666 · · Score: 1

      Good luck determining all the windows drivers you need to install when rebuilding a laptop from bare drive and wanting to avoid all the bloatware that the manufacturer wants to put on it. Depending on the model number you may have one chipset, or another, depending on what options you choose for the wireless devices.

      It's no small task at all.

    12. Re:It is not something that can be resolved... by Burpmaster · · Score: 1

      This is the kind of thing that makes linux a poor choice on the desktop.

      No, it's the sort of thing that makes changing out the stock OS a poor choice on the desktop.

    13. Re:It is not something that can be resolved... by Joce640k · · Score: 1

      The bit I don't understand is why Linux sucks up everybody's battery just so some broken systems/drivers will work.

      Surely the correct thing to do is to follow the standards and let users vote with their wallets. That way the people making broken systems might get off their asses and do something about it.

      --
      No sig today...
    14. Re:It is not something that can be resolved... by Joce640k · · Score: 1

      When Vista first came out all sorts of people were noticing battery life decreased substantially.

      Yeah but Linux hasn't just come out and it isn't suddenly requiring new drivers from everybody because it broke the old model. Linux is supposed to be working by now. This is the year of Linux, remember?

      --
      No sig today...
    15. Re:It is not something that can be resolved... by rnswebx · · Score: 1

      I just did this two weeks ago on a Dell laptop. From start to fully functional OS, starting with a non-dell windows xp CD, including sound, network (both wireless and ethernet), and graphics drivers totaled about 2 hours. The total time is misleading as well because more than an hour of that was formatting and waiting for the installer to copy the files over.

      Dell's site was easy to navigate for my old laptop (Dell D620) and had all the drivers broken down by category. It was a complete no-brainer, and I'm quite certain my mom could've done it without issue.

    16. Re:It is not something that can be resolved... by jones_supa · · Score: 1

      Yeah, but is the Linux grandma one of those cases where she has been taught how to fire up the web browser, but for all other tasks this maintenance person has to hold the hand or dial in with ssh to set up things... :)

    17. Re:It is not something that can be resolved... by mcgrew · · Score: 1

      Thank you for that, it'll be useful when I get Linux on this driveless subnotebook. Power isn't a problem with the box that runs on AC.

    18. Re:It is not something that can be resolved... by LinuxIsGarbage · · Score: 1

      When Vista first came out all sorts of people were noticing battery life decreased substantially.

      Yeah but Linux hasn't just come out and it isn't suddenly requiring new drivers from everybody because it broke the old model. Linux is supposed to be working by now. This is the year of Linux, remember?

      Linux requires new drivers all the time. The kernel APIs/ABIs for drivers change all the time causing all sorts of breakage. Meanwhile in Windows 7 I can load Windows 2000 device drivers.

    19. Re:It is not something that can be resolved... by jaymz666 · · Score: 1

      Whenever I do the same with an HP, everything tends to work, however there is always one or two "unknown device"s in the device manager.

    20. Re:It is not something that can be resolved... by xtracto · · Score: 1

      Yeah, yeah, it's always everyone else's fault except the Linux kernel itself.

      Definitely, as with almost all Linux issues, this is not Linux fault, but it still is its problem. From a pragmatic point of view the fact is that Linux in a laptop draws more power than other operating systems (such as OSX or Windows).

      --
      Ubuntu is an African word meaning 'I can't configure Debian'
    21. Re:It is not something that can be resolved... by amazon10x · · Score: 1

      It's the same on Windows. When the DNS servers at our ISP go down it's not as if my mother just goes "Oh, I'll just pop into the control panel here and use the Google DNS server!"

      In my experience, anything beyond running a basic program on any OS is something that a non-computer literate user is not going to be able to do. Windows, Mac, and Linux are all equally difficult to use.

    22. Re:It is not something that can be resolved... by kermidge · · Score: 1

      Thank you for the information and the links. I found the discussion following Corbett's post at lwn.net enlightening. I'll be trying out Jupiter on my laptop.

    23. Re:It is not something that can be resolved... by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 1

      If your hardware is recent (as in, last few years), and you're installing Windows 7, all you need is to get Internet connectivity working. In many cases WiFi will work out of the box, otherwise you'll need wired - but once there, Windows Update can locate and install all needed drivers in vast majority of cases. I haven't had a case where I had to hunt down some driver in the last 2 years.

    24. Re:It is not something that can be resolved... by jaymz666 · · Score: 1

      I had an HP dv7t a couple of months ago, Windows 7 did not find all the drivers it needed automatically, by a long shot.

    25. Re:It is not something that can be resolved... by dbialac · · Score: 1

      > No, it's the sort of thing that makes changing out the stock OS a poor choice on the desktop.

      I can easily install Windows XP/Vista/7 on my mac, and it isn't the stock OS.

    26. Re:It is not something that can be resolved... by Burpmaster · · Score: 1

      It may not be the stock OS, but it still has official support from the manufacturer, which is a similar situation. And even with that, the install and setup process isn't totally user-friendly. I'm looking at these instructions.

      You have to do the partition setup twice. Once in MacOS to resize the existing filesystem and create a new partition, and again in the Windows installer to select the new partition as the install destination. Select the wrong partition, and you wipe out your data.

      Then it comes up in low graphics mode. Connect to the Internet, let Windows Update run and reboot for the graphics driver. Then put in the Mac OS disc, run the install program and reboot. If sound isn't working, download drivers from realtek.com and reboot.

      If Apple put the same effort into supporting Linux that they put into Windows, you wouldn't need the MacOS-side app at all. They'd upstream everything needed, so you can just boot the install disc. The partition setup done in the Ubuntu installer is essentially the same screen as the Boot Camp partition setup, except it directly leads into the install process without a reboot followed by a re-selection of the install partition. After the first boot of the installed OS, you'd have at most one more reboot to install a proprietary graphics driver in the case of nVidia/ATI graphics.

      So you'd do partition setup once instead of twice, you'd reboot 0-1 times instead of 2-3 times (after OS install), and there'd be no "insert this disc and run setup.exe" or downloading from specific websites. Everything needed to run well (sound, power management, etc) would be integrated into the install disc (except proprietary graphics drivers, and Windows is no better on this matter).

      So let me clarify my original statement: Any OS is likely to not run well on a system if there isn't official support for the OS from the system's manufacturer. Linux isn't immune to this rule, but it's far better at operating without official support than any other OS out there. To convey this as a failure on the part of Linux devs is absurd. If you want a system that runs an OS well, buy from a competent manufacturer that officially supports the OS.

    27. Re:It is not something that can be resolved... by badkarmadayaccount · · Score: 1

      Hairyfeet? Is that you?

      --
      I know tobacco is bad for you, so I smoke weed with crack.
    28. Re:It is not something that can be resolved... by billcopc · · Score: 1

      Bad car analogy, because an ECU can actually do that.

      --
      -Billco, Fnarg.com
  4. absolutely....buggy BIOS's are the problem by Chirs · · Score: 1

    If the BIOS reports ASPM it'll be used. If it doesn't, then Linux can't assume that it works.

    1. Re:absolutely....buggy BIOS's are the problem by kvvbassboy · · Score: 2

      Yes, but apparently a lot of the time the BIOS doesn't report ASPM even if it does support. You are right in that Linux can't assume anything, but OEMs are aware of it.

    2. Re:absolutely....buggy BIOS's are the problem by hedwards · · Score: 2, Insightful

      And this sort of thing really ought to be used to slap MS upside the head for behaving irresponsibly. Years back when ACPI was first coming out and a significant number of motherboard models were shipped with a broken DSDT that would only function with Windows. The company creating the firmware didn't care and MS had the money to work around the problem leaving Windows the only platform that would work correctly.

      MS could have solved the problem by refusing to implement work arounds, but opted to go out of its way to work around broken implementations rather than force the devs to program the DSDT correctly.

    3. Re:absolutely....buggy BIOS's are the problem by 93+Escort+Wagon · · Score: 1, Funny

      And this sort of thing really ought to be used to slap MS upside the head for behaving irresponsibly.

      Wow, I knew someone would find a way to blame Microsoft for this... but so early in the thread - well done! Hey, there's a little girl missing in the Los Angeles area - could you find a way to blame Microsoft for her disappearance as well?

      It's like the "Six Degrees of Kevin Bacon" game, but for Linux fanboys!

      --
      #DeleteChrome
    4. Re:absolutely....buggy BIOS's are the problem by mabhatter654 · · Score: 2

      Um.. The "Halloween Documents"?

      That was a series of leaked emails from 1999-ish where Microsoft had discussed that hardware was "too standard" so actually encouraged this as a way for OEMs that sell finished systems to look better... And to spike the budding Open Source as well.

      Intel happily chipped in because the pushed specs like USB where every device can be super cheap... And controlled by the CPU... all those $39 printers, winmodems, GMA900, etc all sucked up CPU so Intel could sell more... And all those devices that used to be independant now were tied to windows.

      The net effect was that all the device makers were spending time making the cheapest devices, and driver writers were spending all their time fighting windows.. And everybody else's drivers. It was simply impractical to support anything else.

    5. Re:absolutely....buggy BIOS's are the problem by hedwards · · Score: 3, Informative

      It's pretty well established that the ACPI implementation that MS was using with Win XP was non-standard. The one that folks had access to wouldn't compile the DSDTs that were coming with a lot of the computers because they were buggy and non-standard. MS had the advantage of controlling the only validation program that mattered and could hard code into their OS the bits necessary to work with the most common bugs.

      Unfortunately for Linux, *BSD and everybody else, those coders didn't have access to that information and had to go to a huge amount of work to rewrite the DSDT and load that so that it would work as the standard specify.

      Also, nice ad hominem you've got there, I am not a Linux fanboy,

    6. Re:absolutely....buggy BIOS's are the problem by Lehk228 · · Score: 1

      seems to me that such features could be set up using a function probing tool that tested the function of each command and logged it so they system could know what does work, what does not work, and what crashes the system, submit results back to t he repository and linux will have a more complete and accurate database than windows has (include information on lower value probabilistic errors rather than just does/does not work, warn the user when yea this model is supposed to work but there is a 1/2000 chance each time it is called of crashing instead of working.

      --
      Snowden and Manning are heroes.
  5. Intel? by oldhack · · Score: 2

    Why use Intel icon when it's a Linux issue?

    --
    Fuck systemd. Fuck Redhat. Fuck Soylent, too. Wait, scratch the last one.
    1. Re:Intel? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      It's a motherboard issue. BIOS supports ASPM but doesn't advertise it => Linux doesn't try using hardware that isn't there => power usage goes up => Linux gets blamed. Fucking Microsoft.

    2. Re:Intel? by JasterBobaMereel · · Score: 1

      ASPM is implemented incorrectly in many motherboards, either fails to advertise it supports it when it does, or advertises it supports it when it doesn't

      MS have worked around the issue rather than getting the manufacturers to fix it .. so now everyone else has to follow suit ...

      I suspect MS do it wrong on a few systems, but no-one notices because everyone else does it wrong as well

      Blame the MB, Bios manufacturers for not caring about quality, and blame MS for not using the clout they have to force people to do it right ...

      --
      Puteulanus fenestra mortis
  6. Re:You mean Moronix, right? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

    Phoronix testing of video devices has been very helpful to me. The state of Intel and AMD video drivers is analysed in enough detail to make good decisions about hardware for embedded systems. I've found high correlation between my own test results and those of Phoronix.

  7. Re:Phoronix? by RMingin · · Score: 1

    Yeah, I'm still a little bitter that that issue came to nothing in the end. It certainly did look like parts of a Linux-native Steam GUI.

    --
    The preceding comment is my own, and in no way construes an opinon of the Emperor of Mankind.
  8. Re:You mean Moronix, right? by PixetaledPikachu · · Score: 2

    +1. I've been sticking with Maverick on my Vaio E, since Natty actually slashed half of my battery life, even when forcing ASPM

  9. Re:You mean Moronix, right? by ToasterMonkey · · Score: 1

    Phoronix has issues because the guy running it likes to oversensationalize and hyperbolize to get traffic and ad revenue... which is to say it's exactly like Slashdot with the difference being that Phoronix actually does some useful work and there are valuable facts that Phoronix discovers.

    The (multiple) kernel power bugs are a very real problem affecting a large number of Linux users and Phoronix helped to shine a light on the issue and at least get the word out about work-arounds. I don't hang on everything that Phoronix publishes, but dismissing it just shows that you want to remain wilfully ignorant about real issues surrounding Linux so that you can appear 'l33t' to your friends.

    Welcome to New Media, same as the Old Media.

  10. Why bother? by msobkow · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The marginal performance improvements you get by tweaking kernel settings will not make one whit of difference to the average user unless there is a glaring performance issue like the power drain currently being discussed.

    Grandma isn't going to install Linux on her laptop -- you are. And as the technically knowledgeable person, you should be doing any such tweaking. Other systems have the benefit of the OEM doing the tweaking and tuning, but it does get done by somebody. Don't blame Linux for not doing something automagically that other systems don't do, either.

    "...most linux development is primarily focused on servers..."

    I don't believe that's true. While server tweaks get the press, there is a lot of effort put into the desktop experience as well. You're just far more likely to hear about kernel tweaks that are useful for desktop performance from the "real time systems" people.

    --
    I do not fail; I succeed at finding out what does not work.
    1. Re:Why bother? by martin-boundary · · Score: 2

      No, but if you love your grandma, then you prioritize her over some other stuff...

    2. Re:Why bother? by jhol13 · · Score: 1

      Well, Linux then clearly does not pass "nerd" test either. Or perhaps I am not nerd enough. Anyway I do not even know most of the "tweaking" parameters, and I could not care less. I just want it to work.

    3. Re:Why bother? by Haedrian · · Score: 1

      Grandma isn't going to install Linux on her laptop -- you are. .

      Grandparents are incapable of installing anything which isn't an adware-ridden mess.

      Its actually quite amazing that they can't set up anyhting else.

    4. Re:Why bother? by maztuhblastah · · Score: 1

      Well, Linux then clearly does not pass "nerd" test either. Or perhaps I am not nerd enough. Anyway I do not even know most of the "tweaking" parameters, and I could not care less. I just want it to work.

      Fair enough.

      So go get yourself a new laptop, replace the drive and install Windows.

      Ah, ah, ah. No. Don't install those drivers or that update from the OEM's site! That's a tweak. We're trying to be fair here. No tweaking. Just the OS.

      Ok, so now that you've got it installed, you might be wondering why power management isn't as good and why some of the hardware doesn't work the way it used to.

      Now you know my frustration with Windows. I don't know most of the "tweaking" parameters, and I could not care less. I just want it to work.

    5. Re:Why bother? by Urkki · · Score: 1

      No, but if you love your grandma, then you prioritize her over some other stuff...

      Yes, prioritise spending time with your grandma over troubleshooting her Linux installation... Be responsible, don't install Linux!

    6. Re:Why bother? by Pharmboy · · Score: 1

      "...most linux development is primarily focused on servers..."

      I don't believe that's true.

      Be serious. The overwhelming majority of the install base is on the server, you can't really believe that majority of the development isn't as well. There are a number of good reasons why most development is on the server, not the least of which is that because Linux is more difficult to configure initially but is arguably easy to maintain once configured, and while 10% of the desktop installers are nerds, 100% of the server installers are nerds, making it less of an issue.

      There are a lot of people throwing resources at the Linux desktop, to be sure, but most of the resources ARE for Linux as a server. Even programs like Apache, which can run on Windows, are primarily developed for Linux and to a lesser degree, FreeBSD. Linux desktop is a moving target (primarily because of the GUI) but Linux on the server isn't that much different than it was 10 or 15 years ago, just better like the hardware.

      Even Redhat and IBM aren't that serious about the desktop at this stage, and they are the largest supporters of Linux in the corporate world. Most of their resources surely go into the server side, not the desktop side.

      --
      Tequila: It's not just for breakfast anymore!
    7. Re:Why bother? by jones_supa · · Score: 1

      Not necessarily so. With some machines you don't have to do anything, with some you really do have to grab a bunch of stuff from the OEM website. It still varies.

    8. Re:Why bother? by mcgrew · · Score: 2

      It's not just Grandma, but uncle and nephew as well. Being old doesn't make one ignorant, failure to want to learn does. Take it from a 59 year old Linux-using nerd who has folks in their 20s asking me to help them with their computers.

    9. Re:Why bother? by mcgrew · · Score: 1

      WTF? Your FUD is just plain wrong. A Linux install is easier and takes far less time than debugging her virus-ridden Windows install, especially if Windows is so screwed it requires a reinstall. The last Windows install I did was XP and it was a royal pain in the ass and VERY time consuming.

      When Granny's PC will no longer boot, a Linux install will give you far more time to spend with Granny than Windows will. And once it's installed it's not likely to need any more work until you have a hardware failure.

      Getting Linux installed on a machine without optical disks isn't easy, though. I'm still trying to get either kubuntu or Mandriva on this Acer subnotebook and almost ruined a $40 thumb drive -- Win 7 coulfn't read it. Fortunately all I had to do was insert it in the big computer and Linux fixed it with no problems. Still can't get it installed (yet - I did it on an earlier machine like this one, so I'll get it).

      But on a desktop or full notebook with a CD or DVD, installing Linux is quick, easy, and painless. Far easier than a Windows install.

      I miss DOS; an OS install was simply COPY A:\*.* C:\

    10. Re:Why bother? by Urkki · · Score: 1

      Well, actually I mostly agree, except with the special (but unfortunately not too uncommon) case of having a laptop with a poorly supported WLAN chipset needing a closed driver... Often leading to the all-too-common dilemma of needing Internet access to get Internet access... My above post was specifically in relation to TFA, and how it demonstrates, if you install Linux, be preparted to Google for solutions to obscure problems, or be satisfied with poor performance and bad rep for Linux.

      About installing Linux... I've successfully used http://goodbye-microsoft.com/ on top of XP, at least.

    11. Re:Why bother? by amazon10x · · Score: 1

      Use http://www.pendrivelinux.com/downloads/Universal-USB-Installer/Universal-USB-Installer.exe which ubuntu recommends, or use unetbootin.

      You wouldn't be complaining if you've ever tried to install Windows XP from a usb drive. It's nearly impossible (I've never succeeded). I think it's better with win7 now.

    12. Re:Why bother? by diego.viola · · Score: 1

      Getting Linux installed on a machine without optical disks is very easy. All you have to do is grab a Linux ISO image (installer or live cd) and dd the ISO file to a USB flash drive.

      e.g.

      > dd if=/dev/linux.iso of=/dev/sdb

      (assuming that /dev/sdb is your USB flash drive)

      Then reboot the computer, hit F8 (depending on your BIOS) and boot from the USB flash drive.

      I can't recall when was the last time I used optical media, USB flash drive FTW.

    13. Re:Why bother? by jhol13 · · Score: 1

      Windows??? What it has to do with the problem (Linux does not work)?

  11. solutions: by Gravis+Zero · · Score: 1

    - replace BIOS (perhaps demand that the manufacturer update it)
    - create a large (online) database of MBs (best identified by a list of hardware) that support ASPM and check it upon installation

    --
    Anons need not reply. Questions end with a question mark.
    1. Re:solutions: by DarwinSurvivor · · Score: 1

      One of the HUGE advantages of linux (and other *nix derivatives) is the ability to seamlessly move the OS from one machine to another without having to make ANY changes. The only exception is moving from nvidia to ati video cards (or vise-versa), but the OS will still boot. These "check at install time" fixes are very dangerous to that huge feature. You guys are actually demanding a software fix to a firmware bug. Absolutely unbelievable...

    2. Re:solutions: by Urkki · · Score: 1

      I think affected users are demanding a fix for a bug. They won't much care what the fix is or where the bug is, they just want their po... email on the go.

      Solution to your "move from one machine to another" thing would be to tie certain settings to certain hardware signature. If signature changes, revert settings to safe values at boot. It would be a very useful thing to have overall, until the happy day comes when there are no hardware or firmware or software bugs in the world.

      Also, apparently there is a software fix to this particular issue: replace the OS with something which works with the hardware ;)

    3. Re:solutions: by Shoe+Puppet · · Score: 1

      One of the HUGE advantages of linux (and other *nix derivatives) is the ability to seamlessly move the OS from one machine to another without having to make ANY changes. The only exception is moving from nvidia to ati video cards (or vise-versa), but the OS will still boot. These "check at install time" fixes are very dangerous to that huge feature.

      You could check it at the beginning of every boot. If the setting was correct, continue. If it wasn't, automatically change it and reboot if necessary.

      --
      (+1, Disagree)
    4. Re:solutions: by badkarmadayaccount · · Score: 1

      And increase boot time? How about buying decent hardware?

      --
      I know tobacco is bad for you, so I smoke weed with crack.
    5. Re:solutions: by Shoe+Puppet · · Score: 1

      And increase boot time?

      I don't think checking the MB against the list takes much time at all. Having to reboot does take longer, but should be rare.

      --
      (+1, Disagree)
    6. Re:solutions: by badkarmadayaccount · · Score: 1

      This list will be enormous. You'll need PostgreSQL to handle it. Lots of IO. On every. Boot. I say - OEMs fix the shit that's broken.

      --
      I know tobacco is bad for you, so I smoke weed with crack.
  12. If They Don't Fix it I am Switching by Quantum_Infinity · · Score: 1

    They have been playing the blame game. Seriously though, I don't care whether it's an upstream issue or a downstream issue, 30% increase in power consumption is pretty big issue no matter what the reason. That's the reason why I am still on Ubuntu 10.10 and haven't upgraded. If they don't fix this before the support window runs out for 10.10 I am switching to something else (maybe even Windows). I use laptop on my battery all the time (in the bathroom, at the library, coffee shop etc.). A 30% reduction in battery life would seriously affect me.

    1. Re:If They Don't Fix it I am Switching by kvvbassboy · · Score: 2

      Try using Jupiter (http://www.jupiterapplet.org/). It's not there in the repos, but there is a ppa available for it: https://launchpad.net/~webupd8team/+archive/jupiter .

    2. Re:If They Don't Fix it I am Switching by Quantum_Infinity · · Score: 1

      Even though I have used Linux for several years now and am capable of using 'pcie_aspm=force' to get around the issue, I just don't like having to tweak to get around an issue that I expect should not be there in the first place. Tweaking to improve your desktop experience is one thing but tweaking to get around a kernel issue, Linux is too mature now to expect the user to do it.

    3. Re:If They Don't Fix it I am Switching by DarwinSurvivor · · Score: 1

      How long do you SPEND in the bathroom...?

    4. Re:If They Don't Fix it I am Switching by ttong · · Score: 1

      Would you install your vendors driver CD on a fresh windows installation?

    5. Re:If They Don't Fix it I am Switching by PixetaledPikachu · · Score: 1

      It didn't work for me. Maverick consistently gave me more than 3 hours on my vaio e, while natty barely reached 1 and a half hours

  13. Re:Phoronix? by Zeroedout · · Score: 1

    It really did, and he claims it's still in the works... I'm quite bitter as well but he seems confident in his source (no pun intended). It makes sense that it took longer than Valve intended, I just hope it didn't get cancelled.

  14. Re:You mean Moronix, right? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    but dismissing it just shows that you want to remain wilfully ignorant

    Or it could mean that the town folk are a bit tired of running out to see no wolf. Phoronix may be on to something with the power issues but the signal to noise ratio is very low. Every article is stretched out to 10 pages full of full page advertisements, contains 90+ links to other Phoronix articles (as if that somehow makes each article more credible), and their forms are overrun with clueless trolls.

    I don't blame people from baulking at the mention of Phoronix you just can't tell if it's just another stunt. You'll have to forgive some of us who aren't into fact checking Phoronix. Sure Phoronix is sometimes right but so is fucking 4chan. You can call me "willfully ignorant" for not trying to differentiate the bullshit from those two sources but I consider it a better use of my time to just stick to more reputable sources that don't try to trick me into clicking something.

  15. Re:Phoronix? by jonwil · · Score: 1

    I think there IS a Steam for Linux, at least inside Valve.
    It may be that they are still working on it with plans for a future release.
    It may be that its only a test and not actually intended for release. It may be that it was intended for release but was canceled for some reason.

    Blizzard for example at one point had a Linux client for World of Warcraft. But the "powers that be" vetoed the release because then they would need to maintain that release and release Linux patches concurrently with Mac and Windows patches which would require more development staff and/or patch delays whilst they finished the Linux work.

  16. Re:Phoronix? by RMingin · · Score: 1

    The fact of the OSX Steam release gives me hope (if they'll do OSX, they've done most of the work, go after Linux too), but the counter-fact that nothing has been released or announced, despite most of the work being done, takes that hope away again.

    Wine still works, though.

    --
    The preceding comment is my own, and in no way construes an opinon of the Emperor of Mankind.
  17. Re:You mean Moronix, right? by DarwinSurvivor · · Score: 1

    Honest question here. Do you know of any other, reputable, sites people can use to see which video cards work best with linux, which SSD's actually deliver on speed, etc? I've long used phronix simply because it was all I knew about, but would love to have some other sites to at least compare notes with.

  18. Re:hmm by sodul · · Score: 1

    You must be old here ... sorry could not resist Mr 5 digits ;-)

  19. Re:acpi_osi="Windows 2006" ? by hedwards · · Score: 2

    No, that only worked in cases where the Windows DSDT was standards compliant, much of the time even that didn't. I've done that in the past and it doesn't guarantee you any improvement as MS wasn't validating the DSDT against the official Intel implementation that everybody else had access to.

    Nice, that some jackass with mod points felt the need to mod me down without bothering to understand the issue though.

  20. Re:Phoronix? by Lehk228 · · Score: 1

    there should be little if any major differences between the linux and osx versions

    --
    Snowden and Manning are heroes.
  21. Re:hmm by jaymz666 · · Score: 1

    I was wondering the same thing...

  22. Grandma Test?? by jampola · · Score: 1

    Firstly, your logic is with the assumption that Granny uses a laptop. My Dad uses Linux on his Desktop (he has a Laptop also). He is not technically proficient like you claim to be. He has no idea what ASPM or GRUB is. Dad used to use Windows but he could not understand why one day he had some count down box mysteriously appear on his screen (blaster) or why he needs to apply patches or service packs that also seemly make his screen blue. He also had no idea why he needed to pay to upgrade his anti-virus just because he upgraded his OS. My Dad gets aggravated quite easily because he likes that he can turn on his computer and it works. I spent a month talking him around to giving Linux a shot. This was 4 years ago and he is still running the same Debian install on the same PC. Not bad for someone who is not only a Grand Pa but also 70 years old! You're saying that because of some power bug in the Kernel makes the OS fail your "Grandma Test" is a stupid logic and it is broken. Can you honestly say that with all the problems that Windows has had over the years make it Grandma Friendly?? I am not hatting on Windows, just your stupid Logic.

    1. Re:Grandma Test?? by jampola · · Score: 1

      Also worth noting for jokes sake that after installing Debian for him, he asked "Do I need these CD's?" pointing at a pile of driver CD's that came with the computer and I responded "No Dad, the drivers are compiled into the Kernel" to which he responded "So the same guy who makes the chicken also makes Linux?..." Moral of the story is that Dad jokes rule!

  23. Karma? by jampola · · Score: 1

    You know what, karma being the slut that it is, you would have logged in and gotten nothing!

  24. Linux, userland power manager or Ubuntu? by aglider · · Score: 1

    Is the bug in Linux kernel? Then you won't ket any fix from Ubuntu!
    Is the bug in the userland power manager? Then don't blame the kernel and don't expect any news from Ubuntu!
    Is the bug in the Ubuntu packaging? Blame Ubuntu.
    So the question is: where the bug actually is?

    --
    Sent as ripples into the electromagnetic field. No single photon has been harmed in the process.
    1. Re:Linux, userland power manager or Ubuntu? by indeterminator · · Score: 1

      So the question is: where the bug actually is?

      In the motherboard BIOS. But for some reason, no one here is demanding an update from mobo vendors... why?

    2. Re:Linux, userland power manager or Ubuntu? by mollymoo · · Score: 1

      Ubuntu regularly ship with patched versions of stuff to fix annoyances like this from upstream. That's why I switched from Debian, who avoid patching upstream even if it means things are a bit broken. The Debian way in theory leads to better software in the long-run, which is good, but I want my machines to work now

      If you want a specific example, the DHCP client Debian used doesn't have an option to send the system hostname - you had to manually enter the hostname into the configuration file. This annoyed me every single time I set up a Debian box and bit me in the ass every time I changed the hostname. Ubuntu used the same DHCP client but patched it so it sent the system hostname by default. That bug still is still open on Debian's bug tracker 9 years after it was first reported.

      --
      Chernobyl 'not a wildlife haven' - BBC News
    3. Re:Linux, userland power manager or Ubuntu? by aglider · · Score: 1

      It's not a BIOS bug as long as there's some other way (Windogs?) to cope with it.

      --
      Sent as ripples into the electromagnetic field. No single photon has been harmed in the process.
    4. Re:Linux, userland power manager or Ubuntu? by aglider · · Score: 1

      I don't know how much work Ubuntu does on upstream stuff, being it Debian or original.
      What I know is that I can get a number of bugs in Ubuntu which are not present in Debian or original.
      But I can also see improvements.

      --
      Sent as ripples into the electromagnetic field. No single photon has been harmed in the process.
  25. Re:You mean Moronix, right? by hairyfeet · · Score: 1

    But this is a good example of why Linux isn't ready for the masses. Sure the geeks here, with years of experience and who actually like to hang out at geek heavy sites can use esoteric workarounds, but what about Sally the cashier? Joe the construction worker? your landlady? All of these people will only find that Linux equals shit battery life if they were to use one which they would then tell to all their friends, hurting the image further.

    This is nearly 2012 guys, there really isn't any excuse for this Mickey mouse minor league bullshit. Take a lesson from the late Steve Jobs and focus ON THE USER and make damned sure it "just works" OOTB, no workarounds, no tweaks, no bullshit. Updates shouldn't break drivers, you shouldn't need esoteric workarounds just to have usable battery life, c'mon guys, bring your A game!

    I mean here it is, you have less than 2 years before hundreds of millions of late model desktops and laptops will be EOLed by MSFT thanks to the killing of XP, and THIS is the best you can do? No sir I don't believe that. From 2000 through 2005 I saw slow but steady progress when it came to Linux but then Canonical came around and it seemed like the whole community just lost their damned minds. Now everyone is on a truly insane 6 month upgrade deathmarch that gives ZERO time for QA, bugs don't get fixed, instead new versions come out that just add new bugs on top of old, it is like you are taking 1 step forward and three steps back.

    But Linux has done better in the past and could do better again. Use the 2014 EOL of XP as a rallying point. tell Canonical to stick their crazy upgrade schedule, either make all distros a rock solid 7 year support cycle or make Torvalds STFU and give you an ABI so that upgrades don't shit all over drivers, get rid of the stupid esoteric workarounds, and make users job #1. the only reason Linux isn't on machines in every retail store in America is ignorant bullshit just like this. Bring your A games guys, you can do so much better.

    --
    ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
  26. Re:Phoronix? by hairyfeet · · Score: 1

    Sadly it won't happen, and here is why: Both Windows and OSX support DRM, Linux don't, its just that simple. More and more of the titles on Steam have DRM on TOP of Steam, so all those titles? poof, gone. can't offer those. So already you've fractured their market. Then of course you have all the "phone home" games, and of course steam itself which is DRM, and we have seen how there is a VERY vocal group in the Linux community that thinks ALL DRM is the most evil thing ever created and thus will go out of their way to publish as many hacks and cracks as they possibly can as soon as it is released.

    While i personally would love it if Linux would have a butt simple, easy to use game service like Steam right now the community is split in two. On the one side you have the followers of RMS, who believes that ANY software without the four freedoms is the spawn of Satan, and then you have Torvalds who is more of a "just make it work" kind of guy and isn't militant, hence why he kept the kernel GPL V2. But as long as RMS and his followers hold so much sway I seriously doubt you will have such a high profile DRM service like Steam on Linux, just too much hatred for DRM in the community.

    Anyway while it isn't Steam for those Linux guys that would like some cheap games to play Good Old Games has a list of games which run on Linux and of course all are DRM free, enjoy.

    --
    ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
  27. Re:You mean Moronix, right? by gmack · · Score: 1

    Don't be stupid. If they had done that we would all be blasting Linux for making things unstable. The setting that used the power regression was that due to stability issues Linux now by default leaves the power state setting where the BIOS left it with a switch to enable it if you feel brave. This all means that if you have a non buggy chipset Linux will use the power save setting as before. This is the smart play because if the BIOS hasn't set it than it hasn't been tested by the manufacturer.

    Phoronix is trolling, if they have a laptop where the setting works fine they need to be complaining to the Laptop manufacturer and have them correct their BIOS to take full support of the chipset.

  28. Re:There's nothing wrong with Phoronix... by jones_supa · · Score: 1

    unexplained fire

    Don't you think that's a bit of a flamebait?

  29. Re:There's nothing wrong with Phoronix... by Gordonjcp · · Score: 2

    Bahdum-tssch! :-D

  30. Re:Until by 21mhz · · Score: 1

    It's more about being quirk-for-quirk compatible with Windows.

    --
    My exception safety is -fno-exceptions.
  31. Anonymous reader? by Roadmaster · · Score: 1

    I'm not so sure about this. I enabled the fix as proposed by Phoronix and saw a 15% battery life improvement; I'm now getting almost 5 hours, which is pretty good for this system.But 15% was not "significant" really. So "to regain much of their battery life" seems like an exaggeration in par with the alarmist tone of the articles in Phoronix. Sure, there's a problem, and I certainly appreciate Phoronix's efforts to pinpoint the cause and offer a workaround, but it's certainly not as bad as they've been making it look.

  32. Re:Phoronix? by Peristaltic · · Score: 1

    Probably a hare-brained idea, but it would be nice if the Humble Bundle group had enough critical mass to create a Steam-like distribution mechanism.

  33. Re:You mean Moronix, right? by cynyr · · Score: 1

    Sorry, I started dismissing it when they sat on a fairly major bug/regression for a week, and then had a big article about how bugs/regressions do not get fixed in the kernel.

    If you find a bug/regression report it to LKML, don't expect the linux devs to watch the output of your little test suite. Don't get me wrong, I really like the testing, just that when they see something like this, and have it narrowed down to a few commits, freaking report it so it can get fixed.

    --
    All of the above was encrypted with a Quad ROT-13 method. Unauthorized decryption is in violation of the DMCA.
  34. Re:You mean Moronix, right? by cynyr · · Score: 1

    for SSDs and other such OS independent stuff, i like http://www.silentpcreview.com/ Ony site that i have found with a load cell to test manufacturers claims on PSUs, including the efficiency ones, same goes for fans (both CFM and sound)

    As for video cards, Assume that non-bleeding edge desktop cards from nvidia just work, as do intel "cards" but with poor performance. AMD/ATI cards may or may not work, and even if they do only sometimes with the right versions of the kernel, X, and catalyst.

    Printers are at openprinting.org (if it is back up), but you could always just get an HP and expect it to work.

    I use google to find newegg comments about hardware if i'm looking for something else. Gennerly if it works on ubuntu, i can have it working on gentoo without issue.

    --
    All of the above was encrypted with a Quad ROT-13 method. Unauthorized decryption is in violation of the DMCA.
  35. Re:You mean Moronix, right? by hairyfeet · · Score: 2

    So your answer is use esoteric workarounds? I'm shocked you didn't add stable kernel ABI nonsense just to add to your giant fail and bullshit. And folks wonder why Linux is dead last. MSFT and Apple are bring their A games, your playing hackey sack.

    I know its a complete shock but to most people? windows and OSX just work and they do so without fail, without esoteric workarounds, without driver bullshit and WITHOUT EXCUSES, which sadly is all you get from the "community" anymore, along with bullshit, insults, and pages of CLI "fixes" crapola. Oh don't forget to call me an "M$ Ninja shill astroturfer dirty man!" just to seal the fail trifecta. stupid shit like this is why Linux is dead last and frankly? deserves to BE last.

    --
    ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
  36. Re:You mean Moronix, right? by scottbomb · · Score: 1

    I tried to read the writeup on the website. It launched a pop-up ad (on work PC, must accept...) and then it froze my browser. WTF? I won't let that website near any of my personal PCs if it's going to be that abuisive.

  37. Re:Phoronix? by leenks · · Score: 1

    You think all Mac users should run things in X11? Really?

  38. Re:You mean Moronix, right? by diego.viola · · Score: 1

    OSX is designed for a single hardware specification, Linux runs on countless of hardware, and we have to reverse engineer some drivers and try to make most hardware work. Your comments are clearly disrespectful, and you should go bitch the hardware manufacturers instead.

  39. Re:hmm by Yobgod+Ababua · · Score: 1

    Damn kids. Get off our lawn!
    (Or at least install Linux on it...)

  40. Re:Windows a big part of the problem too by Billly+Gates · · Score: 1

    It was posted 10 years ago on slashdot that MS dictated to all the hardware manufactures that this is the way Windows 2000/XP kernel does APM. Go fix your bios because we aint changing it! Almost paraphrased word by word with buggy ACPI and APM. So because people still run XP, the bios has to work around a Windows specific bug.

    It is a two way street when more than manufactor owns the software and a different owns the hardware. Bugs are on both sides and both have 30 years of errata and bugs that emulate off of each other in order to function. Linux sadly, has to produce Windows specific bugs in order to have APM work properly as all the hardware makers care about is Microsoft.

    I hate the MS bashing here more than anyone as I prefer MS more and more these days. But it is deserved here. What are you going to do if you are Dell with a great APM but XP doesn't work the way it was designed to spec? Say no, big bad MS our bios is fine go fix XP with a service pack? Imagine how their customers would feel? Would they blame Microsoft? I think not. They would blame Dell and go buy HPs etc.

    So Dell reflashes their bios so MS doesn't have to fix their bug etc.

    Both Linus and Alan Cox have said this numerous times and is one of the reasons people want to switch to EFI. The bios has 30 years of fixes, updates to bugs, and other nasties. I only assume the Windows kernel does the same exact things to bugs from the 1980s that are there for compatiblity reasons. Shudder

  41. Re:You mean Moronix, right? by gmack · · Score: 1

    No My answer is for the BIOS makers to do the right thing and quite frankly, the current situation is hardly Microsoft's "A" game when an estimated 70% of windows problems are due to driver crashes. The only reason MicroSoft allows this to continue is because it works against their competitors and if they gave a flying crap about their own customers they would have demanded hardware makers all conform to a set of standards that MicroSoft can write drivers for a long time ago.

    Oh, and if your favored platform has so many fiddly tweaks they they have generated a cottage industry of tool makers (PowerTweak etc) you don't get to call out the competition for "esoteric workarounds"
     

  42. Re:You mean Moronix, right? by hairyfeet · · Score: 1

    Riiight, it works for MSFT but it is everyone ELSE'S fault when Linux doesn't work, couldn't be bad OS design, right? you DO know what excuses and assholes have in common, yes? The USER don't give a shit WHY it don't work, and BTW in Win 7 a good 85%+ of the drivers? They JUST WORK. bring your A game or sit on the bench, your choice.

    --
    ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
  43. Re:You mean Moronix, right? by quanticle · · Score: 1

    OSX is designed for a single hardware specification, Linux runs on countless of hardware, and we have to reverse engineer some drivers and try to make most hardware work. Your comments are clearly disrespectful, and you should go bitch the hardware manufacturers instead.

    In that vein, a registry of some kind that told you what hardware was compatible with your Linux distro would be a godsend. I mean, I've seen various half-hearted attempts to start something like this, but they've always petered out. Then when you find them on Google, you get your hopes up, only to have them dashed by lists upon lists of laptops, video cards, sound cards, etc. that were EOL'd years ago.

    --
    We all know what to do, but we don't know how to get re-elected once we have done it
  44. Re:You mean Moronix, right? by diego.viola · · Score: 1

    I find that most hardware works just fine these days, I have access to 6 computers and most of the hardware in those computers is all different. Linux detects all the hardware just fine.

    Take a look at the nouveau driver for example, it accelerates 2d and even 3d and it's all reversed engineered and created without documentation. What I suggest is that you try Linux with your hardware and if you have any problems, always report the bugs to the developers so they can fix it.

  45. Re:You mean Moronix, right? by badkarmadayaccount · · Score: 1

    Hardware probing can get you some sane hardware IDs, thing is, the package system has to be able to handle kernel patching as a part of the installation process, as well as configuration management, see Electra initiative. Where should I submit the feature request?

    --
    I know tobacco is bad for you, so I smoke weed with crack.
  46. Re:You mean Moronix, right? by badkarmadayaccount · · Score: 1

    If you want a just works linux machine, then call up System67 and friends. Works like a well oiled machine, just as well as any Mac. Windows has plenty of problems with weird hardware, though it just gives you the finger, and no way to fix it, so - not much better than linux, either.

    --
    I know tobacco is bad for you, so I smoke weed with crack.
  47. Re:You mean Moronix, right? by hairyfeet · · Score: 1

    So then please be the first to join in on any "You can replace that Windows machine with Linux" posting on /. and point out IT IS A TOTAL LIE and by your VERY OWN WORDS Linux is NOT a usable replacement for Windows but for Macs instead!

    You see it is THIS, this right here, kind of hypocrisy and bullshit that has made sure Linux stays right where it is, dead last. They say "Its a drop in replacement for Windows!" and when you point out articles like TFA that show if you drop in your system goes to shit? They say "Well duh! By drop in we meant throw out all your hardware and start over with a more expensive system just like the Apple guys do!" Well riddle me THIS friend: Then why the fuck wouldn't I just buy an Apple, where I get better quality, resale, and battery life huh? what do YOU have OTHER than "Free as in freedom, fight the power!" to offer? BTW the whole "free as in freedom" thing? Nobody gives a shit. just look at sales of the iShiny, one of the most locked down devices in history, for an example of how little folks give a shit about freedom to tinker.

    So I'm sorry but your post is just another example of how when Apple and MSFT bring their A games Linux has excuses and hackey sack. Yours is a classic example of what I call "moving the goal posts" where you say "Point A is true!" and when pointed out point A is false you then go "But if you do point b-f THEN point A is true!" yeah and if Xena rode up naked on a purple pony wanting to rock my world I'd be a happy camper, doubt its gonna happen though.

    Final tip: If Linux won't run on the stuff we already have money in? Nobody gives a fuck enough to go out and hunt for some niche specialty Linux vendor. That is just like "use esoteric workarounds" (which nobody on windows but the tweakers bother with) or the whole "open up bash and type" after spending three hours doing the forum dance. nobody frankly gives a shit about linux to go through all that horseshit, as the numbers plainly show. Where was Linux 5 years ago? 1%. Where was it two years ago? 1%. Where will it be in 5 years if it stays on the same path? why it don't take Kojak to solve THAT mystery friend, that would be 1%.

    --
    ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
  48. Re:You mean Moronix, right? by badkarmadayaccount · · Score: 1

    Well, it works just fine on non-selected hardware for many people, and I believe it has a bright long term future - emphasis on believe - but why do we have to argue this over and over - I think I speak for the majority of slashdot when I say - if you don't like Linux, don't use it, and don't pester us, ok? We got the constructive criticism, and there is apparently not enough political will for change, not when retaining technical merit on other fronts, so there is no point in reiterating, ok?

    --
    I know tobacco is bad for you, so I smoke weed with crack.
  49. Re:You mean Moronix, right? by crutchy · · Score: 1

    i take windows machines that microsoft chooses to no longer support and put current versions of linux on them with very few problems. these machines still run their older version of windows fine, but would struggle to run Vista or Win7 (if you could even get them to install)

    its fine to get on your soapbox and rant, but what is your ranting worth to someone with experience to the contrary? answer: they just think you're a ranting dickhead.

    people who try to keep their microsoft software up-to-date keep having to buy new hardware with each new version with windows

    because of this, i get free computers that still work just fine for Linux

    even works for laptops. if people have trouble with windows, i get them for free and have little/no trouble putting new linux on. i have an old (8 years) laptop that had a dvd drive fuck up so i couldn't use the recovery disc any more. i could fork out money to buy a new dvd drive (or a new laptop) but i can boot it off my linux boot server and install linux using a sd card and a netinstall.

    moral of story: linux vendors not required :)
    br btw, you don't have to feel threatened by linux. i'm sure its quite happy coming last (whatever that means). its not engaged in any sort of race in which it could come first. it just exists. there are of course people who don't understand this, but i'm sure you agree they are just fucktards who compare linux with windows. in reality the two are not comaprable. they perform a similar function, but for entirely different reasons.