Re:Dell Supplying Windows Only PCs; Refunds Moot
on
Windows Refund Day II
·
· Score: 2
I appreciate what you're trying to say, but you're missing the point.
The Dell I got had a Soundblaster Live. That audio card is well supported by Linux - but not the Dell version. In fact, it didn't work with any drivers except under WinXP. When I got a different Dell version, it worked great.
The chipset on this box is an Intel i845PE. Again, in general, well supported by Linux. But not Dell's version - it isn't recognized correctly.
In other words, Dell did something to limit support to Windows, and in the case of the sound card, one specific version. This isn't a matter of cheapo, uncommon hardware - a vendor took steps, either purposely or not, that result in Linux not working with the hardware.
jonathan
Dell Supplying Windows Only PCs; Refunds Moot
on
Windows Refund Day II
·
· Score: 3, Informative
I tried to make a stink about this in various enthusiast forums, but no one really cares (except for here, possibly).
Windows refunds will become a moot point as this trend continues. Although folks are familar with WinModems, I just got a machine from Dell that:
* Included a sound card that only ran under Windows XP. It just wouldn't run under Linux no matter what I did to the driver.
* Has a chipset that recent Linux kernels cannot understand - so no DMA for hard drives, and no USB2.0 support.
I rectified the first issue by complaining long and loud to Dell, and they finally sent me a new sound card, identical chips on board, that worked fine in all operating systems. I'm hoping that a new kernel will eventually fix the chipset issue.
The machine is a Dimension 4550, which should be about as bog standard as they get. This isn't a laptop, BTW; it is a 'normal' desktop machine, and the first that I've seen that is at least partially Linux incompatible.
At any rate, this refund issue is going to go away as the larger OEMs introduce models tied to specific versions of Windows. Time to start investigating other options.
jonathan
What exactly is running on their servers?
on
Largo Loving Linux
·
· Score: 2
Perhaps I missed it, but what software is serving to all of those thin clients? Tarantella? I'd love to read about more details about what's happening on the server side of things.
Anyone got a link that really gets into detail on the server side?
Most kids are probably not going to be interested in running an OS for its own sake, for geek factor, or to be Free. Kids know why they want to run Windows... their games or current favorite software runs on it, for one.
Show them something that kids will think is really cool. Then show them the OS that makes it possible (or better) - and then do it. You might need more than one computer if the "how" part takes too long (so you can just take the cake out of the oven,ready, like in the cooking shows).
This might be tough to do for some OS's - I mean, you can do many of the same "cool" things on either Linux of FreeBSD.
Perhaps a cool demo would be to start out with a Debian or FreeBSD box, and say out loud... I'd sure like to have a web server that my friends could download files from (or some other thing along those lines)... and then go through the process installing it from the respective ports system... just an idea.
The aliens are too mystical/magical for me
on
Spielberg's Taken
·
· Score: 3, Insightful
Lessee... they can take any shape. They can convert to energy and just vanish. They are telpathic. They can learn English really, really fast. I mean, what's next? Flying bicycles?
Sure, I guess that these things could be part of the same super technology that allows them to get here in the first place, but I'd think its a lot easier to move faster than light than to establish communications with a totally alien species, much less assume their biology and all that jazz.
Bottom line - too much fantasy is being injected into this science fiction.
I used to work at Time Inc., back in the day, so I have some insight about why this is happening.
AOLTW is structured like a loose collection of fiefdoms. Each magazine, each business unit is largely independent of each other. If one wants the content of another, they PAY for it, using real dollars.
This manifested itself in some supreme silliness. For example, at one point, Warner Bros. refused to license the Roadrunner character for use to promote the RoadRunner service. There was also a point where getting articles on line required typing in articles from the early print runs - because the magazines either wouldn't or couldn't provide the material in a friendly electronic format. This constant state of civil war pretty much doomed pathfinder.com, TW's first attempt at online hegemony.
This is likely happening because the AOL side is paying big to put the stuff online, but is not getting a return for it. The other option for them, likely, was to stop putting the magazines on line at all.
Anyone that works there, or used to, knows that AOLTW only succeeds in spite of themselves. Their frictionful culture will eventually kill them.
Buy CD, rip contents onto MP3 player, put CD away. Listen to music.
My music routine, Jan, 2003:
Buy CD. Try to rip, doesn't work. Have to boot Windows. Load buggy software. Connect to Sony. Learn to use feeble Sony software. Find that I either cannot get digital files onto my MP3 player, or they are not encoded at 256k like I like. Cannot do "gapless" encoding.
My music routine Feb, 2003: Connect to favorite P2P network. Download album. Transfer to MP3 player. Save myself several steps, including actually paying for music. Quality no worse than what Sony provided.
Honestly, tho, I'll probably just return the Sony CDs and not buy any more of those:)
Ah, but the Nvidia driver, in twinview, offers its own Xinerama extensions.Which means that I can have 3D acceleration across a 2048x768 desktop, which is what both my 15" monitors, combined, offer.
The bottom line is that I have two heads, but ONE desktop, and 3D across it all. The ATI driver cannot do this, at least as I read it from their documentation.
I'm typing this on a Gentoo box with two DVI LCD monitors attached to my Ti4600 card. Running one large desktop across both monitors WITH 3D acceleration across both monitors.
I might add that you can't do that with the ATI drivers, nor is there any flavor of ATI card that drives two DVI monitors (not that there's a huge selection of such cards with Nvidia chips, but Gainward does make one).
Nvidia is really the best choice for performance graphics on Linux.
FYI.
jonathan
Re:Why LFS indeed?
on
LFS 4.0 Released
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
Although the LFS folks have been making the claim of an 8 or 5 meg installation, I've yet to see any clear docs on how to do it. I'd like to. Anyone know of a related hint or how-to that details the slimming process?
I saw the Pyramid3D at Comdex when it was first announced. Not sure why it never shipped - it seemed to be at least on par with 3Dfx's offerings, and possibly faster.
If Bitboys had anything more to do with it than sketch an envelope, that's pretty impressive.
Great, so when ATI ships their new stuffs, the R250 and R300 chips, later this summer, Linux users will still be waiting for this corporate handout driver for the "old" 8500.
I think that I could get used to Nvidia's way of doing things...
Sorry, Osty, but you have your terms wrong, and the wrong argument to boot.
We're not talking about a different technologies, like CVT, we're talking about different formfactors.
The pushbutton, dashboard transmission was something tried, briefly, in the '50's. It was supposed to replace the lever. It failed; the interface didn't provide any merits. It sure looked cool, tho, but that wasn't enough.
Semi-automatic was tried, briefly, by Volkswagen. Automatic clutch, but normal stick interface. It also failed. You could NOT put it in "auto" mode - you had to shift for yourself - but without difficult clutching. Again, a somewhat different interface to accomplish the same thing as a manual transmission, but with more cost and less efficiency.
Tiptronic and the like are just new interfaces on automatic transmissions. Lots of folks do actually "paddle" their non-Tip auto transmissions, and the Tiptronic crap is a result of that. All of their ilk default to automatic mode, and I'd guess that's how many folks drive them. No interface is essentially being replaced - you can opt in or out on the fly. In other words, your parking lot attendant doesn't need to be retrained.
Um, I wear a watch so that I can find the time with the least amount of effort. Having it on my wrist works very well for that.
Go to your local drugstore and look at the cheapest watches. Analog Timex... there is really no price difference.
Point is that analog watches are dominant at all price points, from the cheapest to the most expensive. Why? People realized that it just works better.
I'd counter this with: yes, they do. It works, and has proven to be quite efficient. Moreover, it is arguable that it became a "universal" interface when other variations simply didn't work as well. Pushbutton gear-shifting, joystick steering, semi-automatic transmissions - they've been tried, and they failed. Because they didn't meet a simple equation.
A good interface is:
- Intuitive. Like it or not, "normal" car interfaces are something that are generally well understood by the driving world's populations. So they are easy to teach, and there is a good bit of inherent education transmitted by simply living in the driving world. Most school in the US, Europe, and a good part of Asia, inherently understand "normal" auto interfaces through a sort of osmosis (video games, magazines, fiction).
- Efficient. A gear shift (manual) or level or t-stick (auto) just works. One step to get to the gearing that you want. Pedals are simple and direct - press for more "go", let up for less. There is not need to think; it becomes a transparent extension.
- Aesthetic. This is the least important in terms of getting things done, but is a "nice to have" kind of thing. I think most here would agree that an "ugly" interface (a CLI is not "pretty" to most people) that gets the job done best is... best.
If you are going to sacrifice the intuitive nature of an existing interface for something different, it should have an efficiency advantage. Likewise, if you are going to cosmetically change an interface (for aesthetic reasons) to the point where it becomes less intuitive, it should at least not loose its efficiency.
What does the BMW iDrive add here? It appears to be interface for the sake of interface. It appears to add steps to most routine processes, not make them easier. For certain things, analog is just better. Like car interfaces.
iDrive is like comparing digital to analog watches. The first digital watches added no additional functionality to telling time, and actually made the task harder. Although they started out as luxury goods, the watch buying public soon realized that, frankly, they are amazingly inefficient chronograph interfaces. And yes, many folks didn't understand how they worked back then.
As a result, most watches sold are analog. In fact, it is almost impossible to find "luxury" digital watches today. I expect that automobiles will go through a brief computer interface phase, and then return to something more standard.
Think about it - everyone thinks short-term, and buys on price. Does ANYONE buy a PC because of the excellent support anymore?
Look at the cheapest Dell desktop you can buy. What was cut out? The support. They only offer 90 days. How many people buy no-name crap at computer fairs and the like, or questionable goods from Ebay, since it has the cheapest price, and then attempt to get Microsoft to answer the phone when it doesn't work?
Why are companies outsourcing to crap outfits? Product support has become something that is a checklist item that never turns up in reviews, for the most part... which is not surprising, since companies like Dell and Gateway pay the bills at the reviewer's magazines. Ever wonder why the biggest advertisers always get the best reviews? Has PC Mag ever said a negative thing about Dell or Microsoft?
So companies find the cheapest way to pay tech-support "lip service" to their customers. This means that some half-asleep foreigner with a good American accent is going to answer the phone call... after a half hour on hold.
Fact is that if you want good support, you pay for it - either in the product's price, or afterwards. Well, no one wants to pay for it the product price anymore.
Tech support should be an option that people have to pay for - either the screwdriver guy in the neighborhood, a local third-party, or as an add-on from the company that sold you the gear in the first place.
How about if Microsoft releases the source to a previous version of Windows? In other words, once they release a new version, the old version is given to the world, minus any code that they don't own.
Think about it. Microsoft ships a new release, Windows XP. They put the source up on their site for anyone to download, and in theory, use to release their own windows.
Now, its going to take at least a few weeks/months to get that source code compiled, libraries replaced, etc... so the OEMs have no choice for several months about what they sell.
So, 6 months later, a smart OEM can now offer the latest Windows, or a somewhat cheaper machine, with an older, non-Microsoft Windows, or a Linux with a really good Windows compatibility layer. Some consumers will go for it, but many, many will elect to get the Real Thing.
The next release? Again, MS has a long window (no pun) to sell the Real Thing, while an OEM can elect to sell a 2-generation old Windows until they catch up.
It gives choice. It give MS a revenue stream and instant competition.
Slashdot Mirror
I appreciate what you're trying to say, but you're missing the point.
The Dell I got had a Soundblaster Live. That audio card is well supported by Linux - but not the Dell version. In fact, it didn't work with any drivers except under WinXP. When I got a different Dell version, it worked great.
The chipset on this box is an Intel i845PE. Again, in general, well supported by Linux. But not Dell's version - it isn't recognized correctly.
In other words, Dell did something to limit support to Windows, and in the case of the sound card, one specific version. This isn't a matter of cheapo, uncommon hardware - a vendor took steps, either purposely or not, that result in Linux not working with the hardware.
jonathan
I tried to make a stink about this in various enthusiast forums, but no one really cares (except for here, possibly).
Windows refunds will become a moot point as this trend continues. Although folks are familar with WinModems, I just got a machine from Dell that:
* Included a sound card that only ran under Windows XP. It just wouldn't run under Linux no matter what I did to the driver.
* Has a chipset that recent Linux kernels cannot understand - so no DMA for hard drives, and no USB2.0 support.
I rectified the first issue by complaining long and loud to Dell, and they finally sent me a new sound card, identical chips on board, that worked fine in all operating systems. I'm hoping that a new kernel will eventually fix the chipset issue.
The machine is a Dimension 4550, which should be about as bog standard as they get. This isn't a laptop, BTW; it is a 'normal' desktop machine, and the first that I've seen that is at least partially Linux incompatible.
At any rate, this refund issue is going to go away as the larger OEMs introduce models tied to specific versions of Windows. Time to start investigating other options.
jonathan
Perhaps I missed it, but what software is serving to all of those thin clients? Tarantella? I'd love to read about more details about what's happening on the server side of things.
Anyone got a link that really gets into detail on the server side?
jonathan
Most kids are probably not going to be interested in running an OS for its own sake, for geek factor, or to be Free. Kids know why they want to run Windows... their games or current favorite software runs on it, for one.
Show them something that kids will think is really cool. Then show them the OS that makes it possible (or better) - and then do it. You might need more than one computer if the "how" part takes too long (so you can just take the cake out of the oven,ready, like in the cooking shows).
This might be tough to do for some OS's - I mean, you can do many of the same "cool" things on either Linux of FreeBSD.
Perhaps a cool demo would be to start out with a Debian or FreeBSD box, and say out loud... I'd sure like to have a web server that my friends could download files from (or some other thing along those lines)... and then go through the process installing it from the respective ports system... just an idea.
Lessee... they can take any shape. They can convert to energy and just vanish. They are telpathic. They can learn English really, really fast. I mean, what's next? Flying bicycles?
Sure, I guess that these things could be part of the same super technology that allows them to get here in the first place, but I'd think its a lot easier to move faster than light than to establish communications with a totally alien species, much less assume their biology and all that jazz.
Bottom line - too much fantasy is being injected into this science fiction.
I used to work at Time Inc., back in the day, so I have some insight about why this is happening.
AOLTW is structured like a loose collection of fiefdoms. Each magazine, each business unit is largely independent of each other. If one wants the content of another, they PAY for it, using real dollars.
This manifested itself in some supreme silliness. For example, at one point, Warner Bros. refused to license the Roadrunner character for use to promote the RoadRunner service. There was also a point where getting articles on line required typing in articles from the early print runs - because the magazines either wouldn't or couldn't provide the material in a friendly electronic format. This constant state of civil war pretty much doomed pathfinder.com, TW's first attempt at online hegemony.
This is likely happening because the AOL side is paying big to put the stuff online, but is not getting a return for it. The other option for them, likely, was to stop putting the magazines on line at all.
Anyone that works there, or used to, knows that AOLTW only succeeds in spite of themselves. Their frictionful culture will eventually kill them.
My music routine, 2002:
:)
Buy CD, rip contents onto MP3 player, put CD away. Listen to music.
My music routine, Jan, 2003:
Buy CD. Try to rip, doesn't work. Have to boot Windows. Load buggy software. Connect to Sony. Learn to use feeble Sony software. Find that I either cannot get digital files onto my MP3 player, or they are not encoded at 256k like I like. Cannot do "gapless" encoding.
My music routine Feb, 2003: Connect to favorite P2P network. Download album. Transfer to MP3 player. Save myself several steps, including actually paying for music. Quality no worse than what Sony provided.
Honestly, tho, I'll probably just return the Sony CDs and not buy any more of those
jonathan
Ah, but the Nvidia driver, in twinview, offers its own Xinerama extensions.Which means that I can have 3D acceleration across a 2048x768 desktop, which is what both my 15" monitors, combined, offer.
The bottom line is that I have two heads, but ONE desktop, and 3D across it all. The ATI driver cannot do this, at least as I read it from their documentation.
Wrong, I am talking about the drivers that Nvidia provides. Want to see my XF86Config?
I'm typing this on a Gentoo box with two DVI LCD monitors attached to my Ti4600 card. Running one large desktop across both monitors WITH 3D acceleration across both monitors.
I might add that you can't do that with the ATI drivers, nor is there any flavor of ATI card that drives two DVI monitors (not that there's a huge selection of such cards with Nvidia chips, but Gainward does make one).
Nvidia is really the best choice for performance graphics on Linux.
FYI.
jonathan
Although the LFS folks have been making the claim of an 8 or 5 meg installation, I've yet to see any clear docs on how to do it. I'd like to. Anyone know of a related hint or how-to that details the slimming process?
jonathan
Perhaps VIA is smart enough to start pumping out "free" CPUs.
I saw the Pyramid3D at Comdex when it was first announced. Not sure why it never shipped - it seemed to be at least on par with 3Dfx's offerings, and possibly faster.
If Bitboys had anything more to do with it than sketch an envelope, that's pretty impressive.
Great, so when ATI ships their new stuffs, the R250 and R300 chips, later this summer, Linux users will still be waiting for this corporate handout driver for the "old" 8500.
I think that I could get used to Nvidia's way of doing things...
You're right on. Here's a pic I found: Pushbutton Transmission.
I was off a few years tho - was this Chrysler only? And wasn't it the same as a normal auto?
jonathan
Sorry, Osty, but you have your terms wrong, and the wrong argument to boot.
We're not talking about a different technologies, like CVT, we're talking about different formfactors.
The pushbutton, dashboard transmission was something tried, briefly, in the '50's. It was supposed to replace the lever. It failed; the interface didn't provide any merits. It sure looked cool, tho, but that wasn't enough.
Semi-automatic was tried, briefly, by Volkswagen. Automatic clutch, but normal stick interface. It also failed. You could NOT put it in "auto" mode - you had to shift for yourself - but without difficult clutching. Again, a somewhat different interface to accomplish the same thing as a manual transmission, but with more cost and less efficiency.
Tiptronic and the like are just new interfaces on automatic transmissions. Lots of folks do actually "paddle" their non-Tip auto transmissions, and the Tiptronic crap is a result of that. All of their ilk default to automatic mode, and I'd guess that's how many folks drive them. No interface is essentially being replaced - you can opt in or out on the fly. In other words, your parking lot attendant doesn't need to be retrained.
jonathan
Um, I wear a watch so that I can find the time with the least amount of effort. Having it on my wrist works very well for that.
Go to your local drugstore and look at the cheapest watches. Analog Timex... there is really no price difference.
Point is that analog watches are dominant at all price points, from the cheapest to the most expensive. Why? People realized that it just works better.
jonathan
I'd counter this with: yes, they do. It works, and has proven to be quite efficient. Moreover, it is arguable that it became a "universal" interface when other variations simply didn't work as well. Pushbutton gear-shifting, joystick steering, semi-automatic transmissions - they've been tried, and they failed. Because they didn't meet a simple equation.
... best.
A good interface is:
- Intuitive. Like it or not, "normal" car interfaces are something that are generally well understood by the driving world's populations. So they are easy to teach, and there is a good bit of inherent education transmitted by simply living in the driving world. Most school in the US, Europe, and a good part of Asia, inherently understand "normal" auto interfaces through a sort of osmosis (video games, magazines, fiction).
- Efficient. A gear shift (manual) or level or t-stick (auto) just works. One step to get to the gearing that you want. Pedals are simple and direct - press for more "go", let up for less. There is not need to think; it becomes a transparent extension.
- Aesthetic. This is the least important in terms of getting things done, but is a "nice to have" kind of thing. I think most here would agree that an "ugly" interface (a CLI is not "pretty" to most people) that gets the job done best is
If you are going to sacrifice the intuitive nature of an existing interface for something different, it should have an efficiency advantage. Likewise, if you are going to cosmetically change an interface (for aesthetic reasons) to the point where it becomes less intuitive, it should at least not loose its efficiency.
What does the BMW iDrive add here? It appears to be interface for the sake of interface. It appears to add steps to most routine processes, not make them easier. For certain things, analog is just better. Like car interfaces.
iDrive is like comparing digital to analog watches. The first digital watches added no additional functionality to telling time, and actually made the task harder. Although they started out as luxury goods, the watch buying public soon realized that, frankly, they are amazingly inefficient chronograph interfaces. And yes, many folks didn't understand how they worked back then.
As a result, most watches sold are analog. In fact, it is almost impossible to find "luxury" digital watches today. I expect that automobiles will go through a brief computer interface phase, and then return to something more standard.
jonathan
... is because no one wants to pay for it.
Think about it - everyone thinks short-term, and buys on price. Does ANYONE buy a PC because of the excellent support anymore?
Look at the cheapest Dell desktop you can buy. What was cut out? The support. They only offer 90 days. How many people buy no-name crap at computer fairs and the like, or questionable goods from Ebay, since it has the cheapest price, and then attempt to get Microsoft to answer the phone when it doesn't work?
Why are companies outsourcing to crap outfits? Product support has become something that is a checklist item that never turns up in reviews, for the most part... which is not surprising, since companies like Dell and Gateway pay the bills at the reviewer's magazines. Ever wonder why the biggest advertisers always get the best reviews? Has PC Mag ever said a negative thing about Dell or Microsoft?
So companies find the cheapest way to pay tech-support "lip service" to their customers. This means that some half-asleep foreigner with a good American accent is going to answer the phone call... after a half hour on hold.
Fact is that if you want good support, you pay for it - either in the product's price, or afterwards. Well, no one wants to pay for it the product price anymore.
Tech support should be an option that people have to pay for - either the screwdriver guy in the neighborhood, a local third-party, or as an add-on from the company that sold you the gear in the first place.
Or at least they did; I used non-Voicestream hardware on their system about two years ago. They may have become more restrictive since then.
Sounds great. Now, just try and buy one. I can't find them, can you?
No, it is Advancing Microsoft's Domination :)
I'll wager anything that Windows XP for x86-64 is pretty much in the bag now.
So, does the Zaurus documentation mention this possibility? If it does, I think that Mossberg needs to put out a retraction.
How about if Microsoft releases the source to a previous version of Windows? In other words, once they release a new version, the old version is given to the world, minus any code that they don't own.
Think about it. Microsoft ships a new release, Windows XP. They put the source up on their site for anyone to download, and in theory, use to release their own windows.
Now, its going to take at least a few weeks/months to get that source code compiled, libraries replaced, etc... so the OEMs have no choice for several months about what they sell.
So, 6 months later, a smart OEM can now offer the latest Windows, or a somewhat cheaper machine, with an older, non-Microsoft Windows, or a Linux with a really good Windows compatibility layer. Some consumers will go for it, but many, many will elect to get the Real Thing.
The next release? Again, MS has a long window (no pun) to sell the Real Thing, while an OEM can elect to sell a 2-generation old Windows until they catch up.
It gives choice. It give MS a revenue stream and instant competition.