Check it out at http://world.std.com/~corey/raylink.html
I only post this because the story seems to suggest that only the wavelan cards are supported under Linux.
Of course, the WebGear Aviator 2.4 cards that I have are only 2 Mbps, but that's good enough for me, because I'm using them to share a 256 kbps DSL connection. And I think they're a lot cheaper - I got 2 cards + 2 isa-pcmcia adapters for $110 at CrapUSA (that includes a $40 rebate).
The Aviator 2.4 cards are also supported by NetBSD, and it shouldn't take all that much work to get the NetBSD driver to work for OpenBSD and FreeBSD.
Uh, I only see four steps that have anything to do with documentation. It seems that the purpose of the other steps is to allow users to avoid reading any documentation at all, by ensuring that all software is automagically installed and configured without requiring any effort from the user.
I think the biggest problem with 'slick' installation programs that account for all possible scenarios (what you seem to want) is that they are extremely expensive to create. As many people have discovered, even giant corporations with tons of resources (like M$) have an extremely difficult time producing such 'slick' software.
I'd rather that users spend some of their time learning about the software they want to use than waste the precious time of open source software developers by attempting to create a "Lazy-Ass Linux" distro.
As I think most people would agree, this 'feature' is something of a departure from the typical/. fare. Personally, I found some of the ideas expressed in it more than a bit offensive.
(I've been a habitual/. reader for quite a while now, and obviously I've had negative reactions to literally hundreds of reader posts in the past. But I think the fact that this is content written and displayed as a 'feature' puts it in a separate class.)
What I'd really like to know is if this was really an attempt at 'humor' (As many have noted, it was placed it the 'It's funny. Laugh.' category. As many have also noted, it's does not appear to be written for laughs.) or if it was a genuine attempt by roblimo to express his views?
This distinction is important to me. If this truly was a feeble attempt at satire, then I just won't read roblimo for witty insight. But if it was intended as a 'serious' article, then I honestly don't want to read this kind of stuff and I don't think I'll bother with./ any longer.
Slashdot Mirror
Check it out at http://world.std.com/~corey/raylink.html
I only post this because the story seems to suggest that only the wavelan cards are supported under Linux.
Of course, the WebGear Aviator 2.4 cards that I have are only 2 Mbps, but that's good enough for me, because I'm using them to share a 256 kbps DSL connection. And I think they're a lot cheaper - I got 2 cards + 2 isa-pcmcia adapters for $110 at CrapUSA (that includes a $40 rebate).
The Aviator 2.4 cards are also supported by NetBSD, and it shouldn't take all that much work to get the NetBSD driver to work for OpenBSD and FreeBSD.
Uh, I only see four steps that have anything to do with documentation. It seems that the purpose of the other steps is to allow users to avoid reading any documentation at all, by ensuring that all software is automagically installed and configured without requiring any effort from the user.
I think the biggest problem with 'slick' installation programs that account for all possible scenarios (what you seem to want) is that they are extremely expensive to create. As many people have discovered, even giant corporations with tons of resources (like M$) have an extremely difficult time producing such 'slick' software.
I'd rather that users spend some of their time learning about the software they want to use than waste the precious time of open source software developers by attempting to create a "Lazy-Ass Linux" distro.
As I think most people would agree, this 'feature' is something of a departure from the typical /. fare. Personally, I found some of the ideas expressed in it more than a bit offensive.
/. reader for quite a while now, and obviously I've had negative reactions to literally hundreds of reader posts in the past. But I think the fact that this is content written and displayed as a 'feature' puts it in a separate class.)
./ any longer.
(I've been a habitual
What I'd really like to know is if this was really an attempt at 'humor' (As many have noted, it was placed it the 'It's funny. Laugh.' category. As many have also noted, it's does not appear to be written for laughs.) or if it was a genuine attempt by roblimo to express his views?
This distinction is important to me. If this truly was a feeble attempt at satire, then I just won't read roblimo for witty insight. But if it was intended as a 'serious' article, then I honestly don't want to read this kind of stuff and I don't think I'll bother with