Langa bashing (was Re: Problems getting Linux into homes)

[Wade Chandler]

Sean Estabrooks wrote:

> On Sat, 24 Apr 2004 17:55:42 -0600
> "Rodolfo J. Paiz" <rpaiz at simpaticus.com> wrote:
> 
> 
>>If he'd argued this with *any* common, available, real (really real, as
>>in tangible!) sound card, his argument would have been a lot stronger.
>>But the way he tested... was simply doomed to fail. The whole story
>>really had no other possible ending.
> 
> 
> Yes he mentions a previous article about Virtual PC's from Microsoft
> but how sure are you he was testing Linux on a virtual PC:
> 
> <quote> 
> Despite my very positive first impressions, I couldn't get XYZ to work
> with my sound card at all, even though I was testing XYZ on a brand new PC
> from a major vendor. The system was based on an utterly mainstream Intel
> motherboard with an on-board Intel sound system. This isn't some weird,
> off-brand system using unknown components: It's about as mainstream as it
> gets.
> </quote>
> 
> Cheers,
> Sean
> 
> 

Funny part is the install probably correctly setup his sound card.  Him 
being a newby he probably has no idea about sound servers.  I happen to 
have the same "vague" computer.  From a major vendor with an utterly 
mainstream on-board intel sound system....intel happens to support linux 
very well...they also make compilers compatible with GCC.

However one takes the article is up to them.  But, with a comment like 
"The system was based on an utterly mainstream Intel motherboard with an 
on-board Intel sound system" and "This isn't some weird, off-brand 
system using unknown components: It's about as mainstream as it gets."
one does have to wonder about the intent of the article.

One simply shouldn't go to print with a criticizing story such as it is 
,designated by the choices of adjectives, and simply throw out specifics 
and merely leave a vague impression as to the type of hardware.  That's 
just about political.

Every Intel board I have ever owned whether purchased seperate or in a 
commercial computer had specifications that explained the brands of the 
major components on the board.  810 or 815 would have even been 
something worth noting.  Yet nothing.  Just criticizing the fact that 
something didn't work and all readers know is it is an Intel mother board.

Most people would probably point at "utterly" and "as mainstream as it 
gets" as critical phrases in the artical.  This just being his 
experience or not doesn't excuse a critical artical from getting it's 
fair share of critism. IMHO.

Wade