[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: ATI video comes out of the closet

Jose Celestino wrote:

Both Linux and Windows work on platforms that have, literally,
thousands of vendors manufacturing a tremendous range of equipment,
most of which has to have a properly working device driver.
Yes, and my experience over the last 5 years has been that the Windows versions are more dependable than the fedora versions. I'm sure there are individual exceptions to that, but I just don't see fedora as a bastion of stability here - or in a position to claim that they have the only approach to drivers that can work.

What? You must be trolling. More dependable? More like more predictable,
you can always predict there will be troubles.

And if your experience is from the last 5 years I bet you've had ME and
98 ubber troubles to some extend.

Yes, I could never get a windows box to run more than a few weeks with some applications back in the the days before NTsp6a and win2ksp2, but I don't see how that is relevant to a current discussion. There are lots of ways to do things wrong, but once they are done right all you have to do is stop changing them.

 > Much as
they'd like to, Microsoft can't control all these vendors; the original
PC was wide open--they even published schematics and the source to the
BIOS--and that legacy is embedded in the attitude of the vendors today.
(MS's attempt to lock down the driver interface with Vista is meeting
with a lot of resistance.)

The Vista approach deserves to fail for the same reasons DRM does, but the driving force has to be consumer reaction. If something is difficult to use, don't use it.

What are talking about? Is it dificult to install or use Fedora? What's
the dificulty, I don't get it. Could you elaborate?

On the machines where I've used fedora, things that worked in the initial install have broken regularly in updates. These include firewire drives, mainstream scsi controllers used by IBM and DELL, and something on an IBM server that I haven't figured out yet where at one update version required a bios flash update after which the previous kernel wouldn't run. Most of these problems happened mid-version - and the list archive is filled with similar issues - and this is even without considering the times kernel updates have been pushed before a corresponding binary driver like nVidia or VMware is available. These are specifically fedora issues, though, not Linux in general. I have, for example, an RH7.3 box that has been up for 4 years (no reboots) and a large assortment of centos 3.x boxes that have been up for years except for reboots following kernel updates - I'd consider these statistically equal to current non-Vista windows versions in not crashing due to driver bugs, but note that is with a 2.4 kernel.

  Les Mikesell
   lesmikesell gmail com

[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]