On Wed, 2007-01-24 at 15:27 +0000, Tamas Rudnai wrote:
> I am a Linux maniac, right? However, I would still say that Linux is not for
> an ordinary user. No matter what distribution you use, either you have to
> customize the kernel or sometimes even have to patch it to get similar
> results on your hardware to Windows. It is because most of the hardware
> manufacturer does not care about Linux and even refusing giving out
> information of their products to the kernel developers. And also because
> many advanced features cannot be included in the kernel as Torvalds or other
> chaps just does not like it.

I run linux, and I don't run a custom kernel.

I believe you are approaching things the wrong way. You are trying to
get hardware to work with Linux. What you should be doing is buying
hardware BASED on it working on Linux.

While many manufacturers have no clue what Linux is, some do, and
support it VERY well. As long as you stick with hardware that has Linux
support you will have LESS problems then with Windows (since many
drivers are built into linux, no need to futz with a crappy driver
disk).

Every piece of hardware I've bought in the past few years, even hardware
initially destined for a windows machine (my laptop) has been checked to
ensure linux compatibility first. It's not hard to do.

The best recent example was a laser printer. Having gotten completely
sick of the inkjet ripoff, I started looking for a VERY basic mono laser
printer. I found two, an HP and a Samsung. The HP was cheaper by about
$10, but after investigating I discovered it had NO manufacturer support
for Linux. While some people reported getting it working, I wasn't
willing to be the guinea pig. The Samsung OTOH had a Linux installer on
the driver disk. I bought the Samsung, and it works wonderfully. No
custom kernel, just an install GUI and that's it.

Now, is Linux ready for the "normal" user? Nope. It still is something
that sometimes needs tweaking at the command line, and that's beyond the
majority of the computing public. 

So, what do I recommend? Windows? Absolutely not. 

I recommend Macs. Yes, they are more expensive then they should be, yes,
I've never owned one, but heck, they sure are simple to get going. They
just work. They are limiting compared to Windows, but so what, most
computer uses don't use their computers for much more then word
processing, email and the web.

Just my opinion. TTYL

-- 
http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist