Quote:
Originally posted by Tinkster
one member of my LUG feels...it's the Linux developers duty to
work their way around secretive hardware manufacturers... 
Cheers,
Tink
|
Hi Mate,
I wouldn't say that's "their duty," but for ~ 13 years now that's what they've
been doing. We all understand that something we do "based on love and
desire for that object" far exceeds the quality or what we do "based upon
obligation." Reader - do you put more into your job, or your favorite hobby?
Do you give more of yourself to your boss, or your wife/husband?
After reading the philosophy of some of the "Linux pioneers," especially
Eric S. Raymond's book "The Cathedral and the Bazaar," I'm convinced that
the reason GNU/Linux systems perform superior to Windoze systems is for
just that reason. The developers producing drivers for hardware to work
under Windoze systems are working for a dollar, putting their time in at the
job, and basically debugging the same problematic OS day in and day out.
On the other hand, the developers of open source software, including the
GNU/Linux kernel, are doing this out of a love and admiration of a far superior
operating system, where they have a "sense of ownership" in the product.
They're also doing it because they use it, and they want it to work more
efficiently.
This type of system is the reason we can use
most motherboards, and
just about
any piece of hardware, with a Linux OS anyway. Asus is my
favorite brand of motherboard, but there are others with great features, and
performance, as well. But for most Linux users, the fact that the manufacturer
of the motherboard does/does not offer support is a mute point. That article
uses many of those "buzzwords" which are similar to the type of tactics that
companies such as Mirco$loth use to instill fear in the general public concerning
Linux and open source software. Reader - how many times in the last 10 years
have you contacted the manufacturer of your motherboard for support?
For myself, I contacted Asus a year and a half ago before I started using Linux,
because I needed a driver to run my onboard IEEE1394 controller under W2K.
I couldn't make a firewire network connection with my W2K desktop and XP lappy,
though I could do it with XP and XP. The W2K system wanted a driver, which was
not on the Asus mobo CD, the Asus website, the Micro$loth website, or any other
place on the net - for free. There was one place where you could buy a software
package that supposedly works, but I felt Asus "owed me" a driver, since it was
an onboard chip. I contacted Asus in Taiwan first, and then in the U.S., and both
of them told me it worked "right out of the box," but couldn't tell me "how to get
it to work." The guys in the U.S. said the driver was available with the W2K SP4,
which I had already installed - and it wasn't there. After telling them this, they
finally told me, "we have it working here." So I asked them all the right questions
about the drivers and asked for proof, which they couldn't supply. So, where do
you go from there? Micro$loth...
Of course, my W2K CD is OEM, so there is
no support from Micro$loth
unless you're willing to pay $35/hour. Their EULA says your support will have to
come from the OEM who sold you the OS - and that's about as effective as a
screendoor on a submarine. So, yes, I called M$ from China (no the 800 number
is not free from here) and gave them a credit card number and paid them $35 for
the answer to "how do you setup firewire networking between W2K and XP?" The
first level guy was no more help than Asus, so he transferred me to some special
tier team, whose name I can't remember, though it's all documented and stored
somewhere in the bowels of the backed-up W2K system. Before transferring me,
the first guy told me that "if we can't answer your question, or supply support for
this, we will refund your support fee." Right - Micro$loth refund - sound familiar?
So the next guy listens to what I have, what I've tried, what I've done, my results,
and whom I've talked to - and immediately says, "You're correct. It is impossible
to network W2K and XP with firewire using the OSs. Is there anything else I can
help you with?" To which I posed all the tough technical questions I could think of,
since I'd never talked to Mirco$loth Tech Support before. Why would I want to?
I can fix a Windoze OS problem, and I'm not going to keep paying for someone
else to fix something I've already paid for, that should work. And btw - Micro$loth
refunded my $35 fee.
That's been my one and only experience calling the manufacturer of a motherboard
for support. And just like the article that you posted, it really isn't the responsibility
of Asus to provide support - they just put the chip on the motherboard. You pick the
OS, and that's where you'll need to find the drivers for the hardware - not from the
motherboard manufacturer.
If GNU/Linux developers, and us as users, decide to boycott all the manufacturers who
"don't support Linux," we'd have a hard time finding enough hardware to get a box
running. And it wouldn't be much of a computer if we did.
So, in response, I'd say these fellers who say "boycott Asus because they don't support
Linux" are the type who will "cut off their nose to spite their face."
Let's face it guys, Asus makes some great products, as do other manufacturers. And
if you'll search the forums, you'll find Asus is not leading the pack in mobos that users
are having problems with. Why don't you call MSI or Gigabyte or VIA and ask for some
"Linux tech support." Better yet, go buy a board from PC Chips, ECS, Albatron, or some
other brand and see how you fare.
Asustek is one of the leaders out there, and if we're naive enough to quit using them
because of some article like this on the internet, we'll never get anywhere with *nix
with that type of an attitude. In this house we've got two PC's with Asus mobos, and
they're both better supported with Slack than with W98, W2K, or XP.
Look at the track record of Asustek, and "from whence they've come." How many of you
were around when AMD launched Athlon in August 1999? The CPU had shown to be faster,
as well as cheaper, than any Intel processor on the market at the time. But the problem
was finding a mobo in a shop to run it! Asus began producing the Athlon-motherboard
'K7M' with AMD's 750 chipset, but they were so scared of Intel that it was sold in 'white
boxes' and without any labeling. It was really good, but you couldn't even spot that it was
an Asus board. And that was about the only board you could get to run the thing for the
first 6 months! But Tom Pabst wrote an article about Taiwan's motherboard makers being
"more afraid of Intel than an invasion from mainland China." A few weeks after the publication,
Asus suddenly started shipments of K7M boards in actual Asustek-boxes and the other big
Taiwanese mobo-players followed.
So why knock Asustek if we don't have some good facts? And rather than "crying wolf" at
every opinionated article on the internet, we should invesigate for ourselves, and find out
what (or who) is really behind it. I personally, though a Linux newbie and novice, believe that
Linus and all the guys over at
http://lkml.org will rise above and beyond the call of duty and
hack the hardware successfully!
