mjg59: Neil:The vast majority of your criticism

Matthew Garrett (

mjg59) wrote,
@ 2008-01-13 16:38:00

Entry tags:

advogato, ubuntu

Neil:

The vast majority of your criticisms are unfounded. Nvidia contribute code to the open driver for their network hardware (see the commits) - you don't mention what version of Debian you're actually running, but if it's etch then it's hardly surprising that new hardware isn't supported terribly well. Try a more recent kernel. It's not clear what you expect HP to have done here - used older hardware to make sure Debian worked?

"the graphics don't work with standard Debian kernels and the standard Debian 'nv' driver" - this seems fairer. No 7000-series IDs have been added to the nv driver for some time, and 7150 is clearly missing. Naughty nvidia. No biscuit. But, again, hard to see what you wanted HP to do here - you bought a machine with an nvidia graphics chipset, and you're surprised that the open support is poor?

"I'll still need some firmware for the bcm43xx wireless card - and it is that firmware that made my previously ultra-reliable iBook into a flaky, power hungry psycho-beast." - no. Given that the firmware runs fine on non-Linux platforms, it's pretty clear that it's the (entirely open) driver that's at fault. Which is hardly surprising, given that it's had to be reverse engineered due to Broadcom providing no specifications whatsoever, but blaming vendors for using proprietary firmware is a bit much. Do you have the source for your CPU microcode? Your BIOS? The firmware that's in flash on your other wireless cards? Your hard drive? As a community, we haven't been sending a strong message to vendors that we want open firmware. Acting shocked that they then don't provide it is alarmingly unreasonable.

"GNOME doesn't yet work because of the proprietary crap" - the only proprietary crap you need is the graphics driver, and it's unlikely (though possible) that it's breaking GNOME. Perhaps you have another bug?

"I didn't think companies were still producing crap of this pitiful standard - HP: you stink" - this might at some level be linked to the fact that you paid 500 pounds, and as a result you got something made from cheap parts. That's not HP's fault. Their consumer hardware isn't designed to work with Linux. It's hardware that's designed to be as cheap and shiny as possible in order to appeal to home users who are then going to use it to download films and porn and animated mouse cursors in order to ensure that all their private data get sent to Russia. If it's supported by Linux then that's a happy coincidence. If not, then who cares?

Never mind. It's likely that your laptop is one of the machines that has some debugging hardware on io port 0x80, and as a result Linux's use of that as a delay port (despite the hardware's acpi tables claiming it as a motherboard resource) is likely to cause the machine to deadlock randomly if you do things like try to read the hardware clock or nvram. That's likely to cause you more problems than HP's use of Nvidia graphics.

(Post a new comment)

crschmidt
2008-01-13 06:11 pm UTC (link)

I don't necessarily disagree with your responses, but I don't think the "HP, you stink!" attitude is particularly out of line. Making a laptop that doesn't support Linux these days *does* stink, and that's not the fault of the users, or even the developers. Anyone who ties their hardware to a particular software platform does, in my opinion (for what little it is worth), stink.

"If it's supported by Linux, then that's a happy coincidence. If not, then who cares?"

I think HP should care, and I think that one of the ways to make them care is publishing far and wide the vendors that seem to be fighting against Linux, either explicitly or implicitly. If I don't like software, I write about it -- to the company, to the other buyers, etc. "Buyer Beware" messages are a way to find out that something isn't going to do what I want before I buy it.

On the flip side, I will write messages of support to the same group of people when something works -- be it hardware or software.

I don't think Neil's post falls out of line at all: he's expressing dissatisfaction because the thing he bought didn't meet his expectations.

(Reply to this)(Thread)

	broonie 2008-01-13 07:21 pm UTC (link)
	One of the ways to apply pressure on vendors is not to buy hardware made with components that aren't well supported by free software - even looking at the spec of the laptop it should have been fairly obvious that there was a reasonable chance of running into trouble. Getting this irate when that is in fact the case seems a bit much. (Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

crschmidt
2008-01-13 07:55 pm UTC (link)

Well, speaking personally, I likely would have 'assumed' (and we all know what that does) that the laptop would run Linux. Laptops have come down to the point where a consumer/home laptop can be an 'impulse buy'.

Now, I wouldn't buy a laptop, expecting to run Linux on it, and not ensure it could be returned without checking it first. I'd say that the right direction for Neil is for him to simply return the laptop (see the comment below). I don't know where it came from -- many big box stores in the US certainly require a 15% restocking fee, which would be enough to give me pause -- but if the laptop doesn't do the right thing for him, I'd say that's the right solution: but I wouldn't say that makes his complaint less valid.

Then again, maybe I've just grown too used to crap not working, and finding that the squeaky wheel may eventually get the grease.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

	broonie 2008-01-13 09:32 pm UTC (link)
	Personally I'd at least make sure that anything I bought (and I've actually just bought a laptop) didn't have an nVidia chipset. Since the graphics chipset is usually part of the advertised feature list, or if not can be easily discovered, this isn't too difficult. It certainly wouldn't interfere with the whole impulse purchase thing. (Reply to this)(Parent)

What about vendors who listened?
(Anonymous)
2008-01-13 07:45 pm UTC (link)

Before the advent of pre-installed Linux systems, I might have grudgingly agreed with you; now, with Dell providing a full range of systems (laptops, desktops and servers) that are all guaranteed to support and run Linux, I'd ask why you didn't buy a system from Dell, or an Asus EEE PC, or any other system that's pre-installed.

My reasoning is quite simple; we've made enough noise that at least one company has decided to gamble on us as a market niche. By buying pre-installed Linux systems, rather than pre-installed Windows or Mac OS systems, we send a very clear message to beancounters at all PC manufacturers that Linux is potentially profitable.

There's also a further side-effect; there is a cost to a company like Dell to keep multiple equivalent parts in stock (e.g. both Intel and Broadcom wireless). If Linux systems are profitable enough, it's worth Dell's while pressuring their suppliers to support Linux next time they're tendering for parts suppliers; even if the parts are intended for Windows systems, it still suits Dell to be able to use them in Linux systems.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

Re: What about vendors who listened?

crschmidt
2008-01-13 08:02 pm UTC (link)

"Price" would be an obvious answer: laptops have come down to the point where a good deal on a nice looking laptop can be an 'impulse buy'. (I don't know if 500 GBP would be -- $500 USD for me would be enough that I might 'splurge' if I knew I needed something and wanted to go ahead and get it, and I don't know how the cost of living compares the two.)

I could be wrong on this: it's possible that pre-installed Linux systems are cheaper or what have you. But in general, what I see in the current home computer market is that it's not about what you buy, it's about when you buy: prices fluctuate wildly with sales, and when you see a good deal, it may make sense to jump on it even if it's not entirely clear ahead of time whether it will do what I need or not, especially if I can return it without taking much of a hit.

The fact that consumer- (rather than business-) grade laptops are still using components that you can't use easily in Linux is annoying enough that in his position, I'd likely have done the same thing.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

	Re: What about vendors who listened? broonie 2008-01-13 09:49 pm UTC (link)
	The Dell pre-installed Linux systems are among the cheapest laptops I saw when I was looking recently. It's unfortunate that they have only one model available with Linux pre-installed - hopefully their range will improve. (Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

	Re: What about vendors who listened? mjg59 2008-01-14 12:20 am UTC (link)
	Dell were heavily limited by the number of models they had that actually ran Linux well. Linux compatibility is something that's being taken into account for hardware choice in their next product lifecycle, so with luck things will improve. (Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

	Re: What about vendors who listened? broonie 2008-01-14 12:35 am UTC (link)
	They do have some other things that do rather well - some of this may be due to relatively recent improvements in the Intel driver support but there are several of their business laptops appear to work more stably with Linux than with Windows. (Reply to this)(Parent)

mjg59
2008-01-14 12:17 am UTC (link)

It's fine to be unhappy if something doesn't meet your expectations. That doesn't make it reasonable to have those expectations in the first place. There's still hardware out there that doesn't work with Linux. Using that hardware doesn't mean you're yourself to a software platform.

I think HP should care, and I think that one of the ways to make them care is publishing far and wide the vendors that seem to be fighting against Linux, either explicitly or implicitly.

Failing to care about Linux isn't implicitly fighting against Linux, any more than my failure to care whether my code works on OpenBSD is an implicit slur on them. If it works, great (and patches happily accepted), but I'm not going to go out of my way.

"Buyer Beware" messages are a way to find out that something isn't going to do what I want before I buy it.

But this isn't buyer beware - this is "HP are a shit company", despite the fact that HP are one of the larget contributors to Linux. "This HP laptop contains hardware that is not currently supported by Linux" would be useful information. A rant demonstrating a fundamental misunderstanding of several aspects of Linux isn't.

(Reply to this)(Parent)

http://blogs.gnome.org/jamesh/
2008-01-14 03:57 am UTC (link)

Anyone who ties their hardware to a particular software platform does, in my opinion (for what little it is worth), stink.

By this reasoning, would you say that Nokia sucks for tying their N800/N810 to Linux? Or does OLPC suck for tying their XO hardware to Linux?

Like it or not, vendors sell and support a combination of hardware and software. Getting that combination working well is going to be the priority -- anything else will be secondary.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

crschmidt
2008-01-14 05:25 am UTC (link)

I thought that the reason for the rise in cost of the XO was explicitly because it's *not* tied to Linux anymore? Microsoft asked for the hardware to be expanded to support running Windows and since it fit in with other things that needed doing anyway, it's now possible to run Windows on it.

I don't know enough about the N800 platform to be sure, but I think that if you wanted to, it would probably be possible to install other software to run the OS on it. You're right that the statement was unclear, however: Specifically, I was addressing laptop makers. In the world of the small internet tablet devices -- like the N800 series -- I have more sympathy, since it is still difficult to get non-proprietary hardware for the smaller size stuff. (See OpenMoko for an example of the difficulties therein.)

Laptops, on the other hand, seem to have reached a point where the proprietary components can be replaced with non-proprietary components for practically no loss of functionality and (basd on what I've read) none/not much difference in price. I could be wrong on this -- it's possible that proprietary hardware really does do it better, and I'm just being unrealistic.

I don't know if anything I've said here really applies. The more I read the post that this was responding to and the subsequent followups, the more I realize that this isn't really about proprietary vs. non-proprietary, at least not for the most part. It seems to be about 'new vs. non-new' -- in which case the original post is just a 'rant', which I have also found myself vulnerable to, but which gets less protection under the code of "rules that my brain makes up when interpreting content online".

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

http://blogs.gnome.org/jamesh/
2008-01-15 07:33 am UTC (link)

The news reports about Windows on the XO talk about running it on "a version of the XO". It certainly isn't clear that you'd be able to run it on the base model, probably needing more memory or storage.

In both the XO and N800 cases, while you can probably get another OS up and running, it probably won't support all the hardware out of the box or may even trigger problems not found with the original software. Of course, you may get enough functionality out of the device to productively use the device (so it'd be worth checking other people's experiences beforehand).

This is pretty much the same situation you are in when buying a Windows laptop. If OLPC or Nokia only support you using their bundled OS, does that make them suck?

(Reply to this)(Parent)

Loving my dv2610us
(Anonymous)
2008-01-13 06:35 pm UTC (link)

This summer I picked up an HP dv2610us for ubuntu. I specifically chose it for the nvidia 7150, because it seems the only option for running any sort of 3d gaming on linux.

Configuring the video was a little tricky, some funky lines got into the auto xorg.conf that were keeping things from going. Other than that, the only trouble I've had is the wireless networking. Currently it's working great with Network Manager and ndiswrapper.

I've been really surprised at what has been working out of the box for me. Full suspend support which took no work on my part. The integrated webcam is perfect, the built in micro card/SD slot gave me no trouble either.

From my view, I expected the wireless and nvidia to take a little setting up. I haven't had to mess with the config since summer once I got it working. I also expected little to no luck on the other components and suspend support.

I have been pleasantly surprised in almost all aspects of this HP laptop and Linux. Running Ubuntu 7.10. Looking forward to 8.04 and it's better efficiency with the amd cpu.

(Reply to this)

	0x80? aigarius 2008-01-13 06:58 pm UTC (link)
	I have a HP laptop that locks up randomly with no log messages at least 2-3 times a day under moderate use. I did suspect the 0x80 problem, but could find no way to confirm or fix that. Any hints? (Reply to this)(Thread)

	Re: 0x80? mjg59 2008-01-14 12:22 am UTC (link)
	Edit include/asm/io_32.h or io_64.h, and find the reference to outb %%al,$0x80. Change the 0x80 to 0xed. Build a new kernel. (Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

	Re: 0x80? (Anonymous) 2008-01-14 12:20 pm UTC (link)
	Would this 0x80 problem cause me to have 0 interrupts for RTC in my HP laptop (in cat /proc/interrupts)?? (and hwclock is non-functional, even though not causing the computer to hang) (Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

	Re: 0x80? mjg59 2008-01-14 01:08 pm UTC (link)
	It's pretty normal to have 0 interrupts for the RTC (it'll only fire them if you're setting alarms), so I suspect that this isn't the problem you're having. It's always possible, though. (Reply to this)(Parent)

	Re: 0x80? jhf 2008-01-14 07:26 pm UTC (link)
	http://lkml.org/lkml/2007/12/11/55 If you run the program at the bottom of that message a few times (as root) and you do have the problem, it'll trigger it pretty quickly. (Reply to this)(Parent)

	My blog juliank.wordpress.com 2008-01-13 07:12 pm UTC (link)
	You may also read my post at http://juliank.wordpress.com/2008/01/13/neil-its-not-hps-fault-hp-rocks/ (Reply to this)

	NVIDIA to make OSS driver ? (Anonymous) 2008-01-13 07:48 pm UTC (link)
	Rumor & random speculation from a guy who has proven in the past to be very well informed: http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=NjI3NQ PS: your captcha is too hard to read (Reply to this)(Thread)

	Re: NVIDIA to make OSS driver ? mjg59 2008-01-14 12:24 am UTC (link)
	The people I know inside Nvidia haven't heard anything about this, though that obviously doesn't mean it's impossible. I'd be thrilled to see it. (Reply to this)(Parent)

Mini Sitemap:

Username:		Create an Account Forgot your login? Login w/ OpenID
Password:
	Remember Me
	English • Español • Deutsch • Русский…