This has been the case for over 10 years... thank you for breaking the news though...
Linux has better hardware support than OS X
151–160 of 218 posts
Re: Linux has better hardware support than OS X
#152Earlier quoted context omitted.
Exactly. If there is any hardware platform that should be a "reference" platform for Linux (or FreeBSD) it should be the mac. It's a very tightly focused hardware ecosystem with broad adoption and of higher quality - inside and out.
> and of higher quality That's completely your opinion. I have had much better luck with Thinkpads. Many of the Unibody Macbooks have severe wifi connectivity and overheating issues. As far as broad adoption goes, it may be more broad than the adoption of Thinkpads, but I wouldn't call it "broad" by any stretch. Mac market share is still quite low - less than 10%.
Is the TrackPoint (eraserhead) pointer well supported by Linux? I hope the answer is yes. If so, which flavor of Linux?
Re: Linux has better hardware support than OS X
#153Earlier quoted context omitted.
> and of higher quality That's completely your opinion. I have had much better luck with Thinkpads. Many of the Unibody Macbooks have severe wifi connectivity and overheating issues. As far as broad adoption goes, it may be more broad than the adoption of Thinkpads, but I wouldn't call it "broad" by any stretch. Mac market share is still quite low - less than 10%.
Is the TrackPoint (eraserhead) pointer well supported by Linux? I hope the answer is yes. If so, which flavor of Linux?
It's a normal PS/2 mouse (at least it was on my R60).
There are a few pointers here: http://www.thinkwiki.org/wiki/How_to_configure_the_TrackPoin...
Re: Linux has better hardware support than OS X
#154That is quite understandable as OSX is designed to run on one hardware - that is Apple's. It is also the way, apple ensures that there is no hardware fragmentation.
Re: Linux has better hardware support than OS X
#155Earlier quoted context omitted.
Linux's "basic functionality" used the full resolution of my integrated graphics card to allow me to run my monitor at native resolution. Windows 7's basic functionality didn't let me run my monitor at native resolution, thus I had to put up with blurry fonts until I downloaded the (huge!) new driver. At the moment there's lots of anecdote - "This worked under one OS, but not the other" - but a comprehensive review o…
Not sure what kind of hardware you have, but the last time I experienced something like that was in XP.
The motherboard is an "Asus F1A55-M LX AMD A55 FM1 DDR3 mATX" which has integrated "AMD Radeon HD 6000 Series Graphics". The monitor is an "Asus VS229HR 21.5" LED IPS Monitor"
But the point is exactly that individuals will have varying experiences - I have a printer that just works in one OS but is terrible in another; a gadget that works as expected in one OS, but has better independently developed drivers in a different OS and doesn't work at all on a third OS; etc.
I don't offer my experience as an example of Windows 7 having worse hardware support than OS X or Linux.
Re: Linux has better hardware support than OS X
#156That may be true. But OS X has the better hardware.
Re: Linux has better hardware support than OS X
#157Earlier quoted context omitted.
I use Windows 7 on a 7 year old ThinkPad with Linux inside a VirtualBox VM. Works better and consumes less power and therefore has longer battery life than Linux on bare metal. My 2010 MacBook Pro caught fire, so I can't vouch for Apple's reliability.
I really find it hard to believe that Win7 on 7 year old hardware with Linux in a VM works better than just Linux on the same hardware. What on earth are you measuring this on?
Lenovo T61 7661. Dual Core 2 2.0, 4Gb RAM, Samsung 840 pro. 9 cell battery.
It's better because even with powertop optimisations, Linux leaks energy out of the window everywhere. If you let Windows handle it with the Lenovo power manager, it's an order of magnitude better.
Windows 7 x64 with reserved power scheme. 8h42m Debian 6.0 with powertop optimisation. 5h12m.
Regarding virtual machines, Linux's virtualbox drivers are better than native ones for the hardware in the actual machine.
Re: Linux has better hardware support than OS X
#158Earlier quoted context omitted.
> and of higher quality That's completely your opinion. I have had much better luck with Thinkpads. Many of the Unibody Macbooks have severe wifi connectivity and overheating issues. As far as broad adoption goes, it may be more broad than the adoption of Thinkpads, but I wouldn't call it "broad" by any stretch. Mac market share is still quite low - less than 10%.
Is the TrackPoint (eraserhead) pointer well supported by Linux? I hope the answer is yes. If so, which flavor of Linux?
Yes. As the GP answered already, it's just another input device. I use it exclusively and turned the touchpad completely off on this T520.
The 'flavor of Linux' should be irrelevant.
Re: Linux has better hardware support than OS X
#159Earlier quoted context omitted.
As a Windows and Linux user on a daily basis, I'll tell you that no-one bothers with Office unless they are running a business. Everyone else seems happy with ancient copies of OpenOffice that their cheap laptop came with or LibreOffice if they have to get involved in installing anything. Also, people don't organise photos with additional software now. Windows Explorer itself is pretty damn good at it to be honest an…
> Printing just works - plug in and go. Meh: https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Printing#Troubleshootin... I'm still having issues with my Samsumg laser printer, and I specifically tried to acquire a printer that had good linux compatability
I've never had any luck with anything Samsung. Their stuff never seems entirely finished or entirely tested.
Re: Linux has better hardware support than OS X
#160> This is a double standard. To have its “great” hardware support, a given release of OS X has to support a few dozen hardware configurations. Agreed. Linux and Windows, as operating systems, are solving a much different and more difficult problem than OS X is. You can get them to run on a wide variety of hardware relatively easily. By that metric, both Windows and Linux have "better hardware support" than OS X. The…
1) go online for project management and responding to emails
check
2) call my clients using their preferred VoIP service
Skype, GoogleTalk maybe? Go2Meeting crashed like a bi-atch on OSX for me.
3) run text editors, IDEs, and various virtual machines, interpreters, compilers, and servers
complete nonsense if you're insinuating that OSX has better support for the above than Linux (you guys just got a non-archaic JDK for example, curious which compilers you're using, the Ruby "compiler" ;-))
4) hook into an iPhone or Android phone and load software onto it
Can certainly do that with Android; OSX VM for iPhone
5) quickly and painlessly install libraries, software, and developer tools
yum, apt, and so on
6) edit video and audio
Macs are great for artists and musicians; case in point, my dad's had a Mac since the early 90s, he does video editing and audio editing (producer and drummer)
7) if I had to learn a new skill or assumed a new responsibility, I'll spend most of my time learning rather than setting my system up.
I mentioned passive non-learning in regard to the OSX experience in another comment. I'd argue that, on the contrary, Linux users, having an understanding of their system beyond the GUI, are actually better suited toward learning new skills, assuming that skill is systems-based of course; if it involves click-click-clicking things, that's another "skill"