Linux No wifi. Still.

What you said right there is a total classic. So he who releases an OS should ensure they are prepared to write hardware drivers for 100% of all hardware for all time? Even when manufacturers of said hardware put barriers in their way to do so?

Oh please do tell me you're trolling. Nobody could ever be so misguided as to believe this.

You'd have a point if Wi-Fi was impossible on Linux but clearly that isn't the case and you're talking about a specific bit of hardware that doesn't have a driver, not that there's a flaw in OS.

Problem : The hardware I'm using doesn't have a driver for my OS of choice.
Cause : You're using hardware that doesn't have a driver for your OS of choice.
Solution : Use hardware that does have a driver for your OS of choice.
Cost: Solution cost less that £5 per installation.

Or.... Use an OS that is supported by your hardware, and then use a virtualisation solution if you need Linux compatibility.

Sheesh, it's computing.
Stuff like this comes up all the time.

Learn how to work around the problems you encounter!

 

I would, if I had any idea what actually fixed it. I adopted the usual Linux approach of googling for information, finding several dozen lines of shell commands, copy and pasting them all into a shell in various combinations, adding and removing "sudo" from the start of lines more or less at random, reading and trying to google for information on various errors and warnings, casting chicken bones, praying to various gods and doing a rather creative sort of dance, and eventually, after an entire afternoon of screwing around, it started working.

What did I do? I have no idea, and even if I did, it'll be something different next time. I've fixed wifi setups on a dozen linux installs and I've never seen the same command twice.

P

 

That's my approach to Linux, which is why I only use it when I have to.

 

I think what you mean - is dozens of times you have copy and pasted stuff other people have also copied and pasted, into your terminal - without actually knowing what it does. As there is quite a few ways of doing the same thing, you have probably done the same thing a few different ways. But without that element of wanting to know what you are doing, and what you are actually changing, might as well be double dutch to you And that's fine, but it kind of means you can't be upset about it - it's your choice not to learn what you are working with, or what your "Magic Phrases" are actually doing to the underlying operating system.

Never try learning perl - I tell you now - it makes even less sense than anything you'll ever do in a linux shell.

I find linux fascinating. Once you get down to it, and learn how it works and what you are doing - it is actually way simpler than any NT operating system. Unix computing just makes sense - problem is most of us have had NT operating systems rammed down our throats for the last 22 years, we are complacent in it's UX.

 

Disclaimer

I am a sysadmin, a Linux fan and Ubuntu user (until Unity - after which I defected to Linux Mint's MATE edition). I used to be a contributing member to the FSF and wholeheartedly support open source software. I happily write and publish my own software as open source.

---

I use Linux at work (sysadmin for an eCommerce company based on Amazon, so we use Ubuntu as a server OS and both myself, our IT Manager and junior ops support guy all use Mint on the desktop). I use a combination of Mac and Windows at home, because like Phil, I want things to JustWork(TM) and I don't want to have to do my day-job at home too.

I think this whole story is actually why Linux (IMO, against all my FOSS evangelism and personal hope) will never make it to the desktop: there's just too many opinions and not enough direction.

Also, I think a bit of perspective is needed. Windows has popularity on its side. Hardware vendors write Windows drivers for their devices because it's the most prevalent OS out there, and the one that most of their users will be using. In the minds of CEOs, why bother hiring expensive people to write drivers for a minority OS? This is where open source developers have historically picked up the slack, and either reverse-engineered existing drivers or just gone all-out and wrote new ones.

The other issue, is (no offence intended) user ignorance. The fact that the majority of people want something which JustWorks(TM) means that either people are not willing to make the time investment to understand how Linux works.

The relatively complex nature of Linux as an OS is in no way hidden from the end-user, resulting in drawn-out installation procedures involving compiling things from source. Windows and OSX do a great job of separating the user from the underlying system - this is where Linux needs to make a massive effort.

Returning to Phil's original problem, I wholeheartedly sympathise. I have lost many hours of my evenings fighting with AMD display drivers on my old desktop rigs.

 

And i could demonstrate the same thing for Windows, or any other OS if i choose to.

All you do is demonstrate your lack of understanding on Linux and how the open source model works as for many millions of people Linux is fixed and lovely and all works fine, just ask all those people that use Android, have a Virgin media STB or router, and the many other devices that it's working on.

As above, for many millions of people and devices it is actually working and usable for day to day tasks, the fact that you assume it's not and feel the need to educate people on your belief probably says more about you than the object of your loathing and contempt.

Sorry but where did you get the "ever let Linux" quote from?
It's a little tricky to follow what you're quoting when your not attributing it to anyone.

Again i would ask for a citation of these very very many people who are cheerleaders for Linux as an every day desktop OS, unfortunately i get the feeling you'll ignore my request as you did when i asked for a citation here.

You see Phil, someone who understands how the open source model works.
Perhaps it would be wise to read what Spreadie has said and what you said about understanding the open source model as every time you make a post such as your OP it says more about you than any failing of Linux (imho).

 

Me my post on the previous page

 

Ahh i see, thanks.
It almost lends credence to what you said in post #24 about using "Magic Phrases" without knowing what there doing.

 

Let me get this straight - you're now basing your argument on the idea that Linux isn't followed by a bleating flock of dunderheaded cheerleaders who will willingly claim it's capable of raising the dead if challenged?

I'm afraid you'll have to do a bit better than that. All I'd have to do is google up some of the (literally) tens of thousands of blogs, articles or forum posts by hyperventilating linux followers eager to claim anything you like. If you need convincing, do that yourself, but I'm not going to take the contrary view seriously. Please.

P

 

I'm not the one arguing you are, I'm simply asking you to backup your opinions with facts.

Such as your claimed fact that "we are encouraging people to use [Linux]", or your claim fact that "people [are] saying linux is fixed and lovely and all works fine. Which it demonstrably doesn't.", or the claimed fact that there "[are] people (the very very many people) who are cheerleaders for linux as an every day desktop OS"

If you can't provided citations to backup your claims they tend to come across as nothing more than the rantings of an incompetent user that lacks the awareness to know they don't know.

 

I'm confident that those are all entirely uncontroversial statements that will be self-evident to any reasonable person, so unfortunately you'll have to live with the situation.

Again, are you seriously trying to contend that the world is not overwhelmingly filled with vocal cheerleaders for linux who'll tell you it'll do anything to get you to use it, then vanish like mist when it falls over?

 

That is not evidence or any type of defence of your position. You could almost copy/paste that statement from any debate where one side has come up short.

The world? Overwhelmingly filled?

The only thing vanishing like the mist here is the credibility of your argument.

 

It's not intended to be. The idea that there are lots of people who rant on about how great linux is doesn't need defending, for pete's sake. I wouldn't defend the fact that the sky is blue, either, and I'm not going to be goaded into drifting off target here by low-brow distraction techniques. Grow up.

If you were right, someone would pop up in threads like this and point out that Glider was wrong in 2006, and remains wrong now, when he comments of Ubuntu that it is:

I'm presenting no argument other than that anyone distributing an operating system in 2015 that does not straightforwardly support USB wifi devices is being irresponsible. The politics of why they're doing that we can talk about, but I'm afraid I have no other case to answer and therefore have no intention of trying to answer it.

P

 

And I'm confident that i can perform brain surgery.

If what you claim are all entirely uncontroversial statements that will be self-evident to any reasonable person then you won't mind providing facts to backup those claims, something can't be uncontroversial unless the majority agree so it shouldn't be difficult to provide something.

I also don't have to live with it as your the one making the claims so the burden of proof is on you, not the other way around.

Like i said the burden of proof is on you but as yet you have totally failed to provide anything to backup your spurious claims.

 

Well, no, if they're self-evident then I would mind, because it's obviously a wind-up.

Let me try the same trick on you. Above, you said:

I hereby require you to provide several million examples or you're wrong - ha ha, I'm very clever. Only, er, no, I don't, because I'm not that sort of idiot.

I'd ask if we can get back to a normal, adult conversation on the actual issues, now, but it's already clear we can't.

P

 

Phil - we get it. Linux doesn't work for you, yada yada yada.

No amount of discussion (reasoned or otherwise) is seemingly going to placate your insurmountable quantities of rage, contempt and frustration.

So how about you just install Windows and be done with it, rather than whinge and whine like a cross between a teenager and a toddler who just wants to throw a tantrum for the sake of attracting attention.

Linux doesn't work for you. We get it. Grow a pair and move on. Tarring an entire ecosystem of software for not supporting a single USB WiFi dongle is just irresponsible and childish. If you want to take it up with someone, send an email to Linus Torvalds.

 

If that were the only problem with linux in general, I'd agree. Wifi is all over the place. Hibernating or suspending is still a crapshoot, which makes laptops difficult. Printing is a nightmare. Printing over networks is a double nightmare. Quite often, linux isn't even supplied capable of playing DVDs, and DVD is practically an obsolete format. Flash recently got more difficult, not easier. I could go on, and on, and on.

You cannot make this OK. It is disastrously terrible. Anyone distributing linux without a giant banner warning people that it doesn't (or doesn't with acceptable ease) do huge amounts of quite normal stuff is being dishonest.

Problems with the open source development model aren't directly related to the driver issues I've been trying to discuss here, although indirectly you could say that the reason nobody writes drivers for "linux" is that "linux" is an inconsistent, poorly-standardised moving target, and nobody wants to deal with the inevitable support cataclysm that this will create. I don't blame them. I wouldn't release software for linux if you paid me, and certainly not if you didn't!

P

 

Lol, I'd love to see how that would go down.

 

As I said, we get it. Now stop whinging, install Windows and be done with it. Problem solved.

I for one am actually one of the "bleating flock of dunderheaded cheerleaders" as you so eloquently refer to us, and I'm actually quite astounded, appalled and slightly offended at the amount of belligerent tripe you seem to be spouting, while at the same time being completely ignorant and unwilling to grasp simple concepts that underpin the software.

I'll happily keep extolling the virtues of Linux as an OS, an ecosystem and a philosophy. You are obviously a lost cause and I respect that Linux isn't for everyone. Just install Windows like everyone else and move on with your life. Simples.

 

Certainly, how about 1 billion active monthly users, how about 38 million in the UK alone the vast majority using Linux on their routers, or how about basing it on a percentage of operating system share just for the desktops, that would be around 1.53% of 3 billion internet users, that if my maths is correct is around 46 million.

Now would you care to provide some evidence to backup your spurious claims?

Sure not a problem, you bought a piece of hardware that specifically says "Supports Windows 8 32/64bits, Windows 7 32/64bits, Windows XP 32/64bits"

Nowhere does it mention Linux so i would say that's a fault with the user, in fact you should be grateful that people have gone out of their way to make it work on an unsupported OS.

^This 100%^
As was mentioned in my first reply to you "why are you still using Linux?"

Why not just use Windows and save yourself (and us) the trouble.