It probably has a lot to do with FreeBSD having a much more focused niche. FreeBSD is really tuned primarily for servers. You can use it on your desktop, but that's not really it's main purpose. Linux on the other hand, has really branched out. It has desktop distros, server distros, embedded distros, and probably a couple other areas I haven't thought of.
You think so? I dunno, it seems to me that FreeBSD suits the desktop role really well; I use it for preference. Especially when you consider that the only OS with more packages is Debian, it makes sense that it can fit a desktop role extremely nicely.
I dunno, it seems to me that FreeBSD suits the desktop role really well
It does (I use it too) BUT only in specific environments. FreeBSD hardware support is not bad, but it is nowhere near as complete as that found in the various Linux distro's. My wireless keyboard + mouse is supported under any recent Linux distro, on FreeBSD, only the keyboard works (fixable with a unofficial ums.ko though). No support under FreeBSD for my DVB-C PCI card either.
FreeBSD hardware support is not bad, but it is nowhere near as complete as that found in the various Linux distro's.
If it's not even as good as Linux, then it must be bad. That's one of Linux's major faults, and probably the most cited reason for not using Linux. If you don't have good hardware support, you are missing out on a lot of users. Because most people aren't willing to buy a specific machine, with just the right hardware just to use your OS. I'm an avid Linux user, but even I admit that their hardware support level isn't quite where I would want it.
huh? Linux is the OS with the best hardware support you can get.
I have never installed Windows without having to get 90% of the drivers from cds or the web. With Linux otoh the hardware support became that good that youll have less trouble just buying something and see if it works than figure out what works beforehand. And whats even better: no installing drivers necessary. they all are already there.
Please name a couple of devices that dont already work in linux. I can think of only one: bisoncam. and dr
It may come with a larger number of drivers included with the operating system, but that doesn't mean that the drivers work. I had a Voodoo 3500 TV card. It worked under the 2.4 kernel, but not under the 2.6 kernel, because whoever was maintain the drivers disappeared. Most video card drives are way worse quality then what you get on Windows. Sure the drivers exist, but they are buggy, or quite slow compared to their windows counterparts.
I am so fed up of reading this. Yes, Linux has more drivers installed "out of the box" than windows. Big deal. Every single piece of hardware I have ever bought came with a CD that had drivers for windows. Yes, it's a bit of pain having to install them all manually after reinstalling the OS, but you only have to do it once. It's far more of a pain to find that you shiny new toy has no working drivers for Linux.
I use Linux as my desktop OS, but I am no prepared to ignore it's shortcomings. From where I'm s
I defy you to find anything on PC world's shelves that is not Windows XP compatible
Any CPU more recent than the Pentium Pro. Of course Windows XP 64 bit and Server 2003 fixed this and implement the extension to allow memory access beyond 2GB.
PAE has been in windows since at least NT4, maybe earlier. On the XP desktop (x86 version), MS made a support choice to not support PAE, due to (their claim) driver issues. If you'll remember, early versions of XP supported PAE on the desktop, but then was shut off around XP SP2. MS claim is that a large percentage of drivers for consumer hardware were not built to handle both PAE and non-PAE environments, and so caused system crashes. Therefore, as a tradeoff between scalability and reliability, they cho
Drivers - I have a nice modern PC, but my scanner is no longer supported under Windows by the manufacturer. The drivers for XP do not work in Vista (I actually had trouble with it since XP SP1) and HP will not be releasing new drivers for Vista. Under Suse 10.3 and Ubuntu 7.04 it works fine. Why? because some other linux hackers have the same sort of scanner and reverse engineered the driver. it will probably keep on being supported and working until the SCSI interface no longer exists.
I call that better d
How old is it? Because I also said seven years old or less. and SP1 was 2002, if memory serves, so it's at least seven years old if it's pre SP1.
Having said that, I do take your point. One massive benefit of open source is better support for older hardware. But that's not what I was arguing about. I explicitly excluded older hardware from my argument. What I was pointing
How did you wind up with all this hardware that doesn't work with your OS? It should be a straightforward matter to only buy things that are supported. Granted, you can't expect that sort of thing from windows users and maybe that is why Linux/* isn't for the general populace. But, If you had bought compatible stuff, it rewards the manufacturers that support linux.
The webcam was given to me, the modem came from the ISP (I use my own router any way), and I don't really care that the phone isn't supported. The only thing I need to hook it up for is installing apps, and I only do that very occasionally, so rebooting is no great hardship. I selected the phone on other grounds. Which, really, is my point. Every phones software works with windows. "Is it compatible with my OS is not an issue for windows users. Despite all the strides made in the last few years, it still is
I'm running a Logitech USB headset on Fedora Core 6 without problems. One problem that could crop up is if alsa is looking for sound from other hardware and has effectively muted the headset. You'll just need to play with your distros mixer program just like the MS windows people have to.
No this is a brand new model, that upon research - I need to download an updated driver, compile and install it. While this is doable, I would have preferred it work out of the box - or I could just do a binary update and get it working.
If it's not even as good as Linux, then it must be bad. That's one of Linux's major faults, and probably the most cited reason for not using Linux.
I don't actually blame Linux for lack of said hardware support, personally. I blame hardware manufacturers for making closed hardware that is barely functional outside Windows.
There's a reason why USB in particular is barely supported by anyone outside Windows; it's because, contrary to the name, in software terms it ain't universal.
You don't have to be Kreskin (Score:-1, Flamebait)
Re: (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:4, Interesting)
Re: (Score:5, Insightful)
It does (I use it too) BUT only in specific environments. FreeBSD hardware support is not bad, but it is nowhere near as complete as that found in the various Linux distro's. My wireless keyboard + mouse is supported under any recent Linux distro, on FreeBSD, only the keyboard works (fixable with a unofficial ums.ko though). No support under FreeBSD for my DVB-C PCI card either.
Re:You don't have to be Kreskin (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
I use Linux as my desktop OS, but I am no prepared to ignore it's shortcomings. From where I'm s
Re: (Score:2)
Any CPU more recent than the Pentium Pro. Of course Windows XP 64 bit and Server 2003 fixed this and implement the extension to allow memory access beyond 2GB.
Re: (Score:2)
On the XP desktop (x86 version), MS made a support choice to not support PAE, due to (their claim) driver issues. If you'll remember, early versions of XP supported PAE on the desktop, but then was shut off around XP SP2. MS claim is that a large percentage of drivers for consumer hardware were not built to handle both PAE and non-PAE environments, and so caused system crashes. Therefore, as a tradeoff between scalability and reliability, they cho
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
I did explicitly say I was talking about XP.
I actually had trouble with it since XP SP1)
How old is it? Because I also said seven years old or less. and SP1 was 2002, if memory serves, so it's at least seven years old if it's pre SP1.
Having said that, I do take your point. One massive benefit of open source is better support for older hardware. But that's not what I was arguing about. I explicitly excluded older hardware from my argument. What I was pointing
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I believe you meant:
"Is it compatible with my OS?" is was not an issue for windows users. Despite all the strides made in the last few years, it still is for Linux users.
As windows will not mean Windows XP after next year but Windows Vista.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I don't actually blame Linux for lack of said hardware support, personally. I blame hardware manufacturers for making closed hardware that is barely functional outside Windows.
There's a reason why USB in particular is barely supported by anyone outside Windows; it's because, contrary to the name, in software terms it ain't universal.