New installation method needed?
- Edited
elfprince How many people purchase brand new computers every year?
I've gotta ask it, "What difference does that make"? At any given time, there are folks with (relatively) new computers, and folks with (relatively) old computers. I want Solus to be able to install and run for BOTH of those owner groups, not just for folks with older computers.
And just to be clear, my computers are all older. I just don't want to see the folks with new hardware after the upcoming holicay season unable to use Solus.
tomscharbach A quiet note: Solus is not the only distro with serious upstream issues keeping up with new hardware. Every disto that is dependent on the kernel for hardware drivers has trouble keeping up with new consumer-level computers.
The upstream issues exist because many/most hardware manufacturers do not make developing Linux drivers a priority (if they do it at all, which they don't, in many cases), kernel developers/maintainers do not make keeping kernel drivers for new hardware a priority, and the community does not do much of a job developing manufacturer-independent drivers for hardware.
^^ this is def. something to be mindful about. hadn't considered this as a factor, but now I'm glad I have.
- Edited
WetGeek This discussion is pretty pointless, imo. The devs team will do what they will do. Aggressive activism tends to only breed conflict. I am happy with where we are at, because Solus works well and is stable. That is all I want. People with new pcs will have to make their own choices. It is not for others to figure out.
One reason why I love Linux is because it is free, it runs well on old and newer hardware, and you have choices. That's all.
- Edited
brent ^^ this is def. something to be mindful about. hadn't considered this as a factor, but now I'm glad I have.
Yes, and there is an additional issue that I'm not sure that I understand.
I've noticed over the years that Windows installs "generic" drivers for components when a specific driver is not in the Windows installation ISO. For example, when I do a clean install, Windows will install a generic display adapter driver and a generic display driver, as well as generic USB port drivers, on initial installation if component-specific drivers are not in the Windows ISO. Windows nags me to install proper drivers until I get around to it. The "generic" drivers are dumbed down and don't offer full functionality, but the installer doesn't end up with a blinking cursor and frozen installation, either. I've not had an installation fail with Linux (in part because I've used only Ubuntu and Solus and in part because my computers are vanilla Intel), but I'd be frustrated as hell if I got a blinking cursor when installing.
If the kernel developers/maintainers could be motivated to do something similar to what Windows does, it would help a lot. I'm not holding my breath, though, because the kernel is focused on business and server computers, not ordinary desktop users.
tomscharbach That is an interesting piece of info. Can be something to consider.
- Edited
elfprince That is an interesting piece of info. Can be something to consider.
As I said, though, "I'm not sure that I understand."
Providing "generic" drivers for installing hardware components seems to be a no-brainer, but perhaps there is something in the way the Linux kernel is architected that doesn't allow "fuzzy" drivers in the way that the NT kernel does. I don't know, but I've noticed that Windows seems to be relatively forgiving when it comes to drivers for hardware components during installation, and Linux seems to be remarkably rigid about needing the exact driver.
WetGeek I just don't want to see the folks with new hardware after the upcoming holiday season unable to use Solus.
Yeah. But I think that we have to face the fact that folks with the newest hardware, particularly hardware that is consumer-specific like NVIDIA cards, are going to have issues, and not just with Solus.
tomscharbach I've noticed that Windows seems to be relatively forgiving when it comes to drivers for hardware components during installation,
Windows is not FOSS. If they can't get their OS installed, they don't get paid for it. That's a simplification, of course, but they're highly incentivised to make sure their OS will install on any compjuter.
- Edited
WetGeek Windows is not FOSS. If they can't get their OS installed, they don't get paid for it. That's a simplification, of course, but they're highly incentivised to make sure their OS will install on any compjuter.
Yup. You've just identified the problem. Developers/maintainers of the Linux kernel have little or no incentive to shape the kernel in the direction of consumer desktop computers or waste limited resources doing so. Microsoft, on the other hand, has enormous financial incentives to do whatever it takes to continue to dominate the consumer market.
The bulk of the kernel's code and financial support comes from companies focused on the server, cloud and Android markets. To the extent that Linux on the desktop is supported, the focus is on business/enterprise computers rather than consumer computers. The financial incentives are all on the side of shaping the kernel to run efficiently on servers and business/enterprise computers.
That's why you see high levels of support for all-Intel setups and lousy support for consumer outliers like NVIDIA, AMD and RealTek. It is a chicken and egg problem, in the sense that Linux has about 1-2% of the gaming market, for example, so NVIDIA has little incentive to dump resources into well-designed Linux drivers, but the Linux gaming market isn't going to grow unless and until NVIDIA does so. Everywhere I look at the Linux consumer desktop market, I see the story replayed over and over again.
Reading Linux boards over the years, I've been impressed with the strength of the idea that Linux is community-based, developed by and for altruistic FOSS believers. I think that's a myth, myself, and I think my observation is supported by the fact that Linux dominates the server, cloud and Android markets, where there is plenty of money being made by the companies developing for and profiting from those markets, and the fact that Linux doesn't seem to be able to get its act together in the consumer desktop market, where there is no money to be made.
tomscharbach You've just identified the problem.
The other part of the problem is that the Windows team has thousands of developers and testers, and can pretty easily create their own device drivers once the new device specs are released. If the OEMs come up with even better drivers eventually, those can be installed later, as you suggested. There's no Linux team that can compete with that.
Often, when I was working with Windows and checked on the availability of updated drivers, I was told that the Microsoft driver that was already installed was the best one available.
- Edited
WetGeek Often, when I was working with Windows and checked on the availability of updated drivers, I was told that the Microsoft driver that was already installed was the best one available.
Yup. Contrast that with your experience with the Linux kernel, or, if you have not personally experienced installation failures, the experiences of others related on the various Linux forums you read.
I am not trying to trash Linux on the desktop, but I've waited 15-16 years now for Linux on the desktop to expand beyond a 2-4% market share, and make inroads into the consumer desktop market. I've given a lot of thought, from the perspective on a retired business/enterprise IT manager, to the reasons why Linux on the desktop remains stuck. The reason, as far as I have been able to tell, is that the resources available to Linux are focused elsewhere.
I don't know how to get out of that hole, but I can see the hole as clear as day. Look no farther than Ubuntu's website, looking at how the site is focused, and you can't avoid the fact that Ubuntu is enterprise, server and cloud focused. Move upstream from Ubuntu to Canonical, and the focus becomes even clearer -- Ubuntu, probably the most-used desktop environment in the Linux universe, is described as "The new standard secure enterprise Linux for servers, desktops, cloud, developers and things." Do you see a focus on the consumer desktop anywhere in the Ubuntu/Canonical business model?
- Edited
tomscharbach I've noticed over the years that Windows installs "generic" drivers for components when a specific driver is not in the Windows installation ISO. For example, when I do a clean install, Windows will install a generic display adapter driver and a generic display driver, as well as generic USB port drivers, on initial installation if component-specific drivers are not in the Windows ISO. Windows nags me to install proper drivers until I get around to it. The "generic" drivers are dumbed down and don't offer full functionality, but the installer doesn't end up with a blinking cursor and frozen installation, either. I've not had an installation fail with Linux (in part because I've used only Ubuntu and Solus and in part because my computers are vanilla Intel), but I'd be frustrated as hell if I got a blinking cursor when installing.
not a fan of the foss version of this. in WIN it's all seen in the device manager. as a user its frustrating to see all the se unidentified 'generic' devices/generic drivers in the tree. even 'properties' won't tell you much. so it's 'ok you let me update it, but don't tell me what it is.' so this disconnect between user (well, me at least) and device manager. at least, if implemented in theory, I'm sure foss would me more transparent anyways.
WetGeek , I was told that the Microsoft driver that was already installed was the best one available.
yeah I was/am always skeptical of that stock dialogue
- Edited
brent it certainly won't affect all (or even most?) potential solus users with new hardware, just some, right?
Just those with new devices -- video cards, autio cards, netwrok cards, etc -- that don't have usable Linux drivers yet. It would be nice if there could be non-optimal drivers for the .ISO files that would at least allow the OS to be installed, even if they needed to be updated soon after.
tomscharbach I've waited 15-16 years now for Linux on the desktop to expand beyond a 2-4% market share, and make inroads into the consumer desktop market.
I like to think of us as the privileged few instead of the minority.
WetGeek It would be nice if there could be non-optimal drivers for the .ISO files that would at least allow the OS to be installed, even if they needed to be updated soon after.
has any other distro done this I wonder? having drivers that fluid could come with pros/cons but I get what you are saying.
Apparently no one is inteested in supporting users with new hardware. How could that be off-topic in a thread about improving installations of working .ISO files?