9.10 on Dell MIni 9 - Why Ubuntu isn't going anywhere

[golfer91]

I've been an Ubuntu user for around two and a half years now. In that time I have grown familiar and have learned to appreciate the OS.

It has become my main OS in the three computers that I have in my house. No Windows at all. In fact i'm so used to GNOME now that going back to Windows would require a lengthy re-adaptation time.

I even collaborated on the Gran Canaria Desktop Summit this year, I was one of the organizers. I met several people who work in Canonical and was honored to do so, very smart and good people.

Months ago I bought a Dell Mini 9 that came with Ubuntu pre-installed. It came with a custom Dell version which I replaced with Jaunty. Everything worked perfectly, including webcam.

However: In the latest release - Karmic - the wifi does not work out of the box. I searched around the internet and apparently the solution is to stick in a regular LAN cable, and to download the drivers this way.

I can't seem to find a regular LAN cable in my house - have had wifi for years now - so my Dell Mini 9 is stuck without internet until I buy one or re-install the older version of Ubuntu.

Considering the wifi worked from the outstart in the previous release - including in live cd mode - this a serious mistake for the Ubuntu team.

What's the point of having so many weeks of beta releases if you don't fix something this necessary in time? I'm pretty sure there was a bug report on this during development, and if not, it's still not a valid excuse on this Dell model.

It comes down to this: the wifi which worked in the older release isn't workin on one that has come only six months later.

It's especially ridiculous considering this is a computer that is SOLD PRE-INSTALLED WITH LINUX, IN STORES .

This is not a step forward, this is not an Ubuntu "getting better with every release".

Having wifi work out of the box, especially on a computer that is already sold with Ubuntu commercially, should be far higher on the priority list than a new icon theme or cooler wallpapers.

I'm sure i'm not the only one who thinks this.

[PrivateSNAFU]

Very strange it works fine for me but i updated rather than doing a fresh install. My dell mini works like a dream with 9.10. Sorry i dont want to rub your nose in it.

Good luck

[phillw]

Did you have a good read of http://www.ubuntumini.com/

It may be able to sort you out.

Phill.

[golfer91]

Did you have a good read of http://www.ubuntumini.com/

It may be able to sort you out.

Phill.

i know the solution.

However still unacceptable when this is one of the few PCs that are sold pre-installed with Ubuntu in Europe, that I know of.

[golfer91]

Very strange it works fine for me but i updated rather than doing a fresh install. My dell mini works like a dream with 9.10. Sorry i dont want to rub your nose in it.

Good luck

I did a fresh install.

[movieman]

It's especially ridiculous considering this is a computer that is SOLD PRE-INSTALLED WITH LINUX, IN STORES (I bought it in carrefour).

This is rather like complaining to Microsoft because you took a laptop which came pre-installed with Windows 98, you installed Window 7, and the new version of Windows doesn't have drivers for your hardware.

Most people don't take a PC that comes pre-installed with an operating system and then install a new operating system; and few people would be surprised if they then had to go and find drivers to complete the installation.

[mikewhatever]

Forgive me for the radical title but I wanted this post to get some attention, especially from someone within canonical.

I've been a passionate Ubuntu user for around two and a half years now. In that time I have grown familiar and have learned to appreciate the OS.
.................................................. .................................................. .................................................. .................................................. ............................

Kind regards,

Well, you've got the attention, happy now. I think we all should start taking these rants as tokens of appreciation, however, I am somewhat disappointed. Given the length of the ran, I was hoping you'd mention a heap of problems, piling them up passionately, but you only have one. Perhaps next time, you can show your appreciation by testing, and making sure no bugs slip through.;)

[Dragonis]

you don't really have a reson to complain here... You were given a version of the OS that worked perfectly with the computer that it was installed with.

changing the OS is not really recommended unless it's an update from Dell. If you're unwilling to try a simple solution to your problem, then maybe you shouldn't be so willing to try a version of the OS that's not supported on your PC?

[phillw]

As Ubuntu comes in the LiveCD flavour - anyone who doesn't check their system for compatibility is "cruising for a bruising" I'd never DREAM of putting on an O/S without running the LiveCD mode first. IMHO, it's one of the best features of the linuxes.

Phill.

[bedhead75]

I'd have to agree with you in making the point that Ubuntu needs a continuum of consistency in order to be taken seriously by the general public and by the media. If the Wifi WAS working in a previous release, then you should expect it to continue to work in a subsequent release. An issue like this isn't a "hardware problem" in terms of it not being compatible with Linux, and the general public has no patience for this type of thing. That's simply how the world works.

But it is true that new releases of ANY OS are subject to bugs and you could have tested it out using the LiveCD first, knowing that Ubuntu is community tested and some bugs may fall through the cracks until they are found. As a community I think we need to up our own personal standards for basic useability issues and consistency first for everyone, and be more vigilant about reporting bugs. Caring only for the latest and greatest because everything works fine on one's own system, or because one has enough experience to figure out how to solve all the bugs, and forgetting about basic useability issues that that might cause a lot of other people endless frustration is simply selfish.

[Zoot7]

This is not a step forward, this is not an Ubuntu "getting better with every release".
TBH I think Ubuntu is kind of developing in every direction at once without a cohesive structure so to speak.
For instance there was a lot of new features clearly not ready for their prime time pushed into Karmic; Pulseaudio, Grub 2, Ext 4.
I've recommended a lot of people to Ubuntu (Hardy in most cases), and a good few are using it thanks to my recommendation. Unless Lucid addresses these issues I don't think I'll be recommending Ubuntu to people as readily as I used to.

Don't get me wrong, I really do like Ubuntu. I've been "Distro Hopping" for a long time now, and I'm yet to find a distro I like better than Ubuntu. I'm also pretty happy with Karmic, it's been pretty flawless for me, and I find it a lot snappier than Jaunty.
But I think it'd be better for everyone if they didn't aggressively push a whole waft of new features upon users.

My 0.02...

[Muley63]

I agree with the original poster. Ubuntu should have better support for Dells since it originally came with Ubuntu. They've pretty much abandoned the Dell Mini's though, so I don't blame you for upgrading. As for expecting the upgrade to work, the original release was 8.04, only 1 1/2 year old so why wouldn't you expect it to work since it wasn't a major kernel upgrade. I upgraded to 9.10 lpia and there were problems with Goom and Palinpast (HD check, sp?), and the network and I originally encrypted my home directory, but the Mini soon became unbootable (I didn't report that one, because I think I goofed somewhere). But I feel upgrading was worth it because I believe I gained an extra half-hour of power and saved a half a gig of storage.

I know better to ignore the hype about new releases, but often don't. Ubuntu should make a better effort to inform upgraders and new users but I understand they are building a business and the only way they can grow is by hyping every release and that emphasizing warnings would dampen the enthusiasm.

However, every release shouldn't break networking, graphics, sound. I don't have exotic equipment, yet my networking or graphics never survives the upgrade without a lot of fiddling.

[Charles Dexter Ward]

However: In the latest release - Karmic - the wifi does not work out of the box. I searched around the internet and apparently the solution is to stick in a regular LAN cable, and to download the drivers this way.

Unfortunately, this was my first experience with Ubuntu; I was tired of my wife picking up viruses from work on her Mini 10. Installation went smoothly, but I had no wireless. I had experience with Mandriva, so I tried ndiswrapper, with limited success. A friend at work told me how he got it to work on his, so I re-installed everything, and wireless worked after the first reboot.

Interestingly, booting Ubuntu from a USB flash drive shows the proprietary bcm driver immediately.

I've learned a lot about Ubuntu in the past couple of weeks; I now have it installed on three computers (one is using Mythbuntu). I quickly learned to never do a wubi installation for anything other than testing, as a GRUB update trashed all three of my installations.

[Greyed]

As Ubuntu comes in the LiveCD flavour - anyone who doesn't check their system for compatibility is "cruising for a bruising"

Er.... Ok, let me look at my Mini 10v. Power, 2 USB, SD slot on the left side. Ethernet, VGA, USB and headphone/mic on the right side. CD, CD, where oh where do I put the CD on this thing.... since... it... doesn't.... have.... a... CD DRIVE! #-o

Gotta love people who recommend something that is physically impossible. While I agree with the sentiment (I kept my Dell 8.04 install on a small partition) I think the delivery needs work.

With that said, I'm still waiting for Canonical to provide an LPIA architecture. My biggest beef isn't with transitory issues like the Wifi adaptor not working (worked fine for me, I upgraded) or trackpad issues (that's what the Bluetooth mouse is for). But not having an LPIA kernel with LPIA video drivers makes my 10v dog slow. Some FLV files that play perfectly smooth on 8.04 turn into slideshows on 9.04 and 9.10. Why Canonical partners with Dell to get Ubuntu out there and then completely ignores the architecture is beyond my comprehension.

Granted, part of that is Dell's fault, too. I think Dell should at least keep track of the LTS releases. So them not having 8.10 and 9.04 is fine. But we should have 9.10, vetted by Dell, for these machines.

Huh... Googling "9.10 ubuntu lpia" shows there is an lpia disc out there somewhere. Wonder why my 9.10 isn't picking that up. Wonder if I can do a repository change mid-run.

[openuniverse]

.

[astrakhan]

Gotta love people who recommend something that is physically impossible.

you don't need a CDROM drive to run the live CD, a usb port will do just fine.

[Greyed]

you don't need a CDROM drive to run the live CD, a usb port will do just fine.

Which would not have helped since the Live image has the Broadcom Wifi driver installed. The issue isn't compatibility (which the Live image can determine) but installation. Berating people with nonsense isn't helpful.

[openuniverse]

.

[snowpine]

Relax. The Dell Mini 10v is well supported by Linux (except for the Broadcom wireless card). You do not need a special kernel or exotic video drivers to run any flavor of Linux on the 10v.

Enabling the Broadcom wireless will be an "extra step" with most Linux distros, since the driver is not "open source". You should be able to get it working with any distro if you have 10 minutes and a wired connection.

Lots of great guides on this website (including how to get wireless working with 9.10), check it out: http://www.ubuntumini.com/

[phillw]

TBH I think Ubuntu is kind of developing in every direction at once without a cohesive structure so to speak.
For instance there was a lot of new features clearly not ready for their prime time pushed into Karmic; Pulseaudio, Grub 2, Ext 4.
I've recommended a lot of people to Ubuntu (Hardy in most cases), and a good few are using it thanks to my recommendation. Unless Lucid addresses these issues I don't think I'll be recommending Ubuntu to people as readily as I used to.

Don't get me wrong, I really do like Ubuntu. I've been "Distro Hopping" for a long time now, and I'm yet to find a distro I like better than Ubuntu. I'm also pretty happy with Karmic, it's been pretty flawless for me, and I find it a lot snappier than Jaunty.
But I think it'd be better for everyone if they didn't aggressively push a whole waft of new features upon users.

My 0.02...

As far as I recall (correct me if I'm wrong) The only one they 'push' is the LTS, every 3 years. The current models of 3 yearly, or 6 monthly upgrades is for the customer to choose. I'll be doing my deep 'gulp' and upgrading to Lucid - and then leaving it well alone !!!! In fairness, also, to ubuntu having seen at first hand what SP2 and Vista did to computers from a major software company I take my hats off to the devs. Also, the more people who get involved in the testing, the more machines that work 'out of the box' Until driver developers release their drivers as open source there is a limit to what can be achived. I find it an unusual market, where you buy the hardware, then have to 'pay more' for the software to make it work, Dell have some 'funny' drivers (I did a reinstall of an XP machine ... that was 'fun') - But, they are one of the very few to offer Linux out of the box, so for that we should 'cheer them on'.

Phill.

[mikewhatever]

TBH I think Ubuntu is kind of developing in every direction at once without a cohesive structure so to speak.
For instance there was a lot of new features clearly not ready for their prime time pushed into Karmic; Pulseaudio, Grub 2, Ext 4.
I've recommended a lot of people to Ubuntu (Hardy in most cases), and a good few are using it thanks to my recommendation. Unless Lucid addresses these issues I don't think I'll be recommending Ubuntu to people as readily as I used to.
.................

Just a correction or two, pulseaudio was not pushed into Karmic, it was first introduces in Hardy Heron, your distro of choice it seems, and has ben included in every Ubuntu release ever since. I think pulseaudio works much better then it used to a year and a half ago. As for the file system, if you don't like ext4, there are other file systems in the installer, pick the one you like and you are good to go.


................

With that said, I'm still waiting for Canonical to provide an LPIA architecture. My biggest beef isn't with transitory issues like the Wifi adaptor not working (worked fine for me, I upgraded) or trackpad issues (that's what the Bluetooth mouse is for). But not having an LPIA kernel with LPIA video drivers makes my 10v dog slow. Some FLV files that play perfectly smooth on 8.04 turn into slideshows on 9.04 and 9.10. Why Canonical partners with Dell to get Ubuntu out there and then completely ignores the architecture is beyond my comprehension.

Granted, part of that is Dell's fault, too. I think Dell should at least keep track of the LTS releases. So them not having 8.10 and 9.04 is fine. But we should have 9.10, vetted by Dell, for these machines.

Huh... Googling "9.10 ubuntu lpia" shows there is an lpia disc out there somewhere. Wonder why my 9.10 isn't picking that up. Wonder if I can do a repository change mid-run.

There isn't a live cd, but you can still have it installed.

lpia iso Direct link (http://cdimage.ubuntu.com/ports/releases/karmic/release/ubuntu-9.10-alternate-lpia.iso)

lpia iso Torrent (http://cdimage.ubuntu.com/ports/releases/karmic/release/ubuntu-9.10-alternate-lpia.iso.torrent)

[Merk42]

As of Lucid Ubuntu will no longer be supporting lpia

[Zoot7]

Also, the more people who get involved in the testing, the more machines that work 'out of the box'.
I'll be testing Lucid once the Alphas hit. I think I might be LTS -> LTS after that TBH.

Just a correction or two, pulseaudio was not pushed into Karmic, it was first introduces in Hardy Heron, your distro of choice it seems, and has ben included in every Ubuntu release ever since. I think pulseaudio works much better then it used to a year and a half ago. As for the file system, if you don't like ext4, there are other file systems in the installer, pick the one you like and you are good to go.
Oh I'm not saying I'd problems with it, quite like Karmic in fact, I just wouldn't recommend people who are running something like Jaunty to upgrade to it because of it's new features.
Yeah Pulseaudio was in Hardy, and TBH with a bit of configuring on my part pulse has been fine since. There's just still some headaches it introduces uneedingly IMO, such pulseaudio and timidity for instance. Wine comes to mind too. At least it could be removed from Hardy.
Granted Pulse does have huge promise, paving the way towards features like a system wide equalizer.

Ext4, I've read about issues, but I'm using it for both my system partition and home partition and it's been stellar. I find it a lot faster for copying both large amounts of small files and large files, which is something I do a lot.
Just having Data corruption in the release notes isn't the most inspirational when it comes to confidence.

Same thing is true of the version of Grub 2 (1.97 Beta 4) doesn't inspire confidence either.

Those minor gripes Karmic IMO is great. I just wouldn't recommend an upgrade if somebody's previous system is working fine.

[J117]

I kinda lurk a bit, but this thread got my attention.

Here's the thing, you're complaining about Karmic Koala not working on your Dell.

Dell has released special ISOs for use with their systems. They have NOT released a Karmic Koala version yet. You should be happy that Dell even made a Jaunty version.

If you want "garaunteed to work" with your Dell. Wait till Dell makes a special version!

Otherwise stick with using the supported versions of 8.04 and 9.04

If your manufacturer doesn't support it, well you're up a creek without a paddle, now aren't you?

A product I'm working on uses ESXi 3.5. If a customer we sold it to upgraded it to vSphere 4, we wouldn't support it.

Why should Dell/Canonical support the usage of a new OS that hasn't been tweaked for those systems yet?

How's the saying go? If it ain't broken, don't fix it.

[Greyed]

Given that this is something of the flagship netbook where Canonical is concern that's a pretty **** poor attitude you're saddling them with. Doubly so considering the multitude of system configurations that work just fine out of the box. Generally speaking, once a particular system is tackled by a Linux distro it shouldn't break massively in future versions.

[snowpine]

People, this is being blown way out of proportion... 9.10 isn't "massively broken" on the Dell Mini. If anything, it's an improvement over 9.04 in many ways.

The main complaint seems to be the 5 minutes required to download the non-free driver for the Broadcom wireless card. This is the price you pay for buying a computer with hardware that requires a closed-source driver. It is easy if you follow this guide: http://www.ubuntumini.com/2009/11/broadcom-wireless-driver-fix-in-karmic.html

Installing the Broadcom driver is something you would also have to do with Debian, Arch, Fedora, etc. so I do not really see it as a failure on Ubuntu's part.

You do not need to wait for a "special Dell version" to run Linux on your Dell Mini 9. The hardware (except for the wireless card) is generic and well-supported by all recent Linux distributions. (I'm currently running Arch on mine--no, not a "special Dell version of Arch." I've also successfully tested many other distros, including Debian, Crunchbang, SliTaz, sidux, etc.)

[golfer91]

The main complaint seems to be the 5 minutes required to download the non-free driver for the Broadcom wireless card.

I can fix it easily. I already did, I found a LAN cable and I already have wifi working on my Dell Mini 9. But i'm an intermediate user. However, another user with more basic knowledge of computing could have a great deal of trouble and headaches with it.

This is not Linux for human beings aka the regular user.

This is the price you pay for buying a computer with hardware that requires a closed-source driver. It is easy if you follow this guide: http://www.ubuntumini.com/2009/11/broadcom-wireless-driver-fix-in-karmic.html


People I sometimes recommend switching to Linux don't really care about wether it's closed or open source. All they see is that their wifi isn't working and on windows it does.


Installing the Broadcom driver is something you would also have to do with Debian, Arch, Fedora, etc. so I do not really see it as a failure on Ubuntu's part.

You do not need to wait for a "special Dell version" to run Linux on your Dell Mini 9. The hardware (except for the wireless card) is generic and well-supported by all recent Linux distributions. (I'm currently running Arch on mine--no, not a "special Dell version of Arch." I've also successfully tested many other distros, including Debian, Crunchbang, SliTaz, sidux, etc.)

Yes but those distros don't claim to be Linux for human beings nor are they sold in huge malls in my country, that I know of. If Ubuntu wants to become a real alternative to Windows then they have to be more careful about this kind of stuff in the future. Claiming it's my fault for not reporting bugs (and what if I did¡? People have been complaining about wifi not working on Dell Mini 9 since the test releases) or for not giving a patch is not acceptable when talking about this model - flagship of the pre-installed ubuntu netbooks -, IMHO.

Thanks for your post.

KInd regards,

[Jackyboy86]

*puts hand up gingerly*
Can I raise the issue of the lack of GMA500 support that suddenly appeared in Karmic? I had to use Jaunty backports on my Mini10.

Oh, I understand the issues around the manufacturer, and I'm more annoyed at Dell for using such a rubbish graphics card whose manufacturers refuse to help the forward progress of Linux, but I just feel that something could have been done?

Even on Jaunty it was a pain to get 1024x576 - not something the average user would be able to manage...

[snowpine]

People I sometimes recommend switching to Linux don't really care about wether it's closed or open source. All they see is that their wifi isn't working and on windows it does.


They would also need to install the Broadcom driver if they installed Windows at home. It is not a Windows vs. Ubuntu thing at all. More a case of Broadcom vs. the universe.

Is it:

1) Dell's fault, for choosing Broadcom instead of an open-source-friendly wireless card?
2) Ubuntu's fault, for not supplying all possible closed-source drivers out-of-the-box?
3) The user's fault, for believing they can install an entire operating system at home without learning whether their hardware is supported?
4) Nobody's fault, since you figured out how to do it, and I figured out how to do it, and any other user with an Ubuntu Forums account and/or access to Google can solve the "bug" in 5 minutes?

[ugm6hr]

If this applies to the 9.10 NBR, someone who can confirm this should edit the wiki compatibility to reflect 9.10:
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/HardwareSupport/Machines/Netbooks#Dell%20Mini%209

Obviously, bugs are always irritating, but new releases will always trade off progressive features for stability. The 6-monthly release cycle means there may be some bugs left over at release time. I agree that priority should be given to maintain compatibility with major markets (e.g. Dell's Mini).

Nevertheless, it is simply not possible to keep everyone happy. Ask any OS maker; have a read of the heavy bashing every Ubuntu release has had, along with every MS release...

[Greyed]

As of Lucid Ubuntu will no longer be supporting lpia

Cite? I just confirmed that as of 9.10 the non-LPIA kernel/video drivers are still not up to snuff. I would loath to see them drop support for hardware which is will still be in production at that time, much less in use for several more years to come.

1) Dell's fault, for choosing Broadcom instead of an open-source-friendly wireless card?

Not for choosing it alone as there are trade-offs which would lead them to this piece of hardware in spite of its closed source status. For choosing it and not testing current releases of Ubuntu on test machines and filing appropriate bugs? Yes. Dell should have a current test for just such regression testing. They are the one entity that is best suited for testing their partner's software on hardware they produce.

2) Ubuntu's fault, for not supplying all possible closed-source drivers out-of-the-box?All? No. The one which is used in a major partnership? Yes. I'll grant clemency if it were only something that affects one line of product. IE, the Mini 9 but not the 10 or 10v as an example. I would not hold Canonical to having a test lab with all possible hardware permutations. That's the hardware manufacturer's job. See above. But when it is something which affects all lines equally? Yeah, that falls under their regression testing purview as well.

3) The user's fault, for believing they can install an entire operating system at home without learning whether their hardware is supported?This, nominally. But, really, is this unreasonable? Dell ships Ubuntu 8.04. This is a later version of Ubuntu. Major backwards compatibility breaks at the OS level are relatively rare. I can think of 3 in my lifetime (95/NT lines of Windows, XP to Vista, OS 9 to OSX). It is not unreasonable that a later version of an OS will support the same hardware as a previous version.

And it does.

It just wasn't installed.

And it just happens to be the one driver which can preclude rectifying the problem and therefore is probably one of the most important to not screw up. Yes, we can plug in a Cat-5 and go. But, really, as people move more and more of their devices to wireless the presumption that Cat-5 will be there for the rescue is coming closer and closer to the presumption that every machine has a floppy.

4) Nobody's fault, since you figured out how to do it, and I figured out how to do it, and any other user with an Ubuntu Forums account and/or access to Google can solve the "bug" in 5 minutes?See above. Furthermore this is a nice logical fallacy. Just because we had the means to resolve the issue doesn't mean everyone has the means.

(edit)

There isn't a live cd, but you can still have it installed.

lpia iso Direct link (http://cdimage.ubuntu.com/ports/releases/karmic/release/ubuntu-9.10-alternate-lpia.iso)

lpia iso Torrent (http://cdimage.ubuntu.com/ports/releases/karmic/release/ubuntu-9.10-alternate-lpia.iso.torrent)

Torrent is dead. In the past 3 days it has gone from 3 seeders to 1, 2 leechers to 1 and I've received 0 bytes. First time in a long time I've seen a torrent perform so abysmally. Pity as I prefer torrents. My torrent client has a dedicated session on my router box and bandwidth limits quite nicely. Things Firefox on my gaming machine does not.

[snowpine]

As of Lucid Ubuntu will no longer be supporting lpia

I am curious to see a citation for this as well.

[mikewhatever]

I can fix it easily. I already did, I found a LAN cable and I already have wifi working on my Dell Mini 9. But i'm an intermediate user. However, another user with more basic knowledge of computing could have a great deal of trouble and headaches with it.

This is not Linux for human beings aka the regular user.

I truly doubt such human being will be downloading the iso file, making a live usb, fiddling with the BIOS, and then installing the OS. They'd simply enjoy the one provided by the OEM. Anyone confident enough to go through the above steps can be expected to install a bunch of packages from the repositories without complaining, don't you think?.



People I sometimes recommend switching to Linux don't really care about wether it's closed or open source. All they see is that their wifi isn't working and on windows it does.

Wifi doesn't work on my XP installation, though it used to. Take a guess, did I start a worthless thread about Windows going nowhere?


Yes but those distros don't claim to be Linux for human beings nor are they sold in huge malls in my country, that I know of. If Ubuntu wants to become a real alternative to Windows then they have to be more careful about this kind of stuff in the future. Claiming it's my fault for not reporting bugs (and what if I did¡? People have been complaining about wifi not working on Dell Mini 9 since the test releases) or for not giving a patch is not acceptable when talking about this model - flagship of the pre-installed ubuntu netbooks -, IMHO.


Are you talking about the flagship of pre-installed, or the flagship of self-installed.
Just admit it, you love ranting, and ranting is the sole and only purpose of this thread. ;)

[snowpine]

It is not a bug; it is a proprietary wireless card. That Broadcom wireless card is not going to work out-of the box with Windows, Arch, Debian, Fedora, Mac, etc. until you install the correct driver.

I am not a big fan of the "Linux needs to cater to anonymous hypothetical noobies who can't be bothered to read instructions or post their questions on a forum" argument. I'm assuming that everyone on this thread has their Broadcom wireless working properly by now; if not, let me know and I will help. :)

ps You are not missing much with 9.10 lpia. I've experienced little benefit from it, only headaches trying to install packages that aren't in the lpia repository. The Atom processor is well-supported by the Linux kernel, and I would recommend simply using "regular" Ubuntu on your Mini. (I am actually using Arch but that's a different story.)

[Greyed]

ps You are not missing much with 9.10 lpia. I've experienced little benefit from it, only headaches trying to install packages that aren't in the lpia repository. The Atom processor is well-supported by the Linux kernel, and I would recommend simply using "regular" Ubuntu on your Mini. (I am actually using Arch but that's a different story.)

Entirely not true. 8.04 from Dell, Cheese is able to record from the webcam at something higher than "slideshow". Problem is it has a bug which makes the recording harf when played by other applications. Point is, however, it records fine.

Youtube videos play without any jerking, stuttering or flickering.

Guess what I'm about to say about 9.10. Yup. Cheese records at slideshow speeds. I'm not even sure it records audio. I haven't tried to see if the video file can be played by other applications.

Youtube videos often stutter, flicker and are jerky.

Now, unless there was a major regression that hasn't been address for a year or the fact that I don't have LPIA kernel/video driver installed and thus the inefficincies of such are causing a slowdown to the point that it is notiable. The latter is the simpler explination.

[snowpine]

Interesting, so you're saying the main advantage of using lpia is better video framerate? I'd always heard it was battery life (which is not true in my experience) so maybe I've been barking up the wrong tree.

One of my Atom computers has lpia, i686, and amd64 installed... if anyone knows a good way to measure flash video framerate, I'd be happy to do some tests and report back.

[Merk42]

Cite? I just confirmed that as of 9.10 the non-LPIA kernel/video drivers are still not up to snuff. I would loath to see them drop support for hardware which is will still be in production at that time, much less in use for several more years to come.

I am curious to see a citation for this as well.
Sorry, forgot about this thread. It was discussed at UDS (https://wiki.ubuntu.com/Specs/Mobile/LpiaFuture)

[Greyed]

Thanks for the cite. That is, imho, unfortunate and short sighted on Ubuntu's part. *sigh*

[mikewhatever]

It's not really a big deal according to this

https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-devel-announce/2009-November/000643.html

As of 9.10,
lpia and i386 share the kernel configuration, reducing most of the
benefits potentially available in previous Ubuntu releases.

[Merk42]

It's not really a big deal according to this

https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-devel-announce/2009-November/000643.html

If the other announcements have taught me anything, it's that people unfortunately won't read that.

They'll simply see "Ubuntu abandoning lpia" and feel they're abandoning netbooks as a whole

[BFG]

Re OP...

To those saying "Well there's nothing wrong with mine", that's the wrong argument. Reliability is measured in failures per thousand and is not about measuring your successes, it's about measuring your lack of failure. A subtle but important difference.

Don't know what I mean? Well, do you say to a heart patient, "Well mine works fine, you must be doing it wrong"?

I'm not a computer enthusiast. I'm a businessman. If I buy a car it's not so I can take it apart and put it together again to see if I can make it go faster. I used to do that when I was a teenager but in the grown-up world priorites are very different. I have a car to go places and get to my business meetings on time. I bought a Honda in 1999. It's now done 75000 miles. It has never failed to start, it has never broken down, none of its controls, switches, lights, instruments, *anything* have ever failed or broken, and nothing has worn out except the tires and brake pads. I don't celebrate this any more than I celebrate that my heart is beating when I wake up. I am used to it, it is my perception of normal. I have become complacent if you like, because these things are reliable.

It's the same with computers. When I switch my computer on I expect it to work without the need for me to feel grateful. It's a tool, not a toy, I expect it to function 100%, 100% of the time. THIS IS WHY I MOVED AWAY FROM WINDOWS. If I perform an update, I like to expect new things, but to reduce the reliability of what already works is a pain deeply felt.

"Well don't upgrade then", is the expected answer.

Actually my machine is fine. That's not the point. The point is that my expectations of 9.10 have been sullied because so many other people are having problems, and it's like someone took the Honda away and gave me something less reliable. In fact this is true in the anaology, my partner now has the Honda and I have a Merc, which is much less reliable. I envy her now ;)

I feel like I can no longer recommend Ubuntu, and have in fact stopped doing so. I used to persuade my clients to let us give them Ubuntu. Not now. Not untill all the noise dies down.

It begs the question, who was 9.10 ready for? The hackers and tweakers or the business users? How likely is it that v9 will produce a LTS offering?

[Merk42]

Yes, because there hadn't been ANY reports of people trying to run Vista on a computer it couldn't.
Or upgrading to Snow Leopard causing giant bug that would erase a users folder.

Nope they're both flawless.

[BFG]

What's your point? :)

Success is "failing less than the other guys?"

[Merk42]

What's your point? :)

Success is "failing less hard than the other guys?"

Just saying you don't want to recommend Ubuntu due to problems, if so you shouldn't shouldn't recommended any OS since they all have problems.

[BFG]

I give my clients Solaris, but they have to pay for it, which puts my costs up.

When I was referring to windows I was talking about my home computer. I didn't make that clear, sorry.

[J117]

Another thing that I haven't seen mentioned.

Ok you complain about having to install A SINGLE DRIVER, on Ubuntu.

Have you personally ever been involved with a Windows XP or Windows Vista install FROM SCRATCH?

Yeah quitcher complaining about installing and having to download drivers.

Tell broadcom to quit being closed source, too.

[ugm6hr]

Sorry, I've been loitering on this thread for a while...

What I am unclear on, is whether not packaging the Broadcom driver for installation (but allowing "Live" use) is a bug in 9.10, or a deliberate omission (due to concerns re: distributing proprietary software / firmware).

I thought it was the latter, but the fact that it was present in 9.04 does make me wonder...

[Greyed]

It's not really a big deal according to this

https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-devel-announce/2009-November/000643.html

Well, considering my experience with non-LPIA releases post 8.04 (enumerated in this thread already) I beg to differ. Until I see no performance degradation between LPIA kernels and i386 kernels on my LPIA machine I will continue to suspect the compilation of the kernel & drivers and, yes, suspect they are doing something foolish.

If the other announcements have taught me anything, it's that people unfortunately won't read that.

They'll simply see "Ubuntu abandoning lpia" and feel they're abandoning netbooks as a whole

Considering Dell netbooks are LPIA and Canonical is partnered with Dell to provide the OS for a good 1/3rd of the Dell Netbook sales... yeah, kinda feels that way.

[Zoot7]

Tell broadcom to quit being closed source, too.
Yeah, Broadcom are normally the cause of most of the problems when it comes to installing Ubuntu on Dell laptops.
Best to avoid them, Intel or Atheros Wireless cards are the way to go.

[conehead77]

Yes, i agree completely! I tested Karmic with a USB boot stick and i had no wireless and no touchpad. I'm still running an ancient bios version because they only deliver updates for Windows out of the box.

I would have sticked to the preinstalled version of Ubuntu, but i had problems (don't know what kind of problems anymore though ;) ) with the Dell custom repositories.

Computers with a preinstalled Linux OS should have Linux-friendly hardware. If i wanted to download binary blobs i would have bought a Windows-PC. I don't care if i have to pay more money because of a Linux-friendly wireless card. If i wanted a really cheap netbook i wouldn't have bought a Dell in the first place.

And i agree that Canonical should focus on supporting computers which are sold with Ubuntu. It's probably not their fault, but maybe they can take more influence somehow, i don't know.

Oh, did i mention that they broke the window key? It switched everything to fullscreen when i got the computer, but after an update this function was gone! And no F11 key! I think to fix it i need to install a new bios, but since it's Windows only support, it's too much of a hassle to do it for me.

Do i really want too much? A computer with a _default_ Linux distribution (which is somehow in the top 10 being used), standard repositories and just a little support. Maybe half of the support granted to Windows users.

tl;dr: i won't buy Linux-preinstalled again (in the foreseeable future) because it offers nothing over a Windows-preinstalled computer.

[conehead77]

Ok you complain about having to install A SINGLE DRIVER, on Ubuntu.

Yes, i complain. I bought the computer with _preinstalled_ Ubuntu. I made this decision only because i don't want to have hardware related problems with my Linux installation.


Tell broadcom to quit being closed source, too.
I'd rather tell Dell not to integrate broadcom into my netbook ;)


edit: i just scrolled through the thread after my initial rant and most points have already been discussed. Still, as a consumer, i'm not pleased with the product and won't buy it again. My expectations aren't met (yet?).

[Chargaff]

Most people don't take a PC that comes pre-installed with an operating system and then install a new operating system; and few people would be surprised if they then had to go and find drivers to complete the installation.

I've been doing that for the last 11 years... There is virtually no computer sold with Linux in Québec, so I buy them, pay the Windows tax and install a decent OS, and I'm pretty sure lots of Linux user do that.

[Greyed]

tl;dr: i won't buy Linux-preinstalled again (in the foreseeable future) because it offers nothing over a Windows-preinstalled computer.

Except...

I've been doing that for the last 11 years... There is virtually no computer sold with Linux in Québec, so I buy them, pay the Windows tax and install a decent OS, and I'm pretty sure lots of Linux user do that.

...that it registers as a Windows sale instead of a Linux sale. What does buying a machine preinstalled with Linux? One less Windows sale and one Linux sale COUNTED which is far more proof of its use to these companies (Pick a name, any company name, from this thread or another) so they will have incentive to provide better Linux support in the future.

Paying the Windows tax, when you have the choice not to, maintains the status quo. Just that simple.

[conehead77]

Except...

...that it registers as a Windows sale instead of a Linux sale. What does buying a machine preinstalled with Linux? One less Windows sale and one Linux sale COUNTED which is far more proof of its use to these companies (Pick a name, any company name, from this thread or another) so they will have incentive to provide better Linux support in the future.

I don't know if companies think like us. For them, preinstalled means to provide a restore-CD with all the drivers included no matter if binary or not. They think support is to provide custom repositories. That's not how the Linux-world rolls. When netbooks came out there were a ton of Linux distributions on them. Not one of them was what you would call a "standard" distro (like Fedora, Mandriva, Ubuntu, openSuse, etc). It was just an experiment to test different UIs. Maybe the companies have also legal issues when granting users access to 3rd party repositories? Fact is that _i_ would not have kept any of the Linux distributions available on my netbook. Why do you think there will be a distribution people want to keep on their machines? There already have been opportunities but they didn't deliver. This makes me think they can't deliver.


Paying the Windows tax, when you have the choice not to, maintains the status quo. Just that simple.
Reinstall + binary blobs vs reinstall + binary blobs isn't a choice. And i don't see that changing.

[Greyed]

Reinstall + binary blobs vs reinstall + binary blobs isn't a choice. And i don't see that changing.

Then you're short sighted. 10 years ago I remember having to scour the net for lists of laptop hardware which was supported by Linux. Then scouring the net for FAQs on how to get the supported hardware to actually work. Back then I would've killed to have a pre-install option but it wasn't there.

So in the past few years we've gotten that option. That alone is a change. Is it perfect? Of course not. But at least that option is there. Turning your nose up at it won't make it change. It will make it regress. IE, the companies finally, finally, listened to the dull roar that is the Linux community as a whole and they give the option. If that dull roar doesn't translate into sales then there is no incentive for them to continue giving one rat's *** about Linux. And if they don't care, why in the hell would they want to push back on the manufacturers to acquiesce to our requests for hardware that supports open drivers?

IE, if Dell keeps having problems with a hardware's drivers while another hardware vendor with better open-source support proves easier to maintain then, when the cost of maintaining the relationship with the closed-source vendor gets too high they'll switch. But to get there they have be selling units in numbers that matter. Not only in numbers that matter but numbers that matter when compared to the alternative OSes for which these machines are designed!

IE, first you have to show that Linux is good for their business. Then you have to show it is significant enough that any problems with the closed-source model hurts them more than maintaining that model for all competing OSes. IE, it isn't enough to get them to switch from Broadcom on their Linux netbooks. They need to be convinced to do so on their Linux and Windows netbooks. Skewing the sales numbers towards Windows minimizes the projected costs of any closed-source problems on the Linux side of things.

It's a self--fulfilling prophecy. We won't get a perfect product until Linux matters enough to force hardware choices. People who are holding out for a perfect product are only minimizing Linux' significance to the hardware vendors. Ergo, they are maintaining the status quo. The way to break it is to realize that first a perfect product will never be achived. Second to realize that to make Linux matter to a company is a simple matter of purchasing a Linux version of a comparable product when the option exists. And third, realize businesses are more likely to listen to customers about products they own than potential customers about products they might not buy anyway.

[skotos]

Well, maybe downloading the drivers for a wi-fi adapter is not an issue to many of us, but to the average user yes.
My brother - the one who introduced me to the C64 a few years ago - is just one of them... he just did not know how to go on with a regular LAN cable.
And I, a systems engineer for over 20 years, do not like the release cycle as well.

After upgrading and reinstalling from scratch as soon as Karmic was out, this week I once again reinstalled my main laptop from scratch because I simply could not live one more day with no USB support at all.
Thus, since Karmic was such a delusion and I was feeling ready to something new, an old beloved friend named Fedora came to me and said: try me!
I simply ran the Constantine (Fedora 12 battle name like Karmic Koala for Ubuntu 9.10) DVD and everything worked as expected: not properly out of the box, because I am no more used to it since I switched to Ubuntu 4 years ago, but in a day time everything was up and working again.

What has changed is the philosophical approach the two distros do not share and I appreciate what Mark and Canonical have done to Linux, but - hey - though Fedora 12 has got its problems with USB support, everything works: probably not at its best, but it works... and this is what an official release is expected to do.

Ok, I know they both share the same Kernel problems since they run the main kernel code, but it is the number of users that might be affected by a problem the first thing to evaluate when something like a kernel change is going to happen.

Fedora 12 gives you a fully running OS.
Though you know that something does not seem to be running at its best, performances are generally great and not the worst I have ever seen in my long GNU/Linux experience... :(

I think that this time is not like in the past: too many severe problems still exist a month after the Karmic release.

What's more, there have been lots of expectations around Karmic: even those who have never run a GNU/Linux system were waiting for it... From this point of view I think that Karmic can just be declared the worst commercial happening of the year.

And I, as an Information Technology guy, can simply admit that my trust in Canonical is vanishing a bit. Though in the mid and long term Mark and Canonical are the true fellows everyone and I first! would want to work with, in the short term trusting them can be dangerous for sure: it does not depend on your skill level.

What can I say? If you are a pro and feeling tempted to upgrade: just wait. WAIT! WAIT!
Do not let the new features seduce you: you might pay more than expected...

I think that this is really sad.

If a product is not ready for delivery, it simply is not ready. That's it.

[Chargaff]

Well, maybe downloading the drivers for a wi-fi adapter is not an issue to many of us, but to the average user yes.
That's it ! This is where Microsoft and their philosophy brought the population : Users surrounded by machines that they can't handle. It's not that people (the average user) can't handle computers, it's that they have been trained to be "ignorant" regarding the OS they use. "Keep them ignorant and that way, they will be much easier to control."

I'm a lucky person, I haven't "learned" Microsoft Windows. What I've learned instead is choice and freedom, to be able to change or try other things when I'm not satisfied. Simply.

[a!man_96]

That's it ! This is where Microsoft and their philosophy brought the population : Users surrounded by machines that they can't handle. It's not that people (the average user) can't handle computers, it's that they have been trained to be "ignorant" regarding the OS they use. "Keep them ignorant and that way, they will be much easier to control."

I'm a lucky person, I haven't "learned" Microsoft Windows. What I've learned instead is choice and freedom, to be able to change or try other things when I'm not satisfied. Simply.

Agree with him.
The Ubuntu give me freedom unlike Microsoft Windows..
I'm so satisfied with Ubuntu..:D

[user_linux08]

Fabio is absolutely right.
One of the main reason why many of those "window" users try Linux, is to get away from window (or Apple for that matter). As an owner of small business, all I wish, is to get from point A to point B, as fastest, cheapest and with reliable means as possible.

With all due respect to all those "geeks" who like to tinker with CL language and its long complicated command land, I say good for you. I don't have neither the propensity, nor the time to sit down and type command lines ( I know, for many geeks, they are more efficient and faster to execute), when I have a business deadline to meet.

What is needed is a reliable and stable system, and yes, more robust GNOME & KDE interface.

[conehead77]

Please don't argue about Linux/Ubuntu vs Windows, that's not what this thread is about. Of course i like Linux better than Windows and for the most part i like to tinker around with the OS and computer.

But i bought a computer with Ubuntu preinstalled. If i need to tinker it shouldn't be sold.

That's it ! This is where Microsoft and their philosophy brought the population : Users surrounded by machines that they can't handle. It's not that people (the average user) can't handle computers, it's that they have been trained to be "ignorant" regarding the OS they use. "Keep them ignorant and that way, they will be much easier to control."
So Ubuntu will fail? Bug #1 will never be fixed this way... If you want to play around with your OS, please do, but Ubuntu isn't here for the tinkerers.
Also, Windows users aren't ignorant. They satisfy their computing needs in the most convenient way. If i use an automatic temperature regulator for my living room, am i ignorant regarding my heating? Ubuntu is all about convenience. I know they can't provide support for everybody, but i'm talking about a very, very small subset of computers: those that come preinstalled with Ubuntu. If it's not possible to keep these running how can Canonical expand?

Greyed made some good points and that's why i bought my Ubuntu Dell 9 in the first place. Canonical doesn't put additional effort in supporting machines with preinstalled Ubuntu and i think that's not the right way. Sure, Dell is supposed to give support, but since that is lacking Canonical has to do their best to keep the users happy. Note, i'm not saying that it is easy or possible for Canonical at the moment, i'm only saying what i think is needed when they want to get serious about Linux on the desktop. Maybe soon they will concentrate on the server market (if the desktop market is too much of a hassle) and it will become a distro like every other?

[Zoot7]

What is needed is a reliable and stable system, and yes, more robust GNOME & KDE interface.
That's what the LTS releases are for. :)

[Brandon Williams]

That's what the LTS releases are for. :)

I agree with you entirely that this is what the LTS releases are for. Those who are complaining because the 9.10 install didn't go as smoothly as it could have probably should have stuck with the 8.04+ that came pre-installed. That version is still backed by a full Ubuntu repository, it's just not the latest-and-greatest version of everything.

As I understand it, the versions that are not LTS releases are intended to be 'technology preview' releases, which means that a lot of new ideas will be experimented with and you should expect to disagree with some of the decisions that were made. How to handle kernel module installation when the module has a closed-source component is a perfect example of this. They tried a new approach and it had some shortcomings. They'll work hard to fix the shortcomings before the next LTS release.

If there are problems like this with an LTS release, I'll be complaining with you, but hopefully all of us with long experience using Ubuntu will be beta testing to help make sure these kind of issues don't go unnoticed prior to the final release.

All of this having been said, Canonical's partnership with Dell has not been terribly positive for Ubuntu's reputation. Even for those who have stayed with the version of 8.04 that came pre-installed on the machine, there were big problems that only an experienced user could resolve, and Dell support was completely incapable of helping new users. Example 1 is the fact that Dell shipped all of the early mini-10v models with a bad install that would not even allow upgrades. The only way to fix the problem was to either hack or delete an install package script. Example 2 is the custom aircraft-manager program, designed specifically for the Dell mini, which was broken when they upgraded to a newer version of network-manager and has not been fixed in the official repository to this day.

So, I don't agree that it's fair to expect Ubuntu 9.10 to run flawlessly on the Dell mini just because the mini came pre-installed with Ubuntu 8.04+. But I think it's quite fair to point out how badly the custom Dell 8.04+ release has been managed, and the lack of adequate support available from Dell. When Dell handles Ubuntu as badly as they have, it unfairly makes the core distro look bad.

[conehead77]

... could have probably should have stuck with the 8.04+ that came pre-installed. That version is still backed by a full Ubuntu repository, ...

No, it was a Dell repository. There were several applications missing from their repositories (i think the Skype client was one of it). Also the windows-key stopped working after a 'normal' update within 8.04. It got never fixed (i really kept the preinstalled version quite some time) so i thought that might get fixed with a newer version.

If it was the normal Ubuntu repository and if they didn't break things i would have kept the original installation.

edit: i agree with the rest of your post, the partnership with Dell wasn't the best. Hopefully this will change.

[mikewhatever]

...................
Thus, since Karmic was such a delusion and I was feeling ready to something new, an old beloved friend named Fedora came to me and said: try me!
I simply ran the Constantine (Fedora 12 battle name like Karmic Koala for Ubuntu 9.10) DVD and everything worked as expected: not properly out of the box, because I am no more used to it since I switched to Ubuntu 4 years ago, but in a day time everything was up and working again.

What has changed is the philosophical approach the two distros do not share and I appreciate what Mark and Canonical have done to Linux, but - hey - though Fedora 12 has got its problems with USB support, everything works: probably not at its best, but it works... and this is what an official release is expected to do.
...................

Having read your post, I am not quite sure you are who you claim you are, namely an IT guy. Perhaps you are a Windows IT guy with limited Linux experience, but it shouldn't matter, should it. I've run Fedora during the past weekend, and liked it a lot, and here are a few things to point out, that should have been obvious the an IT guy:

- Fedora doesn't ship with Broadcom wireless driver installed, same as Ubuntu
- Fedoran follows a biannual release schedule, same as Ubuntu
- Fedora has bugs of its own, same as Ubuntu

Hope I haven't shaken your confidence in Fedora, cause it seems to be a great distro. Have fun, and good luck.

[user_linux08]

I take exception to those who claim LTS are there to fix problems from previous version. It is the intent, but not always the end product as we see here.

Much like others had experienced, the wireless connection in my 9.04 worked flawlessly right out of the box. As soon, however I (fresh) installed the karmic (9.10) one, my dell vostro 1400 doesn't even recognize the wireless card. Yes I did install all the necessary drives, still to no avail.

Also, if the captains of ubuntu wish to attract more users away from Windows or Apple, I would highly recommend here on this forum, also to help with solving problems through GNOME as well, instead of all only CL.

[dshan]

I had a similar set of issues with my Dell Inspiron 1300 recently. After running various versions of Ubuntu on it for three years, the latest being 9.04, with no major problems, in a moment of madness I decided to install the new Linux distribution from some mob called Microsoft on it.

This "Windows 7" Linux distro installed okay but failed to recognise my 1280 X 800 display as anything other than plain old VGA, apparently I needed to download a new display driver for it (these MS bozos can't seem to support a basic Intel graphic card in their latest LTS release for heaven's sake!) Then I discovered that this stupid distro didn't have a driver for my Inspiron's Intel WiFi card either! And it only drove the trackpad in one-finger two-button mouse emulation mode, no scrolling supported! WTF.

Eventually I managed to locate and download display, WiFi and touchpad drivers from an older MS Linux distro (XP) that worked with the new release, albeit in some half-assed "compatibility" mode (such fun setting that up. Not.) Turns out there are no native Win7 drivers for these devices available. So finally after wasting several hours I finally got my Win7 Linux release working.

Then I installed a fresh Ubuntu 9.10 on the same machine in dual boot mode and it all worked perfectly out of the box! Display driver, WiFi card, even two-finger scrolling on the touchpad just worked once it was enabled. Got to say I'd certainly recommend Ubuntu Linux over this dumbass Microsoft distro any day, it's much easier to install and works much better.

[ugm6hr]

Also, if the captains of ubuntu wish to attract more users away from Windows or Apple, I would highly recommend here on this forum, also to help with solving problems through GNOME as well, instead of all only CL.

If you pay Canonical for a support contract, I have no doubt they would be happy to provide a Gnome-based helpline for you.

There are a multitude of good reasons for offering help through the CLI here on the forums; I won't bore people by repeating them here.

[Zoot7]

But I think it's quite fair to point out how badly the custom Dell 8.04+ release has been managed, and the lack of adequate support available from Dell. When Dell handles Ubuntu as badly as they have, it unfairly makes the core distro look bad.
Too true sadly. One of the main reasons IMO why Linux (in general) never truly shined on Netbooks was because of the OEMs trashing the install.

[skotos]

DISCLAIMER: The following is simply an answer to mikewhatever's opinions on me.
For those who are not interested/haven't read his post: this message does not want to start any flame... but simply clarify something to him because... verba volant, scripta manent (that means: spoken words go away, but written words remain).

Having read your post, I am not quite sure you are who you claim you are, namely an IT guy. Perhaps you are a Windows IT guy with limited Linux experience, but it shouldn't matter, should it.
Have you ever heard of CPM, DOS 2.x, Netware 3.x/4.x, IntraNetware, Unixware, AIX/600, S/36, OS/400, Win3x,NT4.0, Linux 0.7, the Slackware floppy disks distros....
Is it enough IT/OSes/Linux experience, mikewhatever?
Probably I have been managing a few thousands computers in different and international environments and I am one of those who still know what UUCP stands for.
Sorry for being 45.
I've run Fedora during the past weekend, and liked it a lot, and here are a few things to point out, that should have been obvious the an IT guy:

- Fedora doesn't ship with Broadcom wireless driver installed, same as Ubuntu
- Fedoran follows a biannual release schedule, same as Ubuntu
- Fedora has bugs of its own, same as Ubuntu

Hope I haven't shaken your confidence in Fedora, cause it seems to be a great distro. Have fun, and good luck.
Well I might even add I do not like Fedora still giving me the default root access instead of moving me towards sudo, or that it is annoying to always add rpmfusion and livna repos but I do not think I have to prove you anything.
I perfectly know who I am.

The problem is that it is not a religion war between Windows, GNU/Linux be it Ubuntu/Fedora/Slackware/OpenSuse/whatever...
Ubuntu has changed the Linux world because it stopped saying nonsense like: just type tar -xvf filename; cd dir; make config; make install and you are done!
That was the right way to destroy rpm and deb based distros in a line for newbies all around!
Noone ever mentioned the checkinstall command... If you have been running GNU/Linux for a while, you should remember.
Then came Mark Shuttleworth and all of this nonsense was over.
But then, the 6 months cycle is wrong. This is what I think.
Ubuntu has forever changed the way GNU/Linux can be deployed, but people - IT guys and non professionals as well - need to trust the distro they are installing.
An update or an installation from scratch of the latest version must not be a regression in functionalities.
An example. The latest kernels work better than the previous ones, but since they correctly trust some memory addresses the BIOSes return them when asked for USB devices info and they do not recover when they cannot find them, Karmic fails USB devices recognition on many desktops/laptos/notebooks/netbooks.
Many computers cannot work anymore with any USB device because Acer and Asus, just to name two involved companies, return wrong memory addresses to the Kernel.
If the kernel has successfully worked up to now, it can be considered a regression from the end user point of view, can't it? We know the BIOS has to be upgraded, but - hey - is there a BIOS upgrade for every BIOS bug we have discovered?
This is the problem.
In the mid and in the long term it is right, but in the short term it is terrible. A month after upgrading to Karmic, I still have 4 of 5 computers that still do not work with USB devices. Fedora 12 is not a definitive solution, but if I plug in all the USB devices when the computer is switched off, everything works and this seems fantastic after 4 weeks of Ubuntu silence at home.

[mikewhatever]

Hey skotos, let's chill out a bit. I think you are quite right in that you don't have to prove things to me, and with that settled, let me tell you what I, not an IT professional take for granted about software:

- All software has bugs. Hardy had a misconfigured pulseaudio, Jaunty Intel graphics regressions, W7 endless reboot bug (http://www.osnews.com/story/22403/Windows_7_Endless_Reboot_Answer_Evades_Microsoft), and sure enough, Karmic has its share. Surprised?

- Test before upgrading, and if something doesn't work, stick with the working release. This should be quite obvious to an IT guy, shouldn't it?

So what is wrong with Karmic in that respect? Nothing. As any other OS, it has bugs, and some people are affected, so what. I really don't understand people ranting about Ubuntu, when their high expectations aren't met somehow, and least of all, IT professionals.

[skotos]

re op...

To those saying "well there's nothing wrong with mine", that's the wrong argument. Reliability is measured in failures per thousand and is not about measuring your successes, it's about measuring your lack of failure. A subtle but important difference.

Don't know what i mean? Well, do you say to a heart patient, "well mine works fine, you must be doing it wrong"?

I'm not a computer enthusiast. I'm a businessman. If i buy a car it's not so i can take it apart and put it together again to see if i can make it go faster. I used to do that when i was a teenager but in the grown-up world priorites are very different. I have a car to go places and get to my business meetings on time. I bought a honda in 1999. It's now done 75000 miles. It has never failed to start, it has never broken down, none of its controls, switches, lights, instruments, *anything* have ever failed or broken, and nothing has worn out except the tires and brake pads. I don't celebrate this any more than i celebrate that my heart is beating when i wake up. I am used to it, it is my perception of normal. I have become complacent if you like, because these things are reliable.

It's the same with computers. When i switch my computer on i expect it to work without the need for me to feel grateful. It's a tool, not a toy, i expect it to function 100%, 100% of the time. This is why i moved away from windows. If i perform an update, i like to expect new things, but to reduce the reliability of what already works is a pain deeply felt.

"well don't upgrade then", is the expected answer.

Actually my machine is fine. That's not the point. The point is that my expectations of 9.10 have been sullied because so many other people are having problems, and it's like someone took the honda away and gave me something less reliable. In fact this is true in the anaology, my partner now has the honda and i have a merc, which is much less reliable. I envy her now ;)

i feel like i can no longer recommend ubuntu, and have in fact stopped doing so. I used to persuade my clients to let us give them ubuntu. Not now. Not untill all the noise dies down.

It begs the question, who was 9.10 ready for? The hackers and tweakers or the business users? How likely is it that v9 will produce a lts offering?
1+

[skotos]

...
- All software has bugs. Hardy had a misconfigured pulseaudio, Jaunty Intel graphics regressions, W7 endless reboot bug (http://www.osnews.com/story/22403/Windows_7_Endless_Reboot_Answer_Evades_Microsoft), and sure enough, Karmic has its share. Surprised?

- Test before upgrading, and if something doesn't work, stick with the working release. ...

The problem with Karmic as with the previous releases from a professional point of view is that the real true features and regressions have never been announced.

(Sorry, mikewhatever, but my reasons that follow are technical)

Stripping out the gdm is fine, but what about XDMCP? Where is it gone? XDMCP is taken for granted by every old *nix user...
No more remote X, browse, work? Only VNC? Tooooo sad... and crappy by design when compared...
Cutting down boot time does not mean stripping out XDMCP!

And what about the SSH? Just a warning on using the encrypted home directory to remind you that encrypting it will forbid you every SSH access unless you have first locally logged in would not hurt... SSH is just as XDMCP, an old friendly beast every *nix guy has been living with for years...

And NFS? Isn't it outrageous the speed it goes on Karmic?
Well, I do not want to run any Windows protocol at home since I am not going to run any Windows computer any more, but NFSv4 must simply work just out of the box... It is a *nix standard protocol... (On Fedora 12, for instance, you do not even have to choose to install NFS, it is just there: you just have to type mount and you're done!)

And what about network authentication? Samba and LDAP? Well, there are probably other ways that could be accomplished without being always copying Microsoft way of doing... though Kerberos seems to be comparable to some Microsoft solutions....
I enjoy building a Microsoft server by just copying a simple (?!) samba.conf instead of wasting hours installing Windows, typing serials, saying I am running a legitimate copy and on and on... but Samba is not the *nix way of doing...

Probably it is not me the one who is too much into Windows, but the latest Ubuntu, instead.

I know that being cross platform is great, but - hey - destroying the *nix roots is like committing suicide. Linux will never rule Windows... Linux will always try to talk to Windows... Forgetting its roots and its real strenght is just losing the opportunity to be a true alternate/other OS.

You will never show what you can do, if you strip out your already running (and tested) tools...and always try to be someone else. You will become a good actor in the end, but you will be a fake.

As an IT guy/gal you have to install/upgrade some test computers and this kind of "tested" strategy hurts. You dream a Windows free world or - at least - a big brother's/spam/virus free world, and this does not seem the way to go at all...
We all would like something different, but we cannot - again - throw away what we already have.

Being Windows compatible is a transitional must, not the long term target. In the long term, we all dream a protocols base, not an OS ruled world. The OS, free or paid, is just a commodity, a starting point, not the end of the journey: unless you are - of course! - a systems engineer or an OS developer!!

The end user just wants/needs a working device...

[almufadado]

Any operating system that I know is flawless in the beginning until some new flaw is discovered by me or someone else.

After the flaw has been discovered, if the people that CAN correct it does it then the flaw disappears.

Either linux or windows are nice "castles of cards", one should proceed careful when either wanting to add cards or remove them.

In Windows, the flaws are a way of life, because the corporation must keep selling. There is a limit to the OS "life expectancy" either programmed (stop providing fixes to flaws) or by creating new problems with the "needed" service packs. Also is a flaw is discovered within the life cycle of the OS, the attitude is to hide or even lie about it, and the truth is (almost always) later discovered.
This is achieved, in my view, by :


creating the conditions to having flaws ("forcing" the OEM's to produce incompatible hardware, no drivers availability, a game that needs some kinky feature, a new gadget, etc)
In windows version transitions there is always something that stops working, and always because some update disrupts the system, creating the "appetite" for upgrading.

In linux, the flaws are always the next step, because the community must also keep up with new hardware, and vendors must also keep up to date with their competition on their particular markets. Although there is a life cycle, it can be prolonged indefinitely or die if the programmer dies in a fire with all his notes. If A flaw is discovery is readily made available to the community to fix it, there is no need or time to lie, all must face the truth and deal with it.



most the flaws seems to derive from the sheer amount of options created by the community, either because of the multitude of distros (different approaches creates different results) or by the lack, insufficient or unavailable knowledge about the hardware the OS is supposed to operate on.
unpredictability of the user actions: without a single source everybody can do everything, yet most won't be able to deal with it.
Lack of support from OEM's : it's the game of the "sell-won't sell" and market quotas. The biggest example is the lack of support from printers manufacturers, even if they use some linux inside their machines, still they do not NEED (or are accomplices ) to address the "full-flavored linux world". And in the corporate world it's all about (but not solely) printing something.


Conclusion : this guy went to the supermarket and bought an electric appliance. He bought "toaster 1.0" fine to roast some square white bread and now he want to toast round slices of bread. I understand one grows tired about eating square toast and sometimes is good to eat a a round toast in version 2.0, but if the toaster worked fine and now doesn't.... reboot and reinstall . Also people seem to forget to read the manuals (and notices like "do not put your finger in the blade to see if it is spinning"), I know it's a drag having to read and hopefully to learn, and do not forget "true leaning comes from our own mistakes".

Having said this I rest.;)

[mikewhatever]

The problem with Karmic as with the previous releases from a professional point of view is that the real true features and regressions have never been announced.

(Sorry, mikewhatever, but my reasons that follow are technical)

Stripping out the gdm is fine, but what about XDMCP? Where is it gone? XDMCP is taken for granted by every old *nix user...
No more remote X, browse, work? Only VNC? Tooooo sad... and crappy by design when compared...
Cutting down boot time does not mean stripping out XDMCP!

And what about the SSH? Just a warning on using the encrypted home directory to remind you that encrypting it will forbid you every SSH access unless you have first locally logged in would not hurt... SSH is just as XDMCP, an old friendly beast every *nix guy has been living with for years...

And NFS? Isn't it outrageous the speed it goes on Karmic?
Well, I do not want to run any Windows protocol at home since I am not going to run any Windows computer any more, but NFSv4 must simply work just out of the box... It is a *nix standard protocol... (On Fedora 12, for instance, you do not even have to choose to install NFS, it is just there: you just have to type mount and you're done!)

And what about network authentication? Samba and LDAP? Well, there are probably other ways that could be accomplished without being always copying Microsoft way of doing... though Kerberos seems to be comparable to some Microsoft solutions....
I enjoy building a Microsoft server by just copying a simple (?!) samba.conf instead of wasting hours installing Windows, typing serials, saying I am running a legitimate copy and on and on... but Samba is not the *nix way of doing...

Probably it is not me the one who is too much into Windows, but the latest Ubuntu, instead.

I know that being cross platform is great, but - hey - destroying the *nix roots is like committing suicide. Linux will never rule Windows... Linux will always try to talk to Windows... Forgetting its roots and its real strenght is just losing the opportunity to be a true alternate/other OS.

You will never show what you can do, if you strip out your already running (and tested) tools...and always try to be someone else. You will become a good actor in the end, but you will be a fake.

As an IT guy/gal you have to install/upgrade some test computers and this kind of "tested" strategy hurts. You dream a Windows free world or - at least - a big brother's/spam/virus free world, and this does not seem the way to go at all...
We all would like something different, but we cannot - again - throw away what we already have.

Being Windows compatible is a transitional must, not the long term target. In the long term, we all dream a protocols base, not an OS ruled world. The OS, free or paid, is just a commodity, a starting point, not the end of the journey: unless you are - of course! - a systems engineer or an OS developer!!

The end user just wants/needs a working device...

How is all of that relevant to the topic of this thread and the original wireless problem? Personally, I don't see a problem with introducing changes. I'd just switch a distro if I don't like something, the question is, what's the big deal, and what's with all the whining?

Originally Posted by bfg
re op...

To those saying "well there's nothing wrong with mine", that's the wrong argument. Reliability is measured in failures per thousand and is not about measuring your successes, it's about measuring your lack of failure. A subtle but important difference.

Don't know what i mean? Well, do you say to a heart patient, "well mine works fine, you must be doing it wrong"?


I used to work at a cardiac catheterization unit, and the staff always tolled patients things like 'you did it to yourself, stop smoking, start jogging or start dieting, etc'.
Evidently, that guy doesn't know anything about heart patients, and the Honda - PC comparison is just ridiculous.

[skotos]

How is all of that relevant to the topic of this thread and the original wireless problem?
-

[csevcik]

Well I have had the same problem with Ubuntu fresh installs in many/most laptops. I have done many fresh installs for my children, students and colleagues. The trouble is that the wireless chips are often non standard or have non open drives. Should Canonical do something about?, perhaps, it will make my life easier.

But frankly, it only takes having a 50 cent cable, plugging it into my wifi router, and in 5 minutes the problem is solved. What it takes is answering a purist question like: There are some proprietary drivers for your system, Would you like to use them?.

Will this problem doom Ubuntu's future? Well I do not know. But somebody said that if you make something foolproof only a fool will want to use it. And also, remember that fools are very smart, and fooling them is hard :-).

[jaqrah]

They would also need to install the Broadcom driver if they installed Windows at home. It is not a Windows vs. Ubuntu thing at all. More a case of Broadcom vs. the universe.

Is it:

1) Dell's fault, for choosing Broadcom instead of an open-source-friendly wireless card?
2) Ubuntu's fault, for not supplying all possible closed-source drivers out-of-the-box?
3) The user's fault, for believing they can install an entire operating system at home without learning whether their hardware is supported?
4) Nobody's fault, since you figured out how to do it, and I figured out how to do it, and any other user with an Ubuntu Forums account and/or access to Google can solve the "bug" in 5 minutes?

I have to agree with Snowpine all the way.

I now have three Mini9s. Two came with Dellbuntu and one with Xp home. On all three of them I erased the OEM OS and installed NEW operating systems (Crunchbang 8.10(an Ubuntu derivative), Ubuntu 9.10, and Win7). With the Ubuntu installs, I had to install proprietary driver. With Win7 I had to locate 3 (yes 3, imagine that) drivers to get my os to operate properly.

None of the aforementioned operating systems, "just worked" after install. Imho, this post is just a tempest in a teapot!

[ugm6hr]

None of the aforementioned operating systems, "just worked" after install. Imho, this post is just a tempest in a teapot!

I agree.

However, the decision to remove a previously (i.e. in 9.04) default included driver in 9.10 is what people are upset about.

I suspect this was deliberate rather than a "bug" - proprietary firmware inclusion is presumably legally shaky ground.

I think the problem is doubled by Ubuntu's dependence on internet to fix driver problems easily. While MS OS also require manual driver installation, it is usually found as an independently downloadable .exe file; to download firmware on a different computer and install on Ubuntu requires a CLI-based "How-To"

Given the lack of ethernet availability only a affects a small minority of users who have wifi, I am not sure packaging such drivers in .deb files (if that is even possible or legal) will be a high priority.

Moral of the story - get an ethernet cable based internet access. Or buy open source supported hardware. Then everyone would be smiling :)

[jdkchem]

I can fix it easily. I already did, I found a LAN cable and I already have wifi working on my Dell Mini 9. But i'm an intermediate user. However, another user with more basic knowledge of computing could have a great deal of trouble and headaches with it.

This is not Linux for human beings aka the regular user.



People I sometimes recommend switching to Linux don't really care about wether it's closed or open source. All they see is that their wifi isn't working and on windows it does.



That you've gone on a nonsensical rant about a non-free wi-fi driver says more about you than Ubuntu. It is clear that you hold an OS you obtained for free to a higher standard than you hold an OS you have to pay for.

[Greyed]

That you've gone on a nonsensical rant about a non-free wi-fi driver says more about you than Ubuntu. It is clear that you hold an OS you obtained for free to a higher standard than you hold an OS you have to pay for.

I doubt that is true of the OP but it certainly true of me. Of course, it isn't my standard, it is the standard set by Ubuntu itself, see bug #1. (https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+bug/1) Specifically point #3 of what should happen.