Re: Universal sound card?

mike wrote:

Aragorn wrote:
Either way, the bottom line is this: if a particular piece of hardware
does not work in your particular GNU/Linux distribution, then you've
bought the wrong hardware.

Yep, all my fault that linux won't work with my hardware.

Indeed so, because you bought hardware without checking whether it's
supported by the intended operating system.

All standardized hardware is supported by the vanilla
Linux kernel out of the box, and many proprietary hardware devices have
proprietary drivers that are freely downloadable at no fee from their
manufacturer's website, so if you own _any_ hardware that's not supported
at all, then this is not standardized hardware, period.

Just because your hardware is supported in any release of Windows - with
a little help from an equally proprietary hardware driver from the
pertaining device's vendor - while this device does not have support for
GNU/Linux, doesn't mean that your hardware is standard. It simply means
that you've fallen for the consumerist propaganda and bought something
that was Designed For Windows XP/Vista (TM), and then I'm willing to bet
that there was a shiny sticker with that slogan on either the device or
its shrinkwrapped box as well.

Another way of looking at is that I can open up the box, plug in the
hardware, click "install" and be done with it.

Really? Aren't we forgetting all those driver disks or the drivers that you
need to download separately?

I don't have to hope that some high-school kid has cobbled together a
driver that accesses a subset of the features.

Those highschool kids are actually qualified engineers, and those drivers
that access a subset of the features are actually complete drivers,
developed with the help of the hardware vendors who *do* support GNU/Linux.

I would hardly call IBM, Adaptec, Silicon Graphics (SGI), Sun Microsystems,
3Com, Realtek, AMD, Intel, Hewlett Packard, Novell, Dell, LSI, QLogic et
all highschool kids, but of course, your mileage may vary. For all we
know, you could of course be this supergenius software developer to whom
all of the aforementioned must bow humbly. (Although I somehow doubt that
this would be the case...)

I don't have to edit magic values into a magic text file that may or may
not be located in one or more "(non)standard" directory locations.

No, you are absolutely correct. Plain text files are *so* much harder to
understand than the cryptic Windows Registry. Right...

Sorry for the rant, but you were either asking for it or in desperate
need of enlightenment. I can only hope that reading all of the above has
made you grow a few extra neurons. If it didn't, then by all means go
back to using Windows - well, you *are* using Windows right now anyway -
but then please don't nag about an operating system that will always be
vastly superior to anything released from that particular company in
Redmond, Washington and that even in its most expensive commercial
iterations will also always be vastly more affordable than any version of
Windows as well,

I bought XP in the store for $10 and at a garage sale for $5.

In other words, you're using *illegal* software. The EULA for Microsoft
products does not permit resale of their commercial products, since you
never even get to own the software in the firstplace even as the first

All you get to buy is a license to use the software, and it may only be used
on one or possibly two computers - both in your possession, and not
switched on simultaneously - and may not be resold, not privately, nor

$5 won't buy you enough food to stay alive while you're pulling
your hair out trying to get hardware working in linux.

I think someone who uses illegal software is not well-placed to lecture me
on the prices of food versus getting hardware to work with GNU/Linux.

And by the way, all *my* hardware works *flawlessly* with GNU/Linux. But
then again, I don't buy "designed for Windows only" hardware.

not to mention that Windows requires third-party software in order to be
usable for anything other than sending an e-mail and surfing the web, or
perhaps even more importantly, that it needs third-party software just to
protect it from its own security leaks.

92% of all e-mail traffic on the internet is pure and unadulterated spam,
and at the same time about 85% of all Windows machines on the planet are
part of at least one of the many botnets from which the bulk of that spam
is being sent on a daily basis. Chances are that some of the spam
reaching my "Trash" maildir was sent from your computer. And *you're*

Exaggerate much?

No, but I gather information much, and I retain it. The above figures have
been published only recently. About two years ago, the total percentage of
spam among all e-mail traffic was still down to 70%, which is still quite a

Are we developing neurons yet, Grasshopper? <evil grin>

Tell me again the linux market share in the consumer sector?

That's rather a moot point, since 95% of all consumergrade computers with
an /x86/ processor are sold *with* Windows pre-installed, and it's damn
hard to even get one of those *without* the Windows license.

If however you take a look at all other computers, then GNU/Linux is the
most prevalent operating system, even if only because it supports just
about every processor out on the market. I don't see any clusters,
mainframes or supercomputers running Windows. Do you?

Linux hardware/software is not yet a chicken-egg problem.
It's still in the horny rooster stage.
Don't think that rooster is gonna be gettin' any soon.

Somebody needs to wake you up from your dream. GNU/Linux supports more
hardware out of the box than Windows does.

I'm all for open source.
I'd like to ditch MS.
I've tried to ditch MS many times.
Just won't do what I need done.

Then you're trying to ditch it for the wrong reasons. GNU/Linux is not a
substitute for Windows, it's a substitute for proprietary UNIX - think
Solaris, SCO Unix(ware), IRIX, AIX, et al - and a very good one at that

Buying linux compliant hardware is not an option.

Really? And why not? Those components would not be more expensive than the
ones for Windows. On the contrary even. You only just have to keep your
eyes open and step back from the glamorous salestalk.

Advertising is intended to get you hooked, it's not intended to tell you the
truth. What good would that do them?

But you have prodded me to swap in the linux drive and play
with it some more.

Good! That's how you'll learn, by using it. It's actually all about logic.

So, how are we doin', rooster?

I'm doing just fine, thank you. I was already using GNU/Linux exclusively
before I even had an internet connection at home, and even before I started
using GNU/Linux, I had only been using Windows 3.0 for about 6 months, and
NT 4.0 for about two years, with over 5 years of OS/2 in between.

See, I already knew of the existence of other operating systems than what
usually came with a computer before I bought my very first one. That was
in the days of MS-DOS 5.0, and I have always felt that it was up to the
customer to decide what operating system they wanted to use, not up to the
hardware vendor.

By the way, there is a long and dirty story behind the reason why most
consumergrade PC manufacturers sell Windows-only PCs - a trend that's now
slowly starting to wear off, thankfully - but I'll save that for another
day. Has to do with the fine print of Windows endorsement deals and all.
Mob tactics etc. Nasty stuff. :-/

(registered GNU/Linux user #223157)