Ubuntu Linux: Built-in apps get an "A", wireless support an "F" (CNET) [LWN.net]

Ubuntu Linux: Built-in apps get an "A", wireless support an "F" (CNET)

Posted Jan 5, 2008 1:27 UTC (Sat) by pr1268 (subscriber, #24648)
In reply to: Ubuntu Linux: Built-in apps get an "A", wireless support an "F" (CNET) by drag
Parent article: Ubuntu Linux: Built-in apps get an "A", wireless support an "F" (CNET)

Indirectly, you and I are arguing on the same side. My original post was partly inspired at how (1) Linux distros in general get judged (unfairly) for their lack of wireless driver support, and (2) Ubuntu is usually the "headline act" in this criticism due to its immense popularity as a Linux distro.

I agree wholeheartedly that the Wi-fi makers do too little to even acknowledge that Linux even exists.... Their claims of encryption export restrictions (or whatever it is) seem like lazy excuses.

Defending my own use of Broadcom/NDISWrapper - it was in autumn 2005 when I bought the card for a decrepit used IBM T23. I was naïve about who made the chipset for Linksys' cards, and they on sale. NDISWrapper was my only choice until the bcm43x driver stabilized. I've since migrated to an Intel 2100 chipset.

(Log in to post comments)

Ubuntu Linux: Built-in apps get an "A", wireless support an "F" (CNET)

Posted Jan 5, 2008 2:59 UTC (Sat) by drag (subscriber, #31333) [Link]

Well absolutely.

I have no problem with people trying to get stuff working. None at all.

I fell into the broadcom trap myself when I purchased a Apple Ibook. I knew that the 'Apple
Airport' was prism device and worked fine under Debian, but I didn't realise (well I had a
inkling, but I didn't understand it all) that the 'Apple Airport Extreme' stuff was a entirely
different beast. Since it was PowerPC then ndiswrapper wasn't even a option. It was very
painful and I applaud the efforts of people getting those broadcom devices working on Linux
using native drivers.

And I've helped people in the past with ndiswrapper issues and broadcom devices on a few
different occasions. It's not the user's fault that they purchased a peice of hardware to be
used with Windows then later on wanted to use Linux only to find out it was poorly supported.

And for people purposely looking for devices to use with Linux lots of OEMs make it very
difficult. They do things like have XXXXXv1 being one device and XXXXXv1.1 being something
completely different. I've gone to stores looking for wifi devices and have seen no less then
THREE different revisions of wifi devices from the same manufacturer with the same name, same
box art, same feature set, same shelf, same price, no revision number on the box, but have
completely different chipsets. The only way I could tell the stupid things apart was to open
the box up look for any company names and the fact I found pictures of cards and with
discriptions chipsets online previous to going to the store. This is more then most people can
ever be expected to deal with.

Linux plus the consumer hardware market, especially with Wifi, sometimes is just a comedy of
errors.