Please give a thorough review [LWN.net]

Please give a thorough review

Posted Jan 11, 2007 15:05 UTC (Thu) by corbet (editor, #1)
In reply to: Please give a thorough review by jreiser
Parent article: Hardware that Just Works

The article wasn't really meant to be a hardware review piece - LWN doesn't do a whole lot of that.

As for why: we've had a fax-capable modem for years. It's the scanning side that was missing.

to post comments

Please give a thorough review

Posted Jan 11, 2007 16:54 UTC (Thu) by JoeBuck (subscriber, #2330) [Link] (2 responses)

I respect your decision to avoid hardware reviews (LWN is excellent as it is), but I wish there were someone who would take on that task. "Which hardware should I buy that works effectively with Linux?" has always been a difficult question, and what databases there are on the net are mostly full of devices you can no longer buy.

Please give a thorough review

Posted Jan 12, 2007 1:21 UTC (Fri) by dark (guest, #8483) [Link] (1 responses)

The databases I found on the net also seem to silently assume that I'm willing to install non-free drivers and whatnot :(

Please give a thorough review

Posted Jan 12, 2007 16:05 UTC (Fri) by gtaylor6 (guest, #19812) [Link]

This may be true for some databases, but Linuxprinting.org most certainly does not do so. We have always* been a listing of DFSG-free drivers. It says so on the page describing our ranking criteria - a printer that comes with a gloriously functional binary driver but which does not work with free software is listed as a Paperweight, with a little "no penguins" icon just to make it clear.

People stuck with such printers do of course help each other out with the unsupportable drivers in the forums and wiki, but I'm certainly not going to do anything to promote the purchase of such a device for use with free software. If the drivers aren't free to include in a working state in the distribution, the device is almost a nonstarter from a usability perspective.

* With the one historical exception of a "probationary" period where we listed HP's HPLIP drivers back when they had a non- free "use this code only with HP printers" clause but I had been given informal assurance that a freer license was forthcoming. This worked out in an ends justifies the means sort of way, but I probably wouldn't do it again. (Not that it's up to me anymore, but I do hope Till and the FSG will continue this policy for however long the database survives).

Please give a thorough review

Posted Jan 11, 2007 17:55 UTC (Thu) by iabervon (subscriber, #722) [Link]

You might want to edit the article to explain that you have pieces of paper with writing on them that you want to fax to people, because that isn't actually clear at present. The first thing that comes to mind for me is actually that you've got files that people want to receive by fax instead of email.