Re: kernel sound

[Al Hudson <nospam [at] york.ac.uk>]

On Tue, 7 Dec 1999, Sam Simpson wrote:

> Having to recompile your kernel just to get sound up running is the second
> main reason why Linux is a long way from being able to challenge Win in the
> desktop market

Forgive my naivite, but isn't sound done with modules these days? Bah,
it's been so long since I had to reconfigure my hardware, the mists of
time have clouded my mind... Certainly, last fresh install of Mandrake I
did worked, and I don't recompile my kernal.

> - ppp being the first.

Heh, my computer did this for me as well ;)

> He'll try Linux again, he says, when basic stuff like this is as
> straightforward as it is with Windows.

Sad that your friend gave up - I would regard that, though, as a failiure
of documentation rather than software. Linux is dead easy to use in a lot
of respects; actually figuring out how to use it seems to be the toughie.
Did your friend buy RH or get a GPL CD/cover cd? It's often good to get a
boxed set for a) the manual, b) the support.

My experience: (setting up Mandrake on my laptop) plugged in (external)
modem. Told kppp (or whatever it was) the device was on cua0. Entered
account details. It worked. Perhaps I'm jaded with experience: after a
while it does come very easily. But there is no reason at the moment why
it shouldn't be easy to get into linux: the distros are very good, there
are some great books out (Running Linux, for example, otherwise check the
Sheflug book reviews pages)... that being said, you *do* need to put
effort in. Of course you do, you need to learn a new system. That's why
it's pointless trying to get Win users to learn Linux if Windows does
everything they need. Linux naturally seems harder: they're having to
learn to get the same benefit they get from Windows.

> The rh suse approach is to load the user's partitions with
> bucketloads of apps, GUIs, scripting languages, compilers debuggers,
> let them get on with it. This is fine for pasty weirdos who get depraved
> pleasure from sitting at terminals doing this kind of thing, but no good
> for someone who just needs to use the Net or run a small business. Does
> a basic distro like the former exist? Tell my mate about it.

A little unfair on RH SuSE perhaps ;)) I hope also your judging the full
product: GPL CDs are all very well, but they're not the same as the full
product and there's no point trying to claim they are.

Distros I would recommend: Mandrake (on PC Answers this month, I think
someone said a few days ago? I would expect that to be the latest version
6.1 if so). Mandrake works on my PC, I've done little configuration and no
kernel recompilation AFAIK. It also worked on my laptop, and laptops can
be funny buggers. SuSE 6.3 also looked very impressive when I saw it.
OpenLinux is well thought of.

The way I see it is pretty much this: most of the apps under linux, and
linux itself, are incredibly good comparable to Windows. The
documentation of said apps tends to be fairly poor, and people find the
HOWTOs and FAQs difficult to read and use. System configuration is
generally easy, but that's if you know which apps to use. I.e., people
labour on with xf86config when XF86Setup is available, or don't know
linuxconf is available. Sure, this is no consolation to your friend, but I
think the rate stuff is improving documentation wise at the moment is
immense. Sure, you have to do some learning, but if you went out tomorrow
and bought the SuSE 6.3 boxed set (for example) I wouldn't expect you'd
have any configuration problems at all, to be honest.

Cheers,

Alex.

Start your own FREE mailing list at

© 2000 Microsoft Corporation. All Rights Reserved