Re: Linux Incompatibility List

[Helge Hafting <helge.hafting@hist.no>]

David N. Welton wrote:

>Hi,
>
>I'm reviving an idea I implemented several years ago, namely the Linux
>Incompatibility List.
>
>The idea is simple: most hardware works fine with Linux, and the
>situation is generally pretty good, with Linux increasingly showing up
>on the corporate radar.
>
>However, there are devices that don't work with Linux, for various
>reasons (no specs, too new and no one has written a driver, etc...),
>and it's easier to keep track of those devices so that people can
>avoid them (or the hero types can write drivers for them).
>
[...]

>I think (correct me if I'm wrong) the information we would want to
>collect is:
>
>Product Name:
>
>Manufacturer:
>
>Model Number:
>
>Chipset:
>
>How bad it is (1 to 10, 9 being it almost works and has only minor
>bugs):
>
>Reason (no specs, driver still being worked on, ...):
>
>Url for more info:
>
>An email address of yours that we may publish (so that we can contact
>you if someone says "no, that works just fine!"):
>
>Notes:
>
>Ideas/comments/suggestions are welcome at this stage.
>
>  
>
An idea:  To really put some pressure on vendors, also have an entry for
"alternate/better solution" where people can list a way to achieve the
same result with someone else's product and open drivers.  Example:

Product: Matrox parhelia  (a triplehead graphichs card)
Reason: Bad binary-only 2D-only driver
Alternate solution: Achieve triplehead with two radeon cards (1 AGP 
dualhead + 1 PCI) instead!

This will be useful for anyone planning a upgrade but finding their 
favourite
solution on the incompatibility list.  And it'll sure put some pressure 
on the manufacturer
to at least get a _good_ driver out (changing the reason), or even 
better, an open one
which get rid of the incompatibility entry. 

Helge Hafting