Linux-Hardware Digest #604, Volume #10 Sun, 27 Jun 99 00:13:32 EDT
Contents:
Re: Windows easy to install? BULLSHIT! (Brian Hartman)
AuraVision VxP520 Video Capture - UNIX? (Gardner Buchanan)
Re: Logitech First Mouse+ (Jeff Potter)
Compaq Presario 425 (!) and Liinux ("Scott Marks")
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Brian Hartman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.linux.setup
Subject: Re: Windows easy to install? BULLSHIT!
Date: Sat, 26 Jun 1999 23:22:48 -0400
Alex Lam wrote:
> Brian Hartman wrote:
> >
> > Alex Lam wrote:
> >
> > > Brian Hartman wrote:
> > > >
> > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > On Wed, 23 Jun 1999 01:12:11 -0400, Brian Hartman
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > > >[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > >> On Mon, 21 Jun 1999 12:08:07 -0400, Brian Hartman
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > > >> >[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > > > > >> >
> > > > > >> >> On Sat, 19 Jun 1999 18:56:06 -0700, Jack Coates <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>wrote:
> > > > > >> >> >[deletia]
> > > > > >> [deletia]
> > > > > >> >> GOD DAMN! Are you telling us you have to be a bloody
> > > > > >> >> MCSE to deal with Windows problems. Arguement's done
> > > > > >> >> right there...
> > > > > >> >>
> > > > > >> >> Windows cabal conceeds.
> > > > > >> >>
> > > > > >> >> [deletia]
> > > > > >> >>
> > > > > >> [deletia]
> > > > > >> > If you look at sales, Windows outsells Linux by a wide margin. (I
>think we
> > > > > >> >can all concede that.) The fact that a specific company that sells Unix
>boxes
> > > > > >> >was mentioned lends credence to the point that you have to look pretty
>hard to
> > > > > >> >find an off the shelf Unix box. In most situations, if a user is going
>to be
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> No. One must merely exercise some care when one is selecting
> > > > > >> hardware. This is much like the burden to avoid the like of
> > > > > >> ATI and their 'poor drivers'. The net effect is still the same.
> > > > > >> The so called Windows advantage can evaporate at any time if
> > > > > >> you're unlucky.
> > > > > >
> > > > > >In the first place, you need to be a *lot* more unlucky to find a company
>with a bad
> > > > > >Windows driver. And for the record, I didn't claim that ATI made "poor
>drivers" in
> > > > >
> > > > > Someone likes making that excuse for ATI.
> > > > >
> > > > > [deletia]
> > > > >
> > > > > 'Luck' simply isn't good enough. It doesn't matter if the
> > > > > odds are better. The potential for disaster is still there.
> > > > > The consumer can, and should demand better than that and
> > > > > allow to flourish those vendors that can actually deliver.
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > I agree with you there. If I had been the person with the bad ATI drivers, I
>probably
> > > > would have taken the card back and gotten another one.
> > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > For 'ease', consumer-I-wanna-plug-it-in-like-a-toaster
> > > > > kinda ease, a kludge clone just won't do. They're built
> > > > > to be cheap and flexible, not reliable and easy.
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > Well, if you buy an off-the-shelf computer (say a Dell or a Compaq or such,
>you definitely
> > > > get a lot more ease of use than something you patch together yourself. That's
>for sure.
> > > > Hey, we're two for two in agreement so far. :)
> > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > The ease of Windows is more myth and lots of conditioning
> > > > > than reality. It's time to dump both MS OSes and PC Clones.
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > I can agree with you so far as day-to-day operation of the PC goes. One of
>the reasons I
> > > > started the Linux migration was all the headaches dealing with Windows
>crashes, sluggish
> > > > performance, etc. I still say that for just installing, if you put a neophyte
>in front of
> > > > both a Linux and an NT box, they'll be a lot less confused and hassled going
>through an NT
> > > > install. (The same goes for 95, but I've never installed 98, so I can't speak
>to it
> > > > directly.) Of course, part of the simplicity lies in the fact that a lot of
>decisions are
> > > > taken away from the user. That can be a bad thing, and lead to other hassles,
>so it's not
> > > > necessarily good, just simpler. The best system would provide simple
>explanations for
> > > > complex things that are going on. (I would have appreciated Help menus along
>with the
> > > > installation of Red Hat, for example.)
> > >
> > > >
> > >
> > > Redhat distro of Linux is JUNK. RH is following M$'s footsteps.
> > > Especially with 5.2. I suspect they rushed 5.2 out so they can make
> > > their book looks good for the IPO. Then rush 6.0 out for some quick bug
> > > fixes for 5.2, and messed 6.0 up as well in all the rush-rush
> > > situations.
> > >
> >
> > I don't really have much of a problem with the way Red Hat runs now. The one
>thing I found
> > curious is that while certain workarounds exist for hardware (pbm2ppa for printing
>with
> > Winprinters, for example) those tools have not made it into the distribution.
>(Maybe someone
> > can tell me if any distribution comes with such tools.) I've had my system hang
>mysteriously a
> > few times, but that problem seems to have gone away.
> >
> I have all but one freeze with SuSE. It was caused by Netscape from some
> bad Java on a web site.
>
> No, Redhat will never get my money or support. It's too buggy. SuSE has
> much better hardware support
> and detection.
You might be right about that. I was told by a network administrator I know that Red
Hat is easier
for Linux novices than other Linux distributions. I guess stability is compromized by
the ease of
use. I don't think the problems were stricly Red Hat's fault, though. Chances are I
did something
ill-advised like editing a system file in pico instead of vi.
>
>
> > >
> > > SuSE distro of Linux is much better in the ease of installation, better
> > > developed and planned. Everything works right out of the box. Can Redhat
> > > and Windoze say that?
> > >
> >
> > I'm not sure. I think everything that's documented to work out of the box
>actually does.
> > I think what's lacking is the documentation to get it all together. (I'm at a
>disadvantage,
> > though, because my Red Hat CD didn't come with a manual, so I had to rely on the
>online howtos.)
> >
> > >
> > > But I've found FreeBSD really have docuements that are up to date,
> > > readable and easy to understand,
> > > and actually you can find what you want to know from it. Linux's
> > > docuement is kind of chaotic in its currennt stage, but still, Windoze
> > > is in the same boat. If you want to know some finer details in Windows,
> > > you need to read a couple of 1,000+ pages books. Same like Linux, or
> > > Unix.
> > >
> >
> > I think the difference is that the fixes available for Windows problems are more
>widely
> > documented, and hardware companies generally post such documentation on their
>sites, and put
> > fixes on them, too. Since hardware companies don't yet have a financial benefit
>from supporting
> > Linux, that kind of effort isn't put forth, in general. Because it's such a huge
>market,
> > companies go out of their way to post fixes for Windows, put information out, etc.
> >
> I don't buy that. I don't think M$ cares about the users at all, other
> than getting their checks/credit cards numbers in.
>
I doubt the guys on tech support duty care at all. What I'm saying is it's common
sense that if you
actually *pay* for something, the people selling it to you have more to lose if they
don't support
you well. If it's free, the person who gave it to you could care less what happens
once it leaves
their hands. It's nothing to them either way. You might be right in the sense that
Microsoft right
now considers itself the only game in town on the workstation side. That's why they
don't care as
much. Linux might change that situation.
>
> Those hardware companies got to think differently now. Or they'll lose
> out a big chunk of business. Actually,
> it won't costs them anything, if they're just willing to release the
> detail info to write the drivers and fixes. Some Linux programmers will
> do it.
>
There's nothing for them to lose by *not* posting the drivers, right now. It's a
catch-22. If they
don't post the drivers, people with that hardware simply won't put Linux on their
systems. And the
user base for Linux is small enough right now that it doesn't take a big chunk out of
their revenue
if they lose that business. What Linux needs is two things:
1) Marketing: You see adds for Microsoft and Windows all over the place all the
time. When was the
last time you saw an ad for Linux in the main press? It's rare to see even a
hyperlink to a Linux
distributor. If Linux distributors don't start doing a better job at this, Linux will
go the way of
OS/2/Warp. Remember when *that* OS was going to squash Windows?
2) Improvements in the UI. Command-line stuff is all well and good for power users,
but novice
users (users unfamiliar with computers, or just with Linux) need GUI support. I've
heard SunSE does
the GUI thing pretty well, but not as well as Windows. Yes, yes, I know that GUIs add
a level of
abstraction that leads to complexity, etc. But the system needs to be easier for
newbies. Things
like updating your kernel and installing new apps are just more complex than they need
to be.
3) Major software companies need to port their apps to Linux. Corel leads the way in
this area, and
others need to follow. What would really help Linux to catch on is if there were
things that you
just couldn't do under Windows that you can under Linux. It's not enough to say,
"Gee, my computer
stays up for six months without a reboot!" If there's nothing extraordinary you can
do with the
compuer in that time, most users (who are perfectly happy with the way Windows runs on
their
machines, or at least not unhappy enough to change) are going to say, "So what??"
I've seen some
interesting apps under Linux (document editors like KLyx (I think that's the name))
and such. If you
can do something extraordinary that the average user would want to do, then more
people will be sold.
If Linux distributors can get these three tasks under their belts, then Linux has a
shot.
>
> > >
> > > To sum it up. As one of my friend said (he LOVES Windoze, because he's a
> > > system consultant and admin.): "Windoze is great, the more problem, the
> > > better for me, the more problems Windoze have, the more money I'll
> > > make..."
> > >
> >
> > I suspect there's a difference in the *kinds* of questions he fields from
>customers. In
> > Windows, it's, "How do I fix this or that?" and in Linux it's most likely "How do
>I *do* this
> > or that." :)
> >
>
> The *big* different is you pay lots of money to M$ to get a worthless
> product.
> And you pay very little, or nothing to get a superior product when
> getting Linux.
>
But superior in what way? Technical superiority is only half the battle. Remember
OS/2? Come to
think of it, there's an even better example: the Mac. In most ways, the Mac is
technically superior
to the PC. But technical superiority doesn't help if you don't have apps and
marketing.
>
>
> With Windoze. It's like paying the price for a Porsche, but get a lemon
> Sterling instead. (remember the Sterling?)
>
Linux is more akin at this stage to a Lamborghini that can only be driven by experts
with a certain
grade of gasoline. Most people wouldn't call that a bargain at any price.
>
> Alex Lam.
> > >
> > > Alex Lam.
> > >
> > > > >
> > > > > --
> > > > >
> > > > > It helps the car, in terms of end user complexity and engineering,
> > > > > that a car is not expected to suddenly become wood chipper at some |||
> > > > > arbitrary point as it's rolling down the road. / | \
> > > > >
> > > > > Seeking sane PPP Docs? Try http://penguin.lvcm.com
> > >
> > > --
> > > *** *** *** *** *** *** ***
> > > Remove all the upper case Xs from my email address if reply by e mail.
> > > **************************************************
> > > *If you receive any spam from my domain name. It's forged.
> > > I DO NOT send spam e mail. But I've found out that my
> > > domain has been forged many times.
> > > **************************************************
>
> --
> *** *** *** *** *** *** ***
> Remove all the upper case Xs from my email address if reply by e mail.
> **************************************************
> *If you receive any spam from my domain name. It's forged.
> I DO NOT send spam e mail. But I've found out that my
> domain has been forged many times.
> **************************************************
------------------------------
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Gardner Buchanan)
Subject: AuraVision VxP520 Video Capture - UNIX?
Crossposted-To: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.video,comp.periphs.scanners
Date: Sun, 27 Jun 1999 03:33:44 GMT
These video capture boards come packaged with a decent little
camera from Sony at a reasonable price. Sony calls it "FunMail".
http://www.auravision.com/products/designs/ptie.html
Is there a UNIX driver for this animal out there anywhere, or in
the works? Or should I just stick with a BrookTree based unit?
Thanks,
============================================================
Gardner Buchanan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Ottawa, ON FreeBSD: Where you want to go. Today.
------------------------------
From: Jeff Potter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Logitech First Mouse+
Date: Sun, 27 Jun 1999 02:59:07 +0000
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
==============2A5AE7E669DAC8011DCCE8E1
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
S3/\\\\\\T3X wrote:
> Can u describe how u got it to work?
>
> thanks, semtex
Yes.
My XF86Config contains the following:
Section "Pointer"
Protocol "MouseManPlusPS/2"
Device "/dev/mouse"
ZAxisMapping 4 5
EndSection
Then I got Navigator to pay attention with the following lines in my
.Xdefaults file:
Netscape*drawingArea.translations: #replace \
<Btn1Down>: ArmLink() \n\
<Btn2Down>: ArmLink() \n\
~Shift<Btn1Up>: ActivateLink() \n\
~Shift<Btn2Up>: ActivateLink(new-window) \
DisarmLink() \n\
Shift<Btn1Up>: ActivateLink(save-only) \
DisarmLink() \n\
Shift<Btn2Up>: ActivateLink(save-only) \
DisarmLink() \n\
<Btn1Motion>: DisarmLinkIfMoved() \n\
<Btn2Motion>: DisarmLinkIfMoved() \n\
<Btn3Motion>: DisarmLinkIfMoved() \n\
<Motion>: DescribeLink() \n\
<Btn3Down>: xfeDoPopup() \n\
<Btn3Up>: ActivatePopup() \n\
Ctrl<Btn4Down>: PageUp()\n\
Ctrl<Btn5Down>: PageDown()\n\
Shift<Btn4Down>: LineUp()\n\
Shift<Btn5Down>: LineDown()\n\
None<Btn4Down>: LineUp()LineUp()LineUp()LineUp()LineUp()LineUp()\n\
None<Btn5Down>:
LineDown()LineDown()LineDown()LineDown()LineDown()LineDown()\n\
Alt<Btn4Down>: xfeDoCommand(forward)\n\
Alt<Btn5Down>: xfeDoCommand(back)\n
Netscape*globalNonTextTranslations: #override\n\
Shift<Btn4Down>: LineUp()\n\
Shift<Btn5Down>: LineDown()\n\
None<Btn4Down>:LineUp()LineUp()LineUp()LineUp()LineUp()LineUp()\n\
None<Btn5Down>:LineDown()LineDown()LineDown()LineDown()LineDown()LineDown()\n\
Alt<Btn4Down>: xfeDoCommand(forward)\n\
Alt<Btn5Down>: xfeDoCommand(back)\n
Now it works like I had expected (but not all windows react properly to the
mouse wheel).
Jeff Potter
==============2A5AE7E669DAC8011DCCE8E1
Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
<!doctype html public "-//w3c//dtd html 4.0 transitional//en">
<html>
S3/\\\\\\T3X wrote:
<blockquote TYPE=CITE>Can u describe how u got it to work?
<p>thanks, semtex</blockquote>
Yes.
<p>My XF86Config contains the following:
<br>
<p><font face="Courier New,Courier">Section "Pointer"</font>
<br><font face="Courier New,Courier"> Protocol
"MouseManPlusPS/2"</font>
<br><font face="Courier New,Courier">
Device
"/dev/mouse"</font>
<br><font face="Courier New,Courier"> ZAxisMapping 4
5</font>
<br><font face="Courier New,Courier">EndSection</font>
<br><font face="Courier New,Courier"></font>
<p>Then I got Navigator to pay attention with the following lines in my
.Xdefaults file:
<br>
<p><font face="Courier
New,Courier">Netscape*drawingArea.translations:
#replace \</font>
<br><font face="Courier New,Courier">
<Btn1Down>:
ArmLink() \n\</font>
<br><font face="Courier New,Courier">
<Btn2Down>:
ArmLink() \n\</font>
<br><font face="Courier New,Courier">
~Shift<Btn1Up>:
ActivateLink() \n\</font>
<br><font face="Courier New,Courier">
~Shift<Btn2Up>:
ActivateLink(new-window) \</font>
<br><font face="Courier
New,Courier">
DisarmLink() \n\</font>
<br><font face="Courier New,Courier">
Shift<Btn1Up>:
ActivateLink(save-only) \</font>
<br><font face="Courier
New,Courier">
DisarmLink() \n\</font>
<br><font face="Courier New,Courier">
Shift<Btn2Up>:
ActivateLink(save-only) \</font>
<br><font face="Courier
New,Courier">
DisarmLink() \n\</font>
<br><font face="Courier New,Courier">
<Btn1Motion>:
DisarmLinkIfMoved() \n\</font>
<br><font face="Courier New,Courier">
<Btn2Motion>:
DisarmLinkIfMoved() \n\</font>
<br><font face="Courier New,Courier">
<Btn3Motion>:
DisarmLinkIfMoved() \n\</font>
<br><font face="Courier New,Courier">
<Motion>:
DescribeLink() \n\</font>
<br><font face="Courier New,Courier">
<Btn3Down>:
xfeDoPopup() \n\</font>
<br><font face="Courier New,Courier">
<Btn3Up>:
ActivatePopup() \n\</font>
<br><font face="Courier New,Courier">
Ctrl<Btn4Down>: PageUp()\n\</font>
<br><font face="Courier New,Courier">
Ctrl<Btn5Down>: PageDown()\n\</font>
<br><font face="Courier New,Courier">
Shift<Btn4Down>: LineUp()\n\</font>
<br><font face="Courier New,Courier">
Shift<Btn5Down>: LineDown()\n\</font>
<br><font face="Courier New,Courier">
None<Btn4Down>: LineUp()LineUp()LineUp()LineUp()LineUp()LineUp()\n\</font>
<br><font face="Courier New,Courier">
None<Btn5Down>:
LineDown()LineDown()LineDown()LineDown()LineDown()LineDown()\n\</font>
<br><font face="Courier New,Courier">
Alt<Btn4Down>: xfeDoCommand(forward)\n\</font>
<br><font face="Courier New,Courier">
Alt<Btn5Down>: xfeDoCommand(back)\n</font><font face="Courier New,Courier"></font>
<p><font face="Courier New,Courier">Netscape*globalNonTextTranslations:
#override\n\</font>
<br><font face="Courier New,Courier"> Shift<Btn4Down>: LineUp()\n\</font>
<br><font face="Courier New,Courier"> Shift<Btn5Down>: LineDown()\n\</font>
<br><font face="Courier
New,Courier"> None<Btn4Down>:LineUp()LineUp()LineUp()LineUp()LineUp()LineUp()\n\</font>
<br><font face="Courier
New,Courier"> None<Btn5Down>:LineDown()LineDown()LineDown()LineDown()LineDown()LineDown()\n\</font>
<br><font face="Courier New,Courier"> Alt<Btn4Down>:
xfeDoCommand(forward)\n\</font>
<br><font face="Courier New,Courier"> Alt<Btn5Down>:
xfeDoCommand(back)\n</font>
<br>
<p>Now it works like I had expected (but not all windows react properly
to the mouse wheel).
<p>Jeff Potter</html>
==============2A5AE7E669DAC8011DCCE8E1==
------------------------------
From: "Scott Marks" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Compaq Presario 425 (!) and Liinux
Date: Sat, 26 Jun 1999 23:53:13 -0400
We have an ancient, upgraded Presario 425, currently running a 200MHz
overdrive chip, 20MB RAM and a 3.8GB hard drive. We installed Red Hat 5.1
quite easily from CD-ROM. The problem comes in trying to describe the
Presario built-in monitor to xf86config or the like. Compaq was somewhat
helpful, confirming that the video chip is a Cirrus CL-GD5420 connected to
512KB of video RAM. But even consulting the dusty hardware manual they were
unable to come up with the dot clock or other timing numbers. Anyone able
to help? We are particularly interested in 800x600 mode, which Windows95 is
able to run, but which the Linux SVGA driver seems to think impossible.
Thanks in advance,
Scott and Jackie Marks
------------------------------
** FOR YOUR REFERENCE **
The service address, to which questions about the list itself and requests
to be added to or deleted from it should be directed, is:
Internet: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
You can send mail to the entire list (and comp.os.linux.hardware) via:
Internet: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Linux may be obtained via one of these FTP sites:
ftp.funet.fi pub/Linux
tsx-11.mit.edu pub/linux
sunsite.unc.edu pub/Linux
End of Linux-Hardware Digest
******************************
