Tim wrote: > On Tue, 2010-08-03 at 11:12 +1000, Roger wrote: >> Why in the world would someone pay more for computer to run Linux? > > Because they wanted to run Linux, and given the choices of hardware > available to them, only the more expensive options were compatible. > I would have said that the least expensive options weren't supported, but we agree completely. The cheap models used video or network which wasn't supported. > I faced that when I bought my laptop. The cheap ones all used an > unsupported graphics chipset, only the expensive ones had graphics > chipsets that we had drivers for. > > And with all due disrespect to the one person on this list who kept on > saying that eventually they would have support, there was no way for us > to know whether that would really happen, and we aren't going to buy an > unusable computer and leave it on the shelf for two years, in the > meantime. Nor forgo buying a new computer for two years, waiting for > the time it was feasible. > Yes, we have a problem with the financial model which includes buying hardware in hopes that it will be useful before it's obsolete. That means it works on day one. The one thing I can't accept is breaking support for systems which worked fine on older releases. I don't want people running FC9 any more, but FC13 no longer supports the hardware. By support I mean a default install will display a graphical login screen a opposed to locking up so hard the battery must come out. Several people point out that Win7 runs on these systems nicely. Daily. Loudly. Insist on putting "Linux upgrade problems" on agendas. Those people, the MS fanbois. -- Bill Davidsen <davidsen@xxxxxxx> "We have more to fear from the bungling of the incompetent than from the machinations of the wicked." - from Slashdot -- users mailing list users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
