The idea here would be to cut the driver layer out of Windows and attach it to Linux directly. This would become MS-Linux. If Microsoft actually produced an MS-Linux that was the standard Linux attached to the driver layer of Windows, giving users full Plug and Play (PnP) support of all their peripherals, nobody would buy any other Linux on the market.
John C. Dvorak: How to Kill Linux
About The Author
Eugenia Loli
Ex-programmer, ex-editor in chief at OSNews.com, now a visual artist/filmmaker.
Follow me on Twitter @EugeniaLoli
There are 2 options, one the layer won’t be free so again we’ll be at the mercy of microsoft (no thanks) the second is that it would be free
and therefore other distributions could copy it.
It’s a question of how much you value your freedom
When are these retarded journalists going to get it into their heads….. there is no place in the Linux world for Microsoft.
Also what sort of journalist uses words like “Gotten” ? there is no such word in the English language. Granted, it was on the Windows XP install program, but since then people have been using it ever since.
Nope, it is only in the US that patent laws apply. There has been no judgement yet in the EU.
In fact this week Poland threw the application for software patents out.
So… in the future, if Sun, Microsoft,whoever decided to use patents to kill Linux, it might succeed, but only in the US.
Believe it or not, the US is not the “whole world”. Linux is successful the world over, so there will be no change there.
IIRC “Gotten” is an American English word, so it does exist. The only problem is that I don’t know how to really use it, it sounds very akward -> I’ve gotten a new PC; You’ve gotten it wrong… doesn’t it sound particulary wrong to your ears? It does to mine, but I know that word exists, only I don’t know how they use it (heard it once or twice being used though…)
Microsoft knows the GPL is unenforcable and that they like
all the proprietary companies can rely on promissory estoppel
to do exactly what Dvorak says. When the GPL falls, Linux
will have more proprietary forks than a formal Whitehouse dinner table. IBM-Novell will run Linux on Power hardware and Microsoft will still own the remainder of the X86 world. All
the other forks will wither and die.
nah – stop trying to spread fud. that one about the GPL being unenforcible is sad and boring.
if you are gonna try and start a flamewar, please do it with something fresh
I used to be a big fan of Mr. Dvorak back before the Internet blew up into something big and popular. Sure, he was still wrong on a regular basis, but he was a fun read and I thought I did gain some insight. Since then, it seems as if he’s just filling up space waiting for retirement.
There’s nothing to see with him anymore. He’s controversial for controversy’s sake. It’s a game.
I don’t think so. I see here written my one-year old idea about killing Linux. Even if I like Linux and use it on daily basis, I have to say it would be the best way to fragment the Linux world.
Just think over the following thoughts (assuming that Microsoft is able to procuce a stable MS-Linux with driver support and Windows UI):
1. The actual tendency would be stopped in spreading of the linux desktops. Those who wanted to change to Linux may stay on this platform. On the other hand a lot of linux fan may switch to this platform too.
2. Porting the Microsoft Office to this OS would be a big attraction for a lot of people.
3. The hard core Linux community would be very confused. Do they really develop for the Microsoft? The fragmentation would be increased further.
Microsoft would lose nothing but would gain new users (=money) and may stop the further (uncontrolled) spreading of Linux.
Just my 2 cents…
I’ve bene tossing this idea around in my head for a while.
What if there existed a free, open standard for an operating system driver API? If successful, every major operating system would support it, and device developers would only need to write a single driver, and everything from Windows to SkyOS would be able to use it.
I doubt wether they have the time for it.Even now they can’t keep their promised release dates and included features of Longhorn.
Even if Dvorak is right, this doesn’t really kill Linux. It kills companies like Red Hat. If Dvorak’s plan works even exactly as he says it will, there will be a time after the dust settles that Open Source will again begin to leverage against MicroSoft’s dominance. Microsoft becomes a driver vendor not an OS vendor and inklings http://www.linuxant.com/driverloader/ of this type of cross-platform-driver wrappers already exist.
So, Microsoft playing a big move like this might buy them time… but in the end the same forces that gave rise to OSS to begin with will still be at work in this new Software Economy. Eventually you would get reverse engineered driver-wrappers and all host of OSS products simply because they can be created.
People just aren’t thinking things through here. Why would all those companies with Linux workstations and servers suddenly decide to switch over to MS-Linux when their computers work just fine as they are? They have no incentive, especially considering MS would likely charge the same or more of what they are already paying to Red Hat, Novell, or Sun. (Microsoft would only consider creating MS-Linux if it didn’t undercut their main OS, so they couldn’t charge less than Windows XP or Longhorn).
People here are getting confused between desktop Linux for the average home user, and business users.
IRTFA.
How can Dvorak’s remarks carry drop #1 of water with no mention of Cygwin?
this is quite possibly the worst opinion piece i have ever seen on osnews. it shows a complete misunderstanding of:
o the community ethics of linux users
o the gpl
o the structure of the kernel.
Why would all those companies with Linux workstations and servers suddenly decide to switch over to MS-Linux when their computers work just fine as they are?
Many companies are in trouble with Microsoft support and licensing. In each 3-4 year they have to change the OS because Microsoft stop supporting an OS product. For example Windows NT 4.0 would be enough for many companies but it is not supported. That’s the way how Microsoft produces the money.
What about adopting http://developer.apple.com/documentation/DeviceDrivers/Conceptual/I…
Dear John C. Dvorak:
No!
the majority of Linux users want to keep Linux as Linux…
sincerely; Cheapskate
I think that make a product for Linux that enable it to use Windows drivers will be the solution to control the entire Linux world. Once everyone use this product, anyone could left it away.
Da tu opinión en español en http://www.tod-os.com
“First of all software patents are not valid everywhere, secondly any kind of advanced and in many cases not so advanced software development you are likely to infringe on someones patents. IE if you go after someone you are opening up yourself as a possible target for counter-action. And considering IBM has the largest patent collection of them all I doubt very much that they’d sit down and take it if you were about to try to duke it out on patents. In fact they have already IIRC used a couple of them in their counter-suit against SCO.. ”
Yeah, isn’t it nice being dependant on IBM to protect Linux from lawsuits and patent infringement. But tell me, when Sun goes bankrupts, and Microsoft loses the OS war to Linux, and the only player around is Linux, what is going to keep IBM from trying to protect it’s patent’s and protect their patents by charging for Linux and making all other versions free?
As I said earlier, patents are Linux’s achilles heel. Microsoft, IBM, and Sun have a large portfolio of patents so they can force each other onto the bargaining table. Linux is free to take for whom ever wants it and has no way to own patents to keep it free.
1) Microsoft moving to linux would be an acknolgement that Linux is better then Windows OS.
2) Microsoft would have to port OFFice
3) Linux, only needs MS drivers on x86, so a Microsoft Office Port would be available on ALL Hardware that Linux runs on.
So, Microsoft would be benefitting AMD on linux, PPC on Linux, and possibly the BSD’s.
Microsoft would shrink to half it’s size, and be responsible for the only area it’s got any competency in: Office.
Apparently few understand this concept so let me break it down:
Linux distros have been around for years. How long ago did the first linux company go public? How long were you playing with linux before that? It’s freely available to ANY company including MS to add and change and distribute. Linux is a survivor b/c it’as licensed that way and cannot be killed even by a distributor of linux itself. For example, a linux distributor (Red Hat, Novell) cannot eliminate another distribution (Slack, Debian, Gentoo) through typical capitalistic tactics. As long as there are users of a product, then the product can exist. Open source users can continue use the existing product or choose to develop the product themselves to a further extent. Open source will find a way to make a product envious to even the biggest software companies in the world. Even if every software company was distributing Linux, do you think all of the open source developers in the world would just stop developing? No, they would find a way to make things better, something that we can say is our own.
The cycle cannot and will not stop. We are in the midst of a renaissance period for the silicon age. Many of us don’t realize the gravity of this era and how much of an effect it will have in later years and centuries.
Many years ago, artists would paint and write and build things just b/c they wanted to and they had the desire to express themselves in that way. That era produced some of the greatest works of art and some of the most brilliant minds in history. Open source is more than “working for free”. It is a way many of us express ourselves and push technology further. At the age of 25, I am proud to have a part in this and witnessed the birth of something so wonderful as worlwide collaboration.
Please don’t look at the open source movement in a close-minded way as this author would like you to think. He doesn’t really understand the era in which we live. Do you?
I take everything Dvorak says with a 300lb grain of salt.
Putting out a version of Linux would contradict every reason MS exists.
Heck yes they could. Will they? Heck no! Why? Because it’s all about the money. See, MS could make money by writing a proprietary module that will load Windows drivers for Linux, that’s not a big deal, but with reverse-engineering then Cedega/Transgaming/WINE would then do it too. MS would, in so doing, hand the keys to the kingdom over to a bunch of serfs. That’s not going to sit well with the stockholders, thus it will never come to pass.
It’s all about money, people.
You want to kill Linux? You can’t do it that way, you need to be more along the “patent” line, throw in the lack of Linux Orange Book C2 security certification, and some other bits… But that’s a moot point, as Linux is a fanboy creation now. Until it’s taken back by the knowldgable real growth isn’t possible and Linux will still be second-fiddle.
I don’t think MS could kill Linux by doing so. But I like the idea of his concept.
I think most people do not ‘buy’ linux, they d/l it for free, I know I do. Also, adding MS drivers to Linux will not ‘kill’ it, it will crash it. Windows crashes, that’s why people use Linux. No Linux user would want ‘MS-Linux’ because most see MS as the enemy, or at least a bad neighbor. Lame…
So basically, if a few companies want to kill Linux (like Sun and Microsoft), they just have to file for a whole bunch of really good patents and send a cease and desist letter to anyone who is using Linux “illegally” or submitting code into Linux “illegally”.
You don’t get Linux do you? Even if it were deemed illegal, you couldn’t stop it. Your argument is the same argument that the music industry is trying to use to stop music sharing.
Patents can never stop individuals who want to do something bad enough. When it comes to the linux community, forget about trying to stop them. Linux will just help them succeed in breaking the malicious patent holders wishes.
This coming from a non-linux geek who has used Linux occasionally, as work has required, and compiled source code, preferring that over binaries. I use OS X for my everyday work.
Wouldn’t that just kill windows?
….just as miserably as they do right now in XP, right?
And I wouldn’t be able to replace the (closed-source) driver with one that works properly, right?
And if I called Microsoft to complain, they’d tell me the same thing they told me about XP—they don’t have a “business reason” to support a “legacy printer” properly, right?
That may just be the most retarded article I have ever read on osnews.
Open source is more than “working for free”. It is a way many of us express ourselves and push technology further.
Agree!
Great to notice idealism isn’t dead.
I’m tired of the thing that people are complain about.. drivers.. no matter the OS.
write your own! It’s open source!
Has it come to your mind that MS might bring out a version of their own MS-Linux, not to make profit with it but to split and destroy the community?
Also, I think all damn-too-sure-that-linux-cannot-be-destroyed people here should recall how MS dealt with DR-DOS. This link might be a good starting point: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DR-DOS
So, don’t tell me that you love your OSS drivers, we are not all with the same luck. And my two web cams are semi-supported, each time I upgrade my kernel, I have to recompile their third party OSS beta drivers. Yuk.
100% right, it is like most of th Open source team out there don’t care about the linux os becoming user-friendly. I want a os besides windows that I can donload a file click & install. So all you oos devs, and users get of your high horse. I don’t use windows well I do to game, but windows is so buggy & crashes to much.
That’s right, the actual NT kernel developers are all VB coders who use a VB Collection as their only data-structure. At night they develop ASP applications using VBScript to challenge themselves. The NT kernel pales in comparison to the Linux kernel, and Dave Cutler and his crew just shudder at Linus’ intellect. F**king please!!
The NT kernel is the best part of the OS. It isn’t perfect, but it no way should it be replaced by a Linux Kernel. Why? It’s the Windows userland that needs fixing, not the kernel.
What does the Linux kernel have the NT kernel doesn’t? Why would they toss the best part of Windows?
I only wish MS would open up the kernel API and support a completely POSIX compliant subsystem. Also, NTFS junctions should support files as well as directories.
Can you tell me where can I download the source code for the super-proprietary nvidia drivers then? There’s an exception in the Linux license that allows for proprietary kernel modules to be linked. Because they make changes to the API/ABI nvidia has some open source wrapper. Those drivers will taint your kernel though.
I said:
Why would all those companies with Linux workstations and servers suddenly decide to switch over to MS-Linux when their computers work just fine as they are?
Alpha99 replied:
Many companies are in trouble with Microsoft support and licensing. In each 3-4 year they have to change the OS because Microsoft stop supporting an OS product. For example Windows NT 4.0 would be enough for many companies but it is not supported. That’s the way how Microsoft produces the money.
My reply:
Alpha99, my question refered to Linux users, not those licensing Windows products. If Linux corporate users are doing just fine with their workstations and servers running GNU/Linux then why would they jump ship to Microsoft, be it Windows or MS-Linux?
The whole premise of the article is vague and unrealistic.
Indeed — it would be stupid for Microsoft to choose GNU/Linux (or GNU/NT, really, since they’d want to keep the drivers) when they already use *BSD for their Services For Unix product and on some of their servers. Why go with the GPL when you can get at least as good software under the BSDL?
Besides, SFU is OpenBSD running on the NT kernel. They’ve already done this.
Why would MS ever let itself get involved when GPL’d code when they can so easily do the following:
1) Buy the Xenix name and either OpenServer or UnixWare (or possibly both) from the charred remains of SCO.
2) Relaunch Xenix using using one of the 2 SCO Unixes – whichever is the one that has the Linux compatability ABI layer (I forget which, but I do remember mention of it soon after the SCO vs the World thing started)
3) Port the .Net framework to new Xenix, and make it so that an app written for .Net will run without modification on either the Win32 or Xenix
4) Either use the technology they got when they bought Connectix to run Win32 apps, or develop a Wine like layer for Xenix
5) Release a native MS Office for Xenix
Assuming somewhere along the line they graft the Windows Driver Model into Xenix so that it can use the same drivers as Win32 than at least some people who are looking for Unix based stability but still want to run Windows based apps may very well be tempted – especially if MS keeps the price low.
If he is, he lost relevancy years ago.
After I posted above, I read the article…
….just enough to get that blather about how bad Linux driver support is, vs. Linux driver support.
I give up. Humanity has lost it. We are in a screwed-up world, where rich men decide what printers we can and can’t use, while strange writers sing their praises.
BTW, Knoppix live CD found *all* the devices on that machine when I tested it, and they all worked as they were supposed to. When I installed XP (as I said,) Windows support for my printer was pitiful, and it also didn’t find my network card out of the box so it couldn’t connect to the Internet through the gateway. Knoppix Live CD was on the Internet right away thru dhcp.
The only drawback was that 2.4 (and OSS) didn’t support my sound card, but 2.6 (ALSA) did. Of course, if I specified Alsa on the bootup, they both supported it. That’s “bad driver support?”
Oh…and keep in mind that if the Linux printer support *had* been problematical, I could have fixed it myself.
If Balmy did in fact shove the winxx drivers into Linux, would I get the source code to fix broken ones that Microsoft (or their “third-party” companies) lost interest in?
drivers in windows is often more plug and pray then plug and play. atleast those low cost ones often are. i would much rather use one developed by people that actualy use the hardware in their home computers. those people have a reason to make the driver work as spotless as they can as they have to use a system that rely on the hardware most likely.
i still have nightmares about helping a friend with a windows that fail to find the correct drivers even tho they are sitting on the cd. no fun at all.
Obviously you failed to read or to understand what I wrote. It’s not all about IBM. Go back, read and comprehend. Thank you for playing.
Nothing can kill Slackware GNU/Linux, NOTHING!.
“Linux” is not a name of complete operation system, it is a name of operation system KERNEL, or what an arrogant computer amateur like Dvorak would call “driver layer”.
How out-of-touch can Dvorak be? I used to actually like reading his columns, but he must be nearing senility now.
He claims that MS could sell “linux” on their own “driver layer” – doesn’t he realize that “linux” IS the driver layer? If you remove the “driver layer” (we call it a kernel John) you remove Linux! What you have left is Xfree, KDE, Gnome, Apache, MySQL/Postgress, and a pile of GNU utilities. You can’t even call it Linux any more because you’ve removed Linus’ entire work!
As an aside, debian lets you run the above list of GNU stuff and other software on BSD, and (sorta) on the HURD. That doesn’t seem to have killed Linux now, does it?
Wow – this article is really bad. I hope someone at ZD has enough neurons to realize that John Dvorak has outlived his relevance in a BIG WAY.
If you read Slashdot long enough, or in this case OSNews, you will notice something about commenter behavior with respect to Dvorak: people comment in large numbers, and with considerable emotional immaturity. “OMFG Dvorak is DUM LOL”
Yeah, just like the administrators of OSNews and Slashdot are dumb enough to link to these articles.
Wait, no, they’re not dumb. They’re relying on your immaturity, arrogance, and your primal need to make comments to correct what you perceive as “completely wrong.”
Dvorak is basically a corporate troll. He gets paid to make you comment on how stupid he is. Websites like this link to the drivel, because it gets hits. Apple news gets posted: 100+ comments. Microsoft to adopt linux: 100+ comments. Dvorak says the sky is lime green: 100+ comments. Something resembling a purely-technical subject: 5 comments.
You get to feel good, because you feel smarter than Dvorak and have a forum of people in which to demonstrate your superiority. Dvorak feels good, because lots of people read his stupid articles making him worth paying for. The people that link to them get to feel good, because all of the raving commenters stay interested in the site and come back in the future.
Sure, by law they are aloud to lash at any young lad.
After all he signed a contract and Apple are hardly known to be “merciful”
I wonder if Apple helps MPAA track down the “downloaders”.
I wouldn’t be surprised because they are two-faced.
For example there seems to be a deal with Microsoft.
One which goes – “Give us Office and Internet Explorer & we will give you iPod and Quicktime”
Then short aftewards, they pretend to be an advocate for OSS community and friends with the GNU/Linux folks.
* Why are some of the quicktime drivers still unavailable for Linux?
* Why don’t they port a QuickTime Player – even if its commercial?
Adobe Acrobat Reader ported their viewer, Macromedia Flash ported their plugin alright.
Because they are two-faced.
* How come you can play iPod under Windows but not Linux?
Why the pact?
Because they care shit about the OSS community, just taking what it needs.
They are a bunch of smug, pretentious, and utterly nasty folks.
Ultimately more vicious and greedy than Microsoft. Sadistic even.
MS threatens. Apple acts. Evil.
sorry posted in the wrong place ..!
// Just like Linux is fun and that won’t EVER be taken away from us. We ALL know that.//
Yah, Linux is loads of fun. Like, last night, when doing an install of SuSE 9.1. It detected my nVidia GeForce 5700 Ultra. I then checked for updates for the nVidia driver in YaST.
Found the update. Downloaded it, installed. Rebooted.
Black screen. X was fried. No gui. XF86Config backups didn’t work, either.
Woo hoo! What fun. I’m done wasting my time with the half-assed world of Linux.
Actually, the kernel isn’t the drivers, and the drivers aren’t the kernel. The core of the kernel is a set of interfaces to the memory and the processors, along with an abstraction called the file system. In general, all of the drivers could be removed from the kernel, and you’d still have a complete, functional kernel.
The kernel is a lot more about abstraction than it is about hardware. Thats why it can run on so many platforms. So it’s completely possible to remove all of the compiled in drivers from the kernel and use a set of kernel loadable objects to implement all of your driver functionality.
In fact, it would be just as easy for them to write an NT microkernel abstraction that runs as a process or as a kernel object and keep it all closed source. The binary drivers would talk to the interface, and the interface would deal with the kernel or hardware wherever necessary. None of it would necessarily need to be compiled straight into the kernel. Much like WINE.
sorry if i haven’t read carefully all 150 comments
but i wanted to point out a doubt of mine, and a point up to now apparently overlooked:
what the author of the ‘article’ foresees is a version of linux able to use binary drivers HW makers provide for Windows (that is, DLL’s with a standardised interface to the kernel or other components – the way drivers are designed allow manufacturers implement them as close source modules)
but binaries compiled for Windows are expected to be in the PE386 format and expect the availability of the Win32 API’s equivalent of “system calls” to which communicate via the Win32/NT ABI
this way, the PE binary loader, the memory allcator, and the original NT symbolic and binary interfaces, need to be emulated, with the respective inner workings and semantics… so it would be very different from a normal Linux (which is ELF/Posix/SysV/C geared), much more REACTOS than Linux …
apparently, it would be easier to put a unix emulation layer on top of the NT kernel (originally intended to support posix alongside win32, in the form of subsystems), than to rewrite a kernel that way (IMHO) ..AND this has been already done: MS Interix, now Windows Services for Unix, anyone?
http://www.microsoft.com/windows/sfu/productinfo/default.asp
ops, i started writing after seeing many comments about John Dvorak’s sanity but yours wasn’t there yet: think you’re right 😉
Wrong. I care. See how easy it is to prove you wrong?
That has to be the most juvenile response ever!
I’m going to guess you are 15 going on 16, and that’s probably giving you too much credit.
Based on your reading comprehension, I’m going to guess that you are around 8-9 years old.
” look up linmodem, and linuxant. you can connect for 14.4 for free”
Yeah, let me put on my seatbelt.
“and if your feeling generous can support them and connect full speed at 56.6.”
If Windows don’t have to pay for winmodem drivers, why in the hell should Linux users have to? But that’s beside the point. Conexant and Asus should be releasing drivers. There’s shouldn’t need to be a third party like Linuxant.
I have a Best Data external modem of which Windows refuses to install the drivers off the CD because it’s not on the Windows approved list or some such nonsense. On the other hand, Linux and FreeBSD both “just work” with this modem.
I’ve ordered my copy today.
http://www.mslinux.org
😛
What if there existed a free, open standard for an operating system driver API? If successful, every major operating system would support it, and device developers would only need to write a single driver, and everything from Windows to SkyOS would be able to use it.
It’s been tried. Google for Universal Driver Interface. It’s not used because there is too much competitive advantage in terms of performance to not use it.
Can you tell me where can I download the source code for the super-proprietary nvidia drivers then? There’s an exception in the Linux license that allows for proprietary kernel modules to be linked.
No such exception exists. Currently, the only reasons proprietary developers aren’t being sued is because 1) most kernel developers don’t care about license politics, and 2) proprietary modules are helping, not hampering, the adoption of Linux compared to the non-existence of such drivers. Eventually the tide will turn, and dealing with proprietary crap on users’ systems will become more of a drawback. At that time, the license can be enforced when the vendors’ hand is forced by marketshare.
how about a keyboard where all the keys were in fucked up places that no one knew, that would kill qwerty keyboards!
“Cutting” and “pasting” driver layer, is not as easy as cutting
and pasting in word processor. And what is a driver layer, anyway.
Linux is not just about drives. There are other things. If the driver problem is that important everyone would be using windows because drivers are easier to find and install.
Anyway. I belive that microsoft is putting very much effort in their next OS, and do not have enogh resources even to think
about this.
“you will notice something about commenter behavior with respect to Dvorak: people comment in large numbers, and with considerable emotional immaturity.”
I’m not trying to make any offense. But I wonder the same aspect on OSNews. They likely couldn’t be that stupid.
No way. Simply because it is the freedom that we, most of us linux user, buy.
Microsoft wont give you that freedom.
“Based on your reading comprehension, I’m going to guess that you are around 8-9 years old”
Yes, you’ve been trounced by an 8 year old. What happened to your clown act? Oh wait, that wasn’t an act! LOL!
What happened to your clown act? Oh wait, that wasn’t an act! LOL!
Yours seems to be in full swing. And you’re doing a very good job at it.
Count yourself lucky pal. At lest she didn’t totally erase your post.
I had to laugh when I saw the article, because I had the idea awhile back of having Amiga OS utilize Linux drivers to access cards and such–and just posted the other day on an Amiga-related website ( http://ann.lu/comments2.cgi?view=1108844292&category=forum&start=1&… ) about the exokernel idea which would help make such a thing even easier.
It’s just a matter of time before Microsoft does it.
But, hey, maybe everyone can benefit from this. While there are those who enjoy Linux quite a bit–something that isn’t likely to change anytime soon–there are also those who probably won’t use Linux, but who use other OSes that could reap great benefits from such drivers.
Drivers seem to be a problematic issue for some in regard to OS creation or evolution. Why don’t the larger companies go ahead and give a nod to Linux as the ‘dumping ground for drivers’? And I don’t see why some hardware manufacturers should care whether a driver for one of their cards is open source or not, since people still have to buy their card. (there’s still GPL, you know).
I think it’s a great idea
–EyeAm
…amazing
Shouldn’t that be MS-GNU/Linux
Has everyone forgot? Linux is free and GPL. There is no way that M$ would want to have any part of that. It goes against everything that they are about.
People don’t only use Windows for its GUIness and that their apps just happen to be Windows-only.
I haven’t have a driver problem with Linux for the last 2 years !! Everything just works!
What’s the use of this idea?
Consumers should be educated about what linux and the importance of open standards and open source.