Terry Hancock wrote:
On Sunday 14 December 2003 02:16 am, Karsten M. Self wrote:on Sat, Dec 13, 2003 at 11:15:07AM -0600, Kent West (westk@acu.edu) wrote:John Hasler wrote:So you guarantee that [a computer system] works with a specific version of a specific distribution. And ship it with that version installed and running.Or to make it even simpler: "Designed for Knoppix 3.3 11-02-2003" and include that Knoppix CD without an OS installed. That'd be good enough guarantee for me.I've recommended this (strongly) in the past.What does "this" mean, exactly? There's more than one idea here.It would be nice to see HW vendors pick up on this.Regarding supporting "Knoppix 3.3 11-02-2003" or some such exact distribution, I think it's missing the point. Not enough people in the Linux users community is going to settle for one distribution. And in this case, the user is optimistically asking for a distribution ONLY ONE MONTH OLD! Think about what you're demanding!
I only meant this version as an example. If the hardware works with a version of Knoppix that is a year old, that's still good enough for me. But as Karsten mentions, there needs to be some sort of agreement as to what the phrase "works with Knoppix" means. Does the fax/modem card work? Completely? or just enough to get online at 33.3 without fax capabilities?
I *actually* bought a computer (a Capucinno) a couple of years ago because the sales guy set it up for me and allowed me to pop in a Knoppix CD to make sure everything worked (the modem did not, but the test still gave me the info I needed to make my purchasing decision). If I had not been able to test it, there's no way I would have bought it.How many good systems must you sell to justify the cost of all the hardware you had to test and send back because it didn't work? How many Linux users will *actually* buy these hypothetical computers, instead of just agitating for them?
I would suspect that most vendors set up a display or test model of the computers they sell; it's not much work to slap in a Knoppix CD and make some check marks/notes against a basic compatibility list ("video has artifacts", "sound works as expected", "recognizes all 256MB of RAM", etc) and then make that information available for that model. I figure it would take an extra 15 minutes worth of work (_real_ testing could take longer, I agree), and if it leads to one sale, making the vendor a $10 profit, that's a return of $40/hour. Not a bad payscale.
Such testing would also allow the vendor to sell component pieces. If Knoppix works in the Zippy PC Model 2003 with video card VidBlaster Xtreme, then he can put a note on his VidBlaster Xtreme video card display/web page that it works with Knoppix, and Linux buyers would have more confidence buying this card than they would otherwise. Same for sound, nic, etc.
As far as real testing goes, the review sites and magazines should settle on a distro and use that for testing. Again, I think Knoppix is the answer, as it's easily and freely acquired, and more importantly, easily "installed" for testing purposes, and if the hardware passes with Knoppix (even a version that's a year or two old, or just one month old), it'll theoretically pass with any distro.
-- Kent