Nvidia sucks, sucks, sucks !
Mike.McCarty at sbcglobal.net
Fri Nov 10 01:05:02 UTC 2006
Ed Greshko wrote:
> Mike McCarty wrote:
>>I have found that any time I bring up a way in which Linux,
>>or Fedora Core in particular, could benefit from easier install/
>>modification/you name it, especially since the OTHER OS already
>>supports such, I get flames more or less like what you experience
> I could see that happening on this list. Remember, it is a "users" list.
I've seen it happen on *all* the "user" lists associated with Linux.
> There are other lists that may be more useful when bringing up certain
> suggestions. Like, for example, Fedora-config-list for the Discussions
> about configuration tool development.
> Note, my use of the word "suggestion" and not "criticism".
> Being "critical" of another's work or starting a thread with a phrase such
I wasn't using the term "criticism" in a negative sense. Sorry if I
didn't make that clear.
> as "sucks, sucks, sucks" is already setting a combative tone. FWIW, many of
I agree with this statement that the tone was combative, rather
than helpful. (At least from my viewpoint.) In any case, I think
that when a user has a complaint, then it needs to be taken as
an opportunity to do some reflection whether something might not
be done a little better.
> these protracted threads start out generally peaceful. It seems that
> somewhere along the way someone inserts a personal attack, be it intended or
> not, and it spirals down from there.
Yes, it seems so.
>>Criticism, however well-intentioned, however spot-on, however helpful
>>it might be, is not something easily condoned by people for whom an
>>operating system is nearly a religion.
>>If another OS does some things better, then the Linux and GNU crowd
>>should take that as an opportunity to review, and see whether some
>>lesson couldn't be learned, rather than as an opportunity to express
>>disdain for anything not of the pale.
> It may be helpful if we all remember that words such as "better", and
> "spot-on" are subjective terms.
Yes. And the word "however" which I used above indicates that some
may be more, and some may be less.
> It may also be be helpful to understand that some suggestions to an
> application, process, kernel, or whatever may not be as easy to accomplish
> as stating the goal. I venture to say that quite a few folks have written
> some application/code and then found they've painted themselves into a
> corner and the only avenue of escape is a total re-write.
Certainly so. And in such cases breaking backward compatibility is
sometimes a painful choice. BUT, currently, there is no published,
well-documented, and supported driver interface for Linux, is there?
> But, my dream did not come true. I went back to sleep with the hopes that
> this thread would die. However, as always, it would take restraint on the
> part of some, and resignation on the part of others.
Are you resigning? :-)
This message made from 100% recycled bits.
You have found the bank of Larn.
I can explain it for you, but I can't understand it for you.
I speak only for myself, and I am unanimous in that!
More information about the users