• Honytawk@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    131
    arrow-down
    12
    ·
    1 year ago

    Yeah, never had a problem with incompatible hardware on Linux.

    No siree, not a once!

    • ichbinjasokreativ@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      58
      ·
      1 year ago

      Such an up and down though. I have an ancient epson scanner that cannot be used on modern windows, but I just installed the driver on linux and everything has been amazing.

        • ichbinjasokreativ@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          8
          ·
          1 year ago

          Not quite that old, it is connectet via USB-B. Windows drivers only exist for 32 Bit systems, on linux the drrivers come in a deb package that works on modern installations.

            • jj4211@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              He might have oversimplified to assume it was the 32-bitness that is the problem. Could be an ancient Windows Driver Model version that is no longer supported. Could have been that there were no signed drivers, or at least no drivers that are signed in a way that would pass today.

              The thing is that Windows banks on extended binary driver compatibility for running “old” hardware, but breaks that compatibility ever so often, and they don’t have first-party investment in drivers for hardware and third-parties would eschew standard multiple device drivers that would have worked fine in favor of their own branded driver/app experience. In Linux, mostly those devices get covered by generic multi-vendor drivers that are better maintained.

          • JPJones@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            Makes even less sense. 20 year old usb Epson flatbed scanner here that plugs into any win10/11 system and works without any fiddling, and that’s generally consistent with any usb hardware on Windows. I’m not saying linux isn’t a good solution to get problematic old hardware working, but let’s be real here.

    • platypus_plumba@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      20
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      1 year ago

      This is not a problem with Linux, this is a problem with hardware manufacturers not making drivers for Linux.

      Which is understandable, honestly. Making drivers is surely not an easy task. Targeting Windows covers the 80/20 rule.

    • xX_fnord_Xx@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      10
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      I just broke out into a cold sweat remembering trying to get wifi to function on my netbook back in 2k8.

      • Im_old@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        1 year ago

        My friend, let me be that guy that says “that’s nothing!”. In 2002 (around kernel 2.14 I think it was) notebooks had no integrated wifi (at least not the second hand notebook I could afford, and it wasn’t cheap anyway). I had to buy a cisco pmcia wifi card from across the world and recompile the kernel to include wifi support (and the driver of course). I don’t remember why, but I remember that recompiling the kernel happened quite frequently. Maybe because I was distro hopping a lot or because there were quite (relatively speaking) kernel updates. Not good old days, but at least I learnt!

    • Blackmist@feddit.uk
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      1 year ago

      Someone gave me an 8 year old laptop to clear down. So I figured I’d swap in an SSD and put Linux on it.

      Damn thing wouldn’t even boot. Wasn’t even that bad a spec machine. 6GB RAM should have been plenty. Shame really, was actually looking forward to seeing how far it had come in the last ten years or so.

      • pancakesyrupyum@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        1 year ago

        2016
        Hmm. There’s no reason anything that supports 6gb RAM shouldn’t run Linux. I’ve janked together much worse Lubuntu rigs before.

        • Blackmist@feddit.uk
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          Exactly. Should have run. Something in the hardware it didn’t like. Just got a black screen with a flashing cursor. Never got past that point.

        • limelight79@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          1 year ago

          Yeah, very odd. A few weeks ago, I retired a computer that had 4 GB of RAM that was doing server duties, running Debian. It was doing a great job until I tried running a virtual machine on it (for Home Assistant); that was just killing the poor thing. The processor was a Core 2 Quad that was introduced in 2008, so I got plenty of life out of that setup.

      • ArcaneSlime@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        1 year ago

        6gb ram is plenty, especially for a lightweight distro like antix or slax.

        From AntiX:

        It should run on most computers, ranging from 256MB old systems with pre-configured swap to the latest powerful boxes. 512MB RAM is the recommended minimum for antiX. Installation to hard drive requires a minimum 7.0GB hard disk size.

    • corsicanguppy@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      Winmodems and other cheap junk comes to mind.

      But, apart from stuff made just for windows, what’ve you got?