Home » Discussões » 55
a number of suggestions
submitted by chris, 22:46, 7 Abril 2011
TÓPICO: other
STATUS: opened
PRIORIDADE: low
Descrição:
I've given this some significant thought and here is the info I believe we should be including: Device name: X 802.11N USB Wifi Adapter Chipset used: AR9170 Free driver: http://linuxwireless.org/en/users/Drivers/ar9170 Places to purchase: http://seller.com/ Sells to: USA Seller supported: Yes Product Description: 802.11N USB wifi adapter Distributions Supported: Ubuntu 10.04, Ubuntu 10.10, Trisquel 4.04 Linux Support Labeled On Packaging: Yes All Features Fully Supported: Yes Mainline Kernel Support: Yes Kernel support from version: 2.6.31 Manufacturer Support Link: none Level of chipset manufacturer support: driver (or specs) Device manufacturer user support: no Only the best supported devices should be included in the list. For instance if an 802.11N USB device has full support from a seller in a given territory and another device does not only the better of the two can be included. This assumes competitive price points. A device intended for a different market should not be excluded (an $40-50 USB wifi device won't be excluded just because a $70 device exists with slightly better support). We want to promote the chipset manufacturers, sellers, and device manufacturers to fully support free software. Sellers should also avoid promoting non-free software: "X recommends Windows 7" is not acceptable. Sellers supporting/selling MS Windows 7 should not be excluded as long as they are not encouraging customers to purchase non-free software. You should not be required to purchase non-free software with your free software hardware/system. Drivers should be in mainstream driver projects like ALSA, the mainline kernel, etc where possible. Some of these projects won't allow non-free drivers or firmware (some will, such as the mainline kernel). This will ensure devices are supported going forward.
Mensagens:
tonicucoz:

Some info about the places to purchase a device could be useful, anyway we have to pay attention and avoid to promote non-free software. For example, it's not important for us to know that a device works with Ubuntu (or a similar not fully free distro) or that the seller supports Ubuntu, since this does not guarantee that that device works with free software.

Also, many sellers/vendors claim that their hardware works with "Linux", but this does not mean that it also works with free software

Some of these projects won't allow non-free drivers or firmware (some will, such as the mainline kernel)

This is not acceptable. We are promoting only free software.

The easiest way to do so is to guarantee that a device works with a fully free distro.

Perhaps we could find a way to promote those vendors whose hardware works with a fully free distro

submitted by tonicucoz, 02:28, 11 Abril 2011
aloniv:
If a vendor sells a laptop or netbook that is fully supported by free software with a popular GNU/Linux distribution like Ubuntu preinstalled then people should now that they don't need to pay the Windows tax to get the laptop.
submitted by aloniv, 23:23, 16 Abril 2011
aloniv:
I thought editing was possible and meant to write "know" instead of "now".
submitted by aloniv, 23:26, 16 Abril 2011
Ark74:
Maybe Los Alamos Computing could be the first on the list. Funny thing they use both terms Linux and GNU/Linux to call the system.
  • http://laclinux.com/en/Linux_Computers
  • http://www.laclinux.com/gnu/GNU_Linux_Computers
  • submitted by Ark74, 23:01, 17 Abril 2011
    tonicucoz:
    perhaps we could start to indicate sellers that sell the computer with a fully free GNU/Linux distro already installed inside the Description entry, if such a seller exists
    submitted by tonicucoz, 07:43, 19 Abril 2011
    chris:

    tonicucoz: Use GNewSense and Trisquel then. I just intended to list the distributions and the versions. You can eliminate the mainline kernel and put in the libre one too. The only issue with the later is that you are making it more work for those who would be providing support/compatibility information. Listing a kernel version is easy to do if you know the chipset. That can be determined from booting any distribution easily. I don't know how the libre kernel equivalent is listed. If the numbers match up no problem. If they don't then you have allot more work to do.

    Ark74: I was using Laclinux as an example of one of the few places to get a system not dependent on non-free drivers. It wasn't until later that I realised that the systems were shipping with nVIDIA chipsets and these chipsets are dependent on non-free drivers for 3D acceleration. This is generally speaking given the free ones... well.. they aren't up to the job. I think I tried contacting him and pointing that out. Nothing changed though and I don't think I got a response. So I stopped using them as an example.

    ThinkPenguin.com and open-pc.com have systems and or peripherals which don't depend on non-free drivers/firmware (Excluding BIOS). I don't think any other online entities makes an effort to exclude chipsets that are non-free driver/firmware dependent at the moment. I should point out that selling systems with non-free software doesn't mean they are dependent on non-free software. You have to look at the chipsets to determine that. This was part of the reason for the original list including the chipset.

    submitted by chris, 01:38, 23 Abril 2011
    tonicucoz:
    Chris, can you please explain better your proposal? You have suggested to add a lot of new fields, but we are trying to list hardware, not vendors. We make this effort in order to discover what devices work with free software. Anyway, we could also try to indicate what vendors sell computer with fully free GNU/Linux distros already installed (the FSF already do this).
    submitted by tonicucoz, 12:39, 26 Abril 2011
    chris:

    I'm going to rehash it a bit and hopefully make it clearer.

    Listing every model number (be it laptops, desktops, or accessories) which may work with free software is an unreliable means of informing people which computers and devices are free software compatible. This is because you can't tell if a chipset has changed based on the model number and they do change. I was going through the USB WIFI cards listed here for instance that say they are supported by free software and noticed a TP-LINK card that I bought which in fact did not work with free software (this is one example of many).

    Listing sellers whom are actively selling only free software compatible hardware is the only way you will ensure that users get the right devices and computers which are compatible with free software. Either they need to list that they are free software compatible or they need to make a declaration of sorts that they will not sell devices which depend on non-free software (drivers or firmware).

    I will make a proposal here as to how to go about solving these issues. Lets involve those selling GNU/Linux systems and/or accessories. Then lets create a list of those sellers whom will either declare that they only sell free software compatible hardware or will at least list which hardware is free software compatible. Then lets list those sellers by country or at least the countries that they ship to.

    A table like the following would work well:

    https://help.ubuntu.com/community/UbuntuPre-installed

    It would probably be helpful to show users both the GNU/Linux companies whom are not supporting free software and those who are in the table. The goal here is to make sure that people don't mistakenly think that all GNU/Linux companies support free software. Differentiating those who do and those who don't will also encourage the don'ts to do.

    I also would like to propose that we do a short 30-45 second video listing the numerous reasons including both technical (like the negative impact on users that non-free software bring to the table such as the discontinuation of manufacturer support leading to the need for new hardware) and ethics of free software (right to copy, modify, learn, improve, etc.). I have some ideas for such a video. It could start with what non-free software is, why you should care (ethics), and how it impacts users (inability to continue using hardware that technically still works). This video would be for the front page (and you can disable this so if you are a repeat user of the site you won't see it). You can then rapidly flash through hundreds of different devices that no longer have support in GNU/Linux due this issue in just a few seconds to make the point. Another thought for the video would be to include a young child being taught to share and then later in another scene being told he can't have a copy of some game and not understanding why when it is the right thing to do.

    submitted by chris, 04:11, 9 Junho 2011
    tonicucoz:
    Listing every model number (be it laptops, desktops, or accessories) which may work with free software is an unreliable means of informing people which computers and devices are free software compatible. This is because you can't tell if a chipset has changed based on the model number and they do change.

    the vendorid:productid code can univocally identify a device. That parameter can be used to assure that a device works or not (if the chipset change then the vendorid:productid change too).

    A user that is not currently using a fully-free distro and that already own the hardware can easily check if that hardware works also with free software and in case decide to use a fully free OS (he has just to check the vendorid:productid code)

    I was going through the USB WIFI cards listed here for instance that say they are supported by free software and noticed a TP-LINK card that I bought which in fact did not work with free software (this is one example of many).

    Can you please write here the model name of that TP-LINK device and in case set it as not-working with free software? Is the vendorid:productid code of your device the same as the vendorid:productid code of the model you have found on h-node?

    But you can't check the vendorid:productid code inside a shop and so you are right, it's sometimes difficult to identify the device from the model name. Anyway we could try to minimize the risk by adding as more information as possible inside each device page (also the chipset version). Sometimes the chipset version is written on the device box (for example I've found my USB wifi card inside the FSF hardware database and I've found that the chipset version indicated by the FSF was fortunately written on the device box, so I've bought the device that actually works with free software)

    Listing sellers/vendors is a different project, we are listing hardware. And it's not easy to assure that a seller only sell hardware that works with free software. We can test the single device but not the whole set of devices sold by a seller. Perhaps we could create a simple page like the one linked by you with the sellers listed by country, but I think we should list only the sellers that sell hardware that works with a fully-free OS or with a fully free OS already installed. And I think this should be in some way separated from the rest of the website.

    submitted by tonicucoz, 10:19, 10 Junho 2011
    tonicucoz:
    I also would like to propose that we do a short 30-45 second video...

    Perhaps a video could be ok, but we have to decide all together the contents, and I think we have to discuss a lot about this topic. Perhaps we could also use the mailing list

    submitted by tonicucoz, 10:26, 10 Junho 2011
    chris:
    the vendorid:productid code can univocally identify a device.

    I haven't paid attention quite that closely. It doesn't really matter though when boxes don't list this. The more technical users can sometimes locate some hardware easily. For instance 802.11G USB wifi devices are fairly easy to find online. 802.11N USB wifi devices are almost impossible. I don't know why that is when the best supported and only (actually there may be two) free chipsets for 802.11N USB devices have no manufacturers which list GNU/Linux on the box. Compared to non-free chipsets where manufacturers are listing GNU/Linux. This seems to be very common. From USB wifi devices to printers. The best supported devices are the ones which don't claim GNU/Linux support.

    I don't see how a site listing the hardware which is compatible based on vendorid:productid is going to be useful to any user. It is easier to just download a free distribution and try it. I can see this being useful to those wanting to sell only hardware devices which have free drivers/firmware though.

    Can you please write here the model name of that TP-LINK device and in case set it as not-working with free software? Is the vendorid:productid code of your device the same as the vendorid:productid code of the model you have found on h-node?

    I was basing it on the model number and not the vendorid:productid. I would assume based on what you said that it was accurate. If the purpose of this project is to let people check hardware they already have then that should be made clear with a warning of some sort. Don't you think?

    the chipset version is written on the device box

    In certain instances that is the case. More often than not this is not the case though. Most devices do not list chipset info. Some list just the chipset's company name and knowing it has an "Atheros" chipset isn't enough to know if it is free software compatible given Atheros has both chipsets which depend on non-free firmware and ones that do not.

    I think what I am getting at is we should make hardware as easy to get a hold of as possible. Everybody has this impression that GNU/Linux is hard to use. It is not. The reason is because there is no clear way to obtain GNU/Linux compatible hardware. At least not that is truly compatible with the design of free software systems.

    Listing sellers/vendors is a different project,

    Aww- great. Can we then link to such a project so users don't get misdirected/mislead and add a warning? I think the main place for this is in an intro to the site (objective:).

    I don't think listing companies which only sell free hardware would be that hard. There aren't that many. Three that I can think of. We would need to talk with sellers and get them involved. I would be more than happy to help with this. Sellers should be the ones verifying compliance. Self-certification is not hard. Either one can purchase them from another company which has certified or they can do it themselves. H-node can even assist in helping seller verify such hardware is compliant without having to download a free OS. I think mainly you need to cover as many countries as possible and not worry so much about the number of sellers. The goal is to make it easier for users to get said hardware. While it would be nice for all sellers to comply that is just not going to happen. If we can just get one seller in each country or continent I think it would suffice making such hardware easier to get for non-technical and technical users alike.

    Here is an example of what I was thinking (but with a short video):

    http://designed-for-linux.org/wikka.php?wakka=HomePage

    And you would want to categorize based on country most likely or regions maybe.

    Here is a sample page:

    http://designed-for-linux.org/wikka.php?wakka=WifiCards

    submitted by chris, 03:57, 12 Junho 2011
    chris:
    Perhaps a video could be ok, but we have to decide all together the contents, and I think we have to discuss a lot about this topic. Perhaps we could also use the mailing list

    Yes- I think it would be a good idea to pass ideas around for a script. That way the effort doesn't go to waste for those producing. Understanding the issues and explaining it in a simple short video is a challenge. I'm often not sure how to explain free software or if what I'm thinking is correct. For instance is there an issue saying "Free software gives you the right to use, study, improve, and distribute." and then giving people the negative effects? Which are all the hardware where support has been discontinued and is no longer compatible. Or is the later conflicting with the former. I think this might satisfy "open source" and miss the point. While the later is an issue people should not be switching to free software for the practical. They should be doing it because it is the ethical thing to do. Then again maybe it is ok to mix the two.

    I am not on the mailing list at the moment. Is there more than one? Which list?

    submitted by chris, 03:57, 12 Junho 2011
    tonicucoz:

    I don't see how a site listing the hardware which is compatible based on vendorid:productid is going to be useful to any user. It is easier to just download a free distribution and try it. I can see this being useful to those wanting to sell only hardware devices which have free drivers/firmware though.

    If the purpose of this project is to let people check hardware they already have then that should be made clear with a warning of some sort. Don't you think?

    The purpose of h-node.com is to both help the users that have to buy new hardware and to help those that would like to use free software (and that already own the hardware).

    In the first case the model name can be used, and even if (as you have pointed out) there can be some problems with the chipset I think that we can reach the goal in most of cases (with most of devices). We are trying to collect different versions of the same device (see here and here and here and here) so at least the user will understand that he has to pay attention and check the exact version before to buy it.

    The vendorid:productid code is only useful to catalogue hardware, to assure that the same devices is not listed twice and so on.. it could be useful to automatically recognize if a device is already in the database, for example this is what we are doing with the client ( here)

    We would need to talk with sellers and get them involved. I would be more than happy to help with this. Sellers should be the ones verifying compliance. Self-certification is not hard. Either one can purchase them from another company which has certified or they can do it themselves. H-node can even assist in helping seller verify such hardware is compliant without having to download a free OS. I think mainly you need to cover as many countries as possible and not worry so much about the number of sellers. The goal is to make it easier for users to get said hardware. While it would be nice for all sellers to comply that is just not going to happen. If we can just get one seller in each country or continent I think it would suffice making such hardware easier to get for non-technical and technical users alike.

    What does "contact the sellers" mean? Can you please specify how we should proceed in this direction? Who should contact the sellers and who will certify the sellers? We are a very small project and the work your are suggesting require a lot of people. Also, "self-certification" is not possible.

    H-node can even assist in helping seller verify such hardware is compliant without having to download a free OS.

    h-node already do this. A seller can simply sell those devices specifid at h-node.com (he can also verify the vendorid:productid code)

    http://designed-for-linux.org/wikka.php?wakka=WifiCards

    I think the website linked by you is not the best for promoting free software:

    • linux kernel -> linux-libre kernel
    • Minimum Distributions Supported: Ubuntu,.. -> Trisquel, Gnewsense,...
    • Linux -> free software or GNU/Linux

    I think we should use the h-node device pages to specify where that device could be found (if it works with free software) or to link to the device page on the vendor website, especially in those cases in which the chipset problem could arise. In this way the users will check the hardware (there will be no self-certification carried out by the sellers), and the users will suggest other users, putting the necessary alerts where required (chipset problem and so on). The description entry inside each device page could be used for this purpose.

    submitted by tonicucoz, 18:08, 13 Junho 2011
    chris:
    The purpose of h-node.com is to both help the users that have to buy new hardware and to help those that would like to use free software (and that already own the hardware).

    I know I am going to be repeating myself largely here. Listing cards and other peripherals based on model numbers does not work. Manufacturers change the chipsets without changing the model numbers. There are often many variations too with different chipsets using the same model number. What you are proposing is users purchase cards, peripherals, and computers which may or may not work. We already have hundreds of lists all over the net with this setup and it has never worked for any distribution. And almost all have. Linspire actually had the best solution where cards and other peripherals were listed and then companies where you could buy the card from online where linked to. They were misguided in pointing users to hardware with non-free drivers/firmware and in that they could sustain the database. They couldn't. It was too much work and failed just like every other large database.

    In the first case the model name can be used, and even if (as you have pointed out) there can be some problems with the chipset I think that we can reach the goal in most of cases (with most of devices). We are trying to collect different versions of the same device (see here and here and here and here) so at least the user will understand that he has to pay attention and check the exact version before to buy it.

    This is generally not possible. Boxes do no list this information. They don't list the chipset and they don't necessarily change model numbers or list version numbers on the box either which is what creates the problem. You also don't know if you are getting an older version or a newer version. I purchase allot of hardware and find this a little naive. I often have to purchase multiple cards or peripherals to find what I'm looking for. It is not a simple process which your typical user is going to go through. Only very technical users with a solid dedication to free software issues will go to this extreme.

    The vendorid:productid code is only useful to catalogue hardware, to assure that the same devices is not listed twice and so on.. it could be useful to automatically recognize if a device is already in the database, for example this is what we are doing with the client ( here)

    That makes sense. You do need to realize though that different cards have the same vendorid:productid in many cases. Companies re-brand cards. For instance 802.11N USB SMC cards are identical to a particular version of the TP-Link card. Not all the TP-Link cards are free software compatible though. Currently it appears all the SMC ones are although this may change. I was actually talking with SMC the other day in order to find out about purchasing a large quantity of this particular card and they said they are now using a different chipset. Which was one of the things I asked about because I wanted to make sure they hadn't changed chipsets. Once again... things are much more complicated than you think.

    What does "contact the sellers" mean? Can you please specify how we should proceed in this direction?

    Yes- there aren't that many companies selling hardware compatible with GNU/Linux. Most don't concern themselves with free software compatibility. They just care that it works “now”. Many don't understand the problems which they are creating for users down the road. You aren't looking at that many companies out there which are even really trying to support GNU/Linux.

    Here is a short list: System76, LinuxCertified, EmperorLinux, linuxemporium.co.uk, etc.

    So what we should do is come up with a set of information and requirements to be listed on the site. We would want policies on what sites h-node will link to. For example if h-node is going to link to seller's web sites where end-users can easily purchase free software compatible hardware then the sellers should have to for instance list which chipset(s) are used in the peripheral / adapter / card / computer and verify the device/computer are compatible with free software systems. They shouldn't just base it on the model number. This can be done by booting up a free software distribution for computers and testing various components or based on the vendorid:productid information for everything. Then we should probably also explain the various benefits. For example devices which utilize non-free drivers are eventually going to lose support in GNU/Linux. Yes I realize that this is not a free software issue. It is an issue for companies who are selling primarily to non-free software users though and you won't get support for this unless you give them reasons that free software is important and simply being "open source" compatible isn't enough for either free software or "open source" distribution/users.

    submitted by chris, 04:18, 26 Junho 2011
    chris:
    Who should contact the sellers and who will certify the sellers? We are a very small project and the work your are suggesting require a lot of people.

    No. It doesn't. It shouldn't. It requires significantly less work than trying to maintain a database which inevitably can't be maintained. Those selling hardware for GNU/Linux are the ones who have a responsibility and helping them make better choices of which hardware and chipsets to use is the way to go. This is where end-users go for hardware.

    Also, "self-certification" is not possible.

    Why not? I think you aren't understanding what I mean by self-certify. If a card is listed in the h-node database the vendorid:productid can be checked and the hardware can be checked against a free software distribution like Trisquel (even if this isn't the distribution the company is explicitly catering to). Trisquel makes a good choice just because it is a free distribution which is up-to-date with drivers and kernel versions.

    H-node can even assist in helping seller verify such hardware is compliant without having to download a free OS. ---- h-node already do this. A seller can simply sell those devices specifid at h-node.com (he can also verify the vendorid:productid code)

    These devices aren't all free software compatible. You can't rely on the model number. The vendorid:productid though should work to verify free software compatibility.

    http://designed-for-linux.org/wikka.php?wakka=WifiCards I think the website linked by you is not the best for promoting free software: linux kernel -> linux-libre kernel Minimum Distributions Supported: Ubuntu,.. -> Trisquel, Gnewsense,... Linux -> free software or GNU/Linux I think we should use the h-node device pages to specify where that device could be found (if it works with free software) or to link to the device page on the vendor website, especially in those cases in which the chipset problem could arise. In this way the users will check the hardware (there will be no self-certification carried out by the sellers),

    Sellers have to make sure that the cards / peripherals / computers they are selling are in fact free software compatible and not utilizing another chipset. This h-node database is not reliable as it is without a verification upon receiving the cards that the devices in question have the chipsets which are listed in the h-node database which are suppose to be free software compatible.

    If it were possible to just list a modal then you could simply tell users to buy Netgear xyz wifi adapter. The problem is that you don't know that an adapter won't change and it is common. Most have a few different chipsets for it and only one version works with free software systems. The boxes don't generally list which version or the sellers don't list the version. There are also variations in configurations which could be shipped with computers. If people purchase from companies which are getting them in quantity and first verifying these computers/devices/and computer configurations- then the problem is solved. You have made it easy for users to free themselves of non-free software.

    and the users will suggest other users, putting the necessary alerts where required (chipset problem and so on). The description entry inside each device page could be used for this purpose.

    This is a common problem. It isn't simply a matter of putting up an alert. Every database out there has this problem and none of the databases have worked well for end-users. Every distribution's database has failed to meet the needs of users. I've been working with users on “desktop linux” distributions for many many years. We need to work toward fixing this problem by narrowing down a smaller list of hardware to support. This isn't terribly hard if sellers are involved in this process. Sellers are the ones making money and the one with the resources to verify. Not h-node.com. H-node can only help sellers narrow down the cards / peripherals / chipsets / and so on in which to investigate.

    submitted by chris, 04:18, 26 Junho 2011
    tonicucoz:

    First of all the vendorid:productid code specify the chipset model, not the device model.

    You do need to realize though that different cards have the same vendorid:productid in many cases. Companies re-brand cards

    This is true, we have faced the problem some time ago. Each device can have also a subvendor code and a subproduct code (you can find those codes listed by the lspci command), added by the seller, but the vendorid:productid code is the same.

    We have decided not to list those subcodes but to use two different entries, one for the chipset name (linked to the vendorid:productid code) and one for the device names (the device name can be changed by the seller as pointed out by you so the users are free to specify one ore more names)

    So please remember that if a user or a seller verify that the vendorid:productid of a device is the same as the vendorid:productid found on h-node, this means that he is verifying that the chipset is the same (not the device re-branded, but the chpset) vendorid:productid <-> chipset

    In this way we can assure that the device does work because we are verifying that the chipset is the same (same vendorid:productid code).

    After that, we have two different cases:

    Case 1: a user already own the device or a seller want to sell a device. Both of them would like to know if that device works with free software. Both of them can browser the website or use one of the features that will be ready in the near future (client and so on) and check the vendorid:productid of that device and read if that device works or not.

    So h-node can already be used by the sellers to choose the devices that should be sold.. they have only to sell those devices listed at h-node and check the vendorid:productid code, that is the chipset version. Perhaps the database isn't still enough complete, we can discuss about this.

    Case 2: the user has to buy a new device. In this case, as pointed out by you, the user can't use the vendorid:productid code. I really understand the problem. You say the model name is not enough to help a user, that h-node is basically useless and that it's impossible to maintain such a database.

    Perhaps this is right, but what's the alternatives. None of the sites/sellers indicated by you could be used for the purpose (let the sellers to certify the trusted hardware) since they all speak about Linux, Ubuntu and so on, that is something that is not related to free software. So please find a new list of companies.

    We are trying to catalogue all the devices that works or not with free software, I think we could reach the goal thanks to the vendorid:productid code. Perhaps we could, in the future, make a list of companies that also sell notebooks with fully free distros already installed or a list of companies that sell devices that are also listed at h-node.com.

    Sellers are the ones making money and the one with the resources to verify. Not h-node.com. H-node can only help sellers narrow down the cards / peripherals / chipsets / and so on in which to investigate.

    So please write here the names of the sellers we should contact and that should make the work of verifying the devices

    submitted by tonicucoz, 21:26, 26 Junho 2011

    Write below your motivation

    h-node.org is a hardware database project. It runs the h-source PHP software, commit cdeda15, available under the GNU General Public (GPLv3) License.
    JavaScript license information