
Choosing Ubuntu Fully Compatible Laptop Is Easier Now - tzury
http://www.ubuntu.com/certification/makes
======
bmastenbrook
tl;dr: don't believe it, at least not for any recent Intel ThinkPads.

I have the ThinkPad T420 with Sandy Bridge graphics that they list as
"Certified" under 11.04. This is at best highly misleading. I bought this
laptop under the delusion that choosing components that were supported by open
source in-tree drivers written by the actual hardware vendor was the right
decision to make. Alas, Natty out of the box hangs quite frequently, and X is
very unstable. The DisplayPort output is unusable, and even non-DisplayPort
output via an adapter didn't quite work.

After quite a lot of fiddling, I've found that the latest upstream kernels
(I'm using 3.1-RC9 at the moment) from the Kernel PPA mostly fix the hanging,
and using KDE with the XRender compositing backend addresses the rest of the
issues I have. OpenGL stability is still a disaster, but I don't really have
any need it for anything. I'm not sure if native DisplayPort actually works
yet; I got a small HDMI adapter to use instead. Using XFCE would probably work
just as well, but don't expect stability from Compiz.

Oh, and if you use dm-crypt (which you should on a laptop) you'll get a stupid
error from Grub on every boot unless you uncomment GRUB_TERMINAL=console in
/etc/default/grub (&& run update-grub). For reference:
<https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/grub2/+bug/699802>

~~~
jessedhillon
_tl;dr: don't believe it, at least not for any recent Intel ThinkPads._

Counterpoint: I chose the ThinkPad X220 because it was on that list and it
works (nearly) flawlessly under Linux. The only problem I know of is that the
mic mute button doesn't work. That's it.

~~~
bmastenbrook
Which distribution of Linux? Do you use compositing? If so, what compositing
window manager are you using? What's your typical uptime? Do you use multi-
monitor? Have you used an 802.11n AP, particularly a 5GHz AP supporting WLAN
power save (such as an AirPort Extreme)?

Under a different set of circumstances, Natty could have been said to be
flawless on my T420, and indeed I thought it was for the first few days. When
I started using the system more intensively for the tasks I bought it for, I
began to notice the problems.

~~~
jessedhillon

      - Distro: Ubuntu, then Fedora
      - Compositing: Yes
      - WM: Mutter
      - Uptime: weeks, currently 15 days
      - Multi-monitor: haven't yet, I could try and let you know what happens
      - 802.11n: No
    

I noticed on the notes for your laptop that you have an Nvidia graphics card.
I had an Nvidia on my last laptop and that experience convinced me never to
get a card that requires a proprietary driver. I always had issues with
compositing, resuming from sleep, and artifacts appearing on my desktop
(especially text corruption in terminals).

------
munin
notice how many specify "32 bit".

this is a joke for engineering laptops that need more RAM.

I have a T510, which is listed. it definitely doesn't work out of the box, and
not all of the hardware (nvidia optimus for example) is fully supported.

~~~
schwuk
We have a very large number of systems to test, and it is not feasible to test
every system with both 32-bit & 64-bit. There are also requirements from the
manufacturers to consider. (Please note, I don't perform the testing, so my
knowledge is second hand.)

Personally, I'd rather see lots of 32-bit systems than a handful of 64-bit. :)

~~~
wmf
Why not test 64-bit first and only try 32-bit if it fails?

~~~
schwuk
Desktops, Laptops and Netbooks are certified using the 32bit version of Ubuntu
and Servers are certified using the 64bit version of Ubuntu Server Edition.
This is based on the most common usage patterns we've seen.

Another answer is that it would lengthen an already long process.

~~~
GeneralMaximus
That usage pattern only exists because 32-bit Ubuntu is selected by default
and marked as "recommended" on your download page. People I know regularly
download the 32-bit version even though I tell them to get the 64-bit version.

Why is 64-bit not the recommended option?

~~~
mappu
Why should it be?

PAE [1] is reported to work very well, so there's no RAM problem. Plus, things
like ndiswrapper go a long way to highlighting Ubuntu's famous 'ease of use',
and i imagine it's a huge hassle to get that working on x86_64.

64-bit is a higher number, but it's not instantly better in all situations.
Larger pointers = effectively smaller cache, and the extra registers don't
always make up for that.

_________________

1\. <https://help.ubuntu.com/community/EnablingPAE>

------
schwuk
I'm the maintainer of the application that provides these listings, and it's
great to see them featured on HN. I'll try and reply to some of the comments,
but feel free to ask any other questions.

~~~
davidw
Years ago, I ran a "Linux Incompatibility List". You might consider the idea
of something similar - a list of things to avoid because they're guaranteed
not to work with Linux.

------
reustle
It's showing my laptop (Lenovo x120e) on this list, but my laptop has known
issues with the current wifi drivers which causes kernel panics.

~~~
schwuk
There is an X100e and X121e listed, but no X120e. I've seen enough hardware
listings to know that there's no guarantee of equivalence between models.

~~~
ajross
Not even between devices with exactly the same model numbers. I've seen
batches of "identical" laptops arrive from the factory with a mix of Broadcom
and Atheros wifi, for instance.

~~~
schwuk
Yes. Device substitutions are hard enough, but device revisions add another
layer of complexity.

------
dgudkov
Ubuntu crashes on my T420 during installation despite T420 is listed there.

~~~
schwuk
All systems are tested from a fresh install, therefore the installation is
part of the certified status. Also see my comment about SKUs: a single model
name can cover a multitude of incompatibilities.

Anecdotally, I've managed to crash my MacBook while installing OS X.

------
antirez
what should be done instead is a fork of Ubuntu designed to run well in the
best laptop hardware out there: macbooks.

~~~
schwuk
Ubuntu actually works really well on MacBooks - since Natty I've not had to do
anything OOTB to use it on my MacBook Pro, and only minor tweaks for Maverick.

While you'll never see Apple hardware certified for Ubuntu, I expect we'll see
lots of results on our crowdsourced hardware compatibility listings at
<http://friendly.ubuntu.com>

~~~
samstokes
Is this also the case for current-generation MacBooks? On both of the last two
occasions I researched this - 2 years ago and 1 year ago - the story was that
on older MacBooks it would mostly work, though you might need to tweak to get
some hardware (e.g. sound) working, and that on the current or previous
generation of MacBooks it would require serious surgery to even boot.

TBH, even the tweaking to get sound working is more than I can be bothered
with these days. I use Linux rather than OSX because it's better for my use
cases and I want the _option_ to tweak, not because I actually enjoy tweaking.

Would be great news if the support was better now.

~~~
schwuk
Mine is a mid-2009 15" MacBook Pro. I can't speak for anything newer.

~~~
moreati
Typing this on a late 2010 MBP running 11.10. I started on 10.10 which needed
modules and other bits from the mactel PPA for audio, backlight control,
hotkeys etc to work properly. 11.04 was pretty good - just needed a wireless
driver from the backports repository I think. 11.10 so far is working with the
exception of 3-finger tap to middle-click in Unity. I've switched to KDE which
is good enough, after some theming/tweaking.

From my sample of 1 I'd say Ubuntu Mac/Macbook support is good about 6-9
months after the first release by Apple. Before then it's hunting around
forums, and PPAs.

------
moondowner
Note that there are other fully compatible laptops - but aren't listed due to
not taking the Ubuntu certification.

For example, there is only one HP laptop there, and It's more than obvious
that there are lot more HP laptops which run the default Ubuntu installation
without problems.

~~~
schwuk
Absolutely. Certified means we've got an agreement in place with the
manufacturer to test specific models.

For everything else, we're started Ubuntu Friendly:
<http://friendly.ubuntu.com>

------
samstokes
This is a wonderful move. This would have saved me _so_ much time if it had
been around a year or so ago when I was shopping for a new laptop. (I went
with the Thinkpad T510, which has worked flawlessly.)

~~~
schwuk
That's the whole idea of the listings. :)

------
ericb
Does ubuntu, with 11.10, for any of these models, detect external displays
automatically? Is this a feature that is just not in the current ubuntu, or
something particular to 10.10 and my Dell?

~~~
sp332
It has "support" for this, unfortunately support varies depending on your
driver. e.g. Nvidia Quadro:
<http://www.brighthub.com/computing/linux/articles/31614/p2/> and some
Radeons: [http://niccolofavari.com/ubuntu-10.04-lucid-issues-with-
exte...](http://niccolofavari.com/ubuntu-10.04-lucid-issues-with-external-
monitor-and-ati-radeon-card) and so on.

------
puredemo
Hopefully we'll see some ultrabooks on here in the upcoming months.

------
spinlock
This is just what I was looking for. I was thinking about building an
alienware laptop and duel booting to Ubuntu. My big issue was I didn't know
where the problems were going to come in. Thanks!

~~~
schwuk
Within those listings is the Component Catalog that lets you search for
individual components (contained within the certified systems). There's no
guarantee that individual components will work together, but it's better than
not knowing at all.

------
zacharysjoden
Haven't tried them(yet), but <http://www.system76.com> looks promissing for
fully Linux compatible computers, including laptops.

------
lallysingh
Bullshit.

They're listing "Preinstall only" for quite a few machines (including the
Lenovo W520, which I just bought), but the "preinstall" image isn't available.
In the US, you can only choose windows as your OS. You can't get the
compatibility-tested version of ubuntu anywhere on that page, or anywhere else
I've looked _.

Rather tragic for an open-source operating system.

_ Note: I didn't look too far, I just installed arch instead.

~~~
schwuk
Where can I find a Pre-install/Manufacturer image:
<https://answers.launchpad.net/ubuntu-certification/+faq/1523>

Why can't I buy a system with Ubuntu pre-installed on it?:
<https://answers.launchpad.net/ubuntu-certification/+faq/1717>

~~~
lallysingh
.. and they're full of excuses.

That sort of crap was why _I thought_ Ubuntu was created. No more excuses for
having to go through free & non-free repos, half-assed "it's meant for the
enterprise" desktop configurations, etc.

Look, if I can't get the image that they're saying is compatible, _it isn't
compatible for me._ It's empty sales-speak and has no business in free
software.

------
gtani
Maybe you could list most common failing tests, let people decide what they
could live without:

\- wifi chipset

\- vid cards (GPU set)

\- sleep/resume

~~~
schwuk
That's what Ubuntu Friendly (<http://friendly.ubuntu.com>) does.

------
buster
A shame that Sony is not listed.. hopefully this page motivates Sony to
certify them :)

~~~
spinlock
Yeah. I like the look of the Vaio line a lot but I really want a machine that
will run linux well. Ubuntu seems like it would be the best distro for a
vendor to partner with.

~~~
buster
I have Vaios since quite a few years and they generally worked. Only thing i
wished that would work is the graphics switch from integrated graphics to
seperate one...

Despite a netbook with the horrible GMA500 graphics (stay away from that crap
as far as possible!).

