Okay. Which graphic card manufacturer would you recommend?
Which of your recommended solutions perform decent enough if you happen to want decent graphic performance as well. Think dual booting or using Wine to play even 1-2 year old games?
Was the previous release of Ubuntu working with the exact same hardware, but a new version pushed a free graphic driver that didn't work well enough? It seemed like that to me, so why are you blaming the hardware vendor _for this case_?
In an ideal world you'd be right. I support the ideology you're trying to spread. But it's totally impractical for a large number of people. Even if you don't care about gaming, chances are you got a PC off the shelf. With either a card from NVidia or AMD/ATI. Because you want to install Linux on a machine for your brother, mum, girlfriend - or that old box that is just available.
Given the huge flaws with the 'bad luck with your hardware' attitude you sound like the typical zealot. Don't do that.
> Okay. Which graphic card manufacturer would you recommend?
I have had nothing but good experiences with Intel graphics hardware. Windows are wobbly and translucent, performance is good enough.
> Which of your recommended solutions perform decent enough if you happen to want decent graphic performance as well.
A PlayStation 3 or an XBox 360. They are usually connected to larger screens too and you can watch TV on them, as well as play from the couch. That's unbeatable.
> a new version pushed a free graphic driver that didn't work well enough?
... with your specific hardware because it was never properly documented by its manufacturer (who really doesn't care about you) and the distro maintainers probably didn't like to ship a proprietary driver in the first place and switched to a free (remember, freedom is a good thing) one as soon as it worked well enough on the hardware they felt was common enough (tough luck yours wasn't on the list). You can probably install the proprietary driver yourself.
First: To state the obvious, I'm not the same guy as the guy with this upgrading troubles.
Second: You still sound like a zealot if you talk in absolutes and keep your condescending tone.
So I should buy a console and a big TV (I have neither)? And that idea (buying a completely closed platform like a PS3/XBox 360) doesn't violate your grand plan of bringing freedom and open specifications to everyone?
You silently ignored my 'what about existing machines?' point. It seems those are out of luck as well, so we're finally arriving in a world where you suggest to buy specific hardware for running Linux. Like we had to do, 10 years ago.
How can you write arguments like 'the manufacturer doesn't care about you' and continue with 'the distribution maintainers probably didn't like to include the proprietary driver' and 'tough luck if your machine won't work now' (paraphrased)? If the end user is my aunt, where's the end-user visible difference between 'Nvidia doesn't care about her' or 'Ubuntu doesn't care about her, because that off-the-shelf machine has a graphic card from one of the two big manufactures on the market'?
I stick to my point here: What the original author experienced was a regression in the distribution. The reasons for bad (open, free/libre) hardware support, while correct and sad at the same time, don't matter here. You saw 'had to blacklist nuveau' and jumped on it.
It worked first, it broke after an update -> Ubuntu fail. NVidia hate might be a pet peeve of yours, but is only tangentially related to the experience described above.
(Disclaimer: I don't have a graphic card from NVidia, nor do I run Ubuntu on any machine of mine. I've got no options of NVidia nor do I want to diminish the work of the Ubuntu maintainers, although I have to admit that I stopped being a member of the 'free or not all all' crowd quite some time ago)
Which of your recommended solutions perform decent enough if you happen to want decent graphic performance as well. Think dual booting or using Wine to play even 1-2 year old games?
Was the previous release of Ubuntu working with the exact same hardware, but a new version pushed a free graphic driver that didn't work well enough? It seemed like that to me, so why are you blaming the hardware vendor _for this case_?
In an ideal world you'd be right. I support the ideology you're trying to spread. But it's totally impractical for a large number of people. Even if you don't care about gaming, chances are you got a PC off the shelf. With either a card from NVidia or AMD/ATI. Because you want to install Linux on a machine for your brother, mum, girlfriend - or that old box that is just available.
Given the huge flaws with the 'bad luck with your hardware' attitude you sound like the typical zealot. Don't do that.