SupportedHardwareListProposal
|
Size: 8444
Comment:
|
Size: 8494
Comment:
|
| Deletions are marked like this. | Additions are marked like this. |
| Line 3: | Line 3: |
| '''NOTE''': This page is part of the Ubuntu Specification process. Please check the status and details in Launchpad before editing. If the spec is Approved then you should contact the Assignee, or another knowledgeable person, before making changes. | '''NOTE''': This page is part of the Ubuntu Specification process. Please check the status and details in Launchpad before editing. If the spec is approved then you should contact the Assignee, or another knowledgeable person, before making changes. |
| Line 13: | Line 13: |
| There are several hardware compatibility lists available on the web, but such lists often do not give users clear indications, and have several gray areas. Gray areas are in practice a green flag to "give it a go anyway" even when the user experience cannot be guaranteed to be satisfactory. As a result such lists, while extremely useful, might negatively affect the reputation of Linux distributions and Ubuntu in particular. The aim is to correct this situation by creating a list that draws a clear line between supported and unsupported hardware, eliminating gray areas and disincentivizing users from experimenting with hardware that has a less than satisfactory level of support. It is essential for the hardware list to have an official feeling to it, possibly with a proper certification program. This will help preserve Ubuntu's reputation and incentivize hardware manufacturers. | There are several hardware compatibility lists available on the web, but such lists often do not give users clear indications, and have several grey areas. Gray areas are in practice a green flag to "give it a go anyway" even when the user experience cannot be guaranteed to be satisfactory. As a result such lists, while extremely useful, might negatively affect the reputation of Linux distributions and Ubuntu in particular. The aim is to correct this situation by creating a list that draws a clear line between supported and unsupported hardware, eliminating grey areas and disincentivizing users from experimenting with hardware that has a less than satisfactory level of support. It is essential for the hardware list to have an official feeling to it, possibly with a proper certification program. This will help preserve Ubuntu's reputation and incentivize hardware manufacturers. |
| Line 21: | Line 21: |
| Even worse, sometimes users try to fix things by themselves following guides they fetch on the web (often of arguable quality, or even relating to other distributions). Such guides may lead them to recompile the kernel which in turns can create all sort of other problems. Some users may see this as an interesting learning adventure but for most it will simply spoil their experience and affect Ubuntu's reputation. | Even worse, sometimes users try to fix things by themselves following guides they fetch on the web (often of arguable quality, or even relating to other distributions). Such guides may lead them to recompile the kernel which in turns can create all sorts of other problems. Some users may see this as an interesting learning adventure but for most it will simply spoil their experience and affect Ubuntu's reputation. |
| Line 23: | Line 23: |
| Ubuntu users should simply be educated that there exist only 2 types of hardware: supported and unsupported. If this distinction is clear, they will know what to expect in advance and orient their hardware purchases accordingly. Moreover, the certification program, will create an incentive for hardware manufacturers to have a more friendly attitude. | Ubuntu users should simply be educated that there exist only 2 types of hardware: supported and unsupported. If this distinction is clear, they will know what to expect in advance and orient their hardware purchases accordingly. Moreover, the certification program, will create an incentive for hardware manufacturers to have a friendlier attitude. |
| Line 27: | Line 27: |
| An hardware panel team should be created in charge of deciding the rating of each component/system. | A hardware panel team should be created in charge of deciding the rating of each component/system. |
| Line 29: | Line 29: |
| The panel should follow some clear, predetermined criteria when assigning their rating. The judgement should be based on tests perfomed on donated hardware or alternatively on confirmed bugs/reports or using automatic client-side hardware probing software. | The panel should follow some clear, predetermined criteria when assigning their rating. The judgement should be based on tests performed on donated hardware or alternatively on confirmed bugs/reports or using automatic client-side hardware probing software. |
| Line 37: | Line 37: |
| Where the Status can only be one of the ratings below. Any extra information should be in a linked page specific for the component and contain: driver(s), status in older Ubuntu versions, detailed explanation, test results, timestamp, link to related bugs... The pages of pre-configured systems should be similar to the component ones but also include a list of ralated components. All the sections should only be edited by the hardware panel. | Where the Status can only be one of the ratings below. Any extra information should be in a linked page specific for the component and contain: driver(s), status in older Ubuntu versions, detailed explanation, test results, timestamp, link to related bugs... The pages of pre-configured systems should be similar to the component ones but also include a list of related components. All the sections should only be edited by the hardware panel. |
| Line 39: | Line 39: |
| It is quite likely that such a site will soon become difficult to maintain in a wiki and in the future it might be appropriate to move it to a dedicated CMS website customized for the purpose. This will also give the opportunity to enhance some functionality, so that the website can be used not only to look for known hardware but also to get suggestions. It should be possible for instance to rank components/systems/manufacturers, a useful and ''stimulating'' feature... Search capability could be enhanced by providing a lateral navigation bar containing the entries now in the main HardwareSupport page, as well as quick search, and a quicklink dropdown list of manufacturers. Additional interactive sections could be added to the component/system pages with features such as: submit a bug (to launchpad), user comments, popularity contest, tips/howto wiki... It would even be feasible to have a list of suggested retailers, provided they meet some criteria, like selling pre-installed Ubuntu machines... The visibility of components that have "opened up" could be highlighted within a news section... The website could therefore become a centralized resource for all hardware related issues and create a strong incentive for manufacturers, but it is essential that the main focus remains on the official list. | It is quite likely that such a site will soon become difficult to maintain in a wiki and in the future it might be appropriate to move it to a dedicated CMS website customized for the purpose. This will also give the opportunity to enhance some functionality, so that the website can be used not only to look for known hardware but also to obtain hardware recommendations. It should be possible for instance to rank components/systems/manufacturers, a useful and ''stimulating'' feature... Search capability could be enhanced by providing a lateral navigation bar containing the entries now in the main HardwareSupport page, as well as quick search, and a quick link dropdown list of manufacturers. Additional interactive sections could be added to the component/system pages with features such as: submit a bug (to launchpad), user comments, popularity contest, tips/how-to wiki... It would even be feasible to have a list of suggested retailers, provided they meet some criteria, like selling pre-installed Ubuntu machines... The visibility of components that have "opened up" could be highlighted within a news section... The website could therefore become a centralized resource for all hardware related issues and create a strong incentive for manufacturers and retailers, but it is essential that the main focus remains on the official list. |
| Line 41: | Line 41: |
| In any case there should be a prominent link to the list in the Ubuntu home page, both to confer officiality to the list and to make it easily accessible. | In any case there should be a prominent link to the list in the Ubuntu home page, both to confer an official feeling to the list and to make it easily accessible. |
| Line 45: | Line 45: |
| As mentioned it is essential to clearly distinguish between supported and unsupported hardware. It is still possible to use subcategories for supported hardware, but the basic rule is that the lowest supported subcategory should always guarantee a satisfactory user experience, anything less should simply be flagged as fully unsupported. Unsupported hardware should never include subcategories, since those would qualify as gray areas. Hardware whose compatibility is unconfirmed should also be included in the unsupported category. | As mentioned it is essential to clearly distinguish between supported and unsupported hardware. It is still possible to use subcategories for supported hardware, but the basic rule is that the lowest supported subcategory should always guarantee a satisfactory user experience, anything less should simply be flagged as fully unsupported. Unsupported hardware should never include subcategories, since those would qualify as grey areas. Hardware whose compatibility is unconfirmed should also be included in the unsupported category. |
| Line 57: | Line 57: |
| * '''Gold''': Some components are green and some are yellow, and there are no known bugs * '''Silver''': Most components are yellow, or there are some minor bugs * '''Bronze''': Some less relevant component is red and/or there are some minor bugs |
* '''Gold''': Most components are green and some are yellow, and there are no known bugs * '''Silver''': All or most components are yellow and/or there are some minor bugs * '''Bronze''': Some less relevant components are red and there may be some minor bugs |
| Line 66: | Line 66: |
| I would like to make a note that Martin Owens (doctormo@gmail.com) is developing an application to tie information which would be available on the above potential website into the ubuntu hardware detection system. nicknamed Dohickey please send email request for more information. | I would like to make a note that Martin Owens (doctormo@gmail.com) is developing an application to tie information which would be available on the above potential website into the Ubuntu hardware detection system. nicknamed Dohickey please send email request for more information. |
NOTE: This page is part of the Ubuntu Specification process. Please check the status and details in Launchpad before editing. If the spec is approved then you should contact the Assignee, or another knowledgeable person, before making changes.
Launchpad entry: https://features.launchpad.net/distros/ubuntu/+spec/supported-hardware-list
Created: 08/31/06 by Ago
Contributors: Ago
Packages affected:
Summary
There are several hardware compatibility lists available on the web, but such lists often do not give users clear indications, and have several grey areas. Gray areas are in practice a green flag to "give it a go anyway" even when the user experience cannot be guaranteed to be satisfactory. As a result such lists, while extremely useful, might negatively affect the reputation of Linux distributions and Ubuntu in particular. The aim is to correct this situation by creating a list that draws a clear line between supported and unsupported hardware, eliminating grey areas and disincentivizing users from experimenting with hardware that has a less than satisfactory level of support. It is essential for the hardware list to have an official feeling to it, possibly with a proper certification program. This will help preserve Ubuntu's reputation and incentivize hardware manufacturers.
Rationale
With other operating systems (like OSX) users check if the hardware is compatible before making a purchase, and if unsupported hardware does not work properly they certainly do not blame the OS.
Somehow the same attitude does not hold for Ubuntu. When hardware does not work as expected users blame Ubuntu. The problem is generally that the expectations for the specific hardware were far too optimistic to begin with, because not based on correct information, or because the users did not easily find relevant information (and assumed their hardware would work), or because the information found was not clear enough.
Even worse, sometimes users try to fix things by themselves following guides they fetch on the web (often of arguable quality, or even relating to other distributions). Such guides may lead them to recompile the kernel which in turns can create all sorts of other problems. Some users may see this as an interesting learning adventure but for most it will simply spoil their experience and affect Ubuntu's reputation.
Ubuntu users should simply be educated that there exist only 2 types of hardware: supported and unsupported. If this distinction is clear, they will know what to expect in advance and orient their hardware purchases accordingly. Moreover, the certification program, will create an incentive for hardware manufacturers to have a friendlier attitude.
Implementation
A hardware panel team should be created in charge of deciding the rating of each component/system.
The panel should follow some clear, predetermined criteria when assigning their rating. The judgement should be based on tests performed on donated hardware or alternatively on confirmed bugs/reports or using automatic client-side hardware probing software.
The HardwareSupport wiki is an excellent starting point. The main issues at the moment are: It does not have an official feeling to it. The distinction between "supported" and "works" is confusing and potentially creates grey areas. While some components are listed within a table, others (motherboards) have dedicated pages with comments instead of a clear rating, again creating grey areas. It is somewhat difficult to find (some users simply do not know about it). The tables are not always consistent, and while the rationale behind it is appreciated, this is nevertheless confusing. Notably, sometimes you have "supported" others "auto-detected".
Ideally, the wiki could be slightly modified to be as simple as possible so that each component list is a clear table with only 3 columns:
|Manufacturer | Model | Status|
Where the Status can only be one of the ratings below. Any extra information should be in a linked page specific for the component and contain: driver(s), status in older Ubuntu versions, detailed explanation, test results, timestamp, link to related bugs... The pages of pre-configured systems should be similar to the component ones but also include a list of related components. All the sections should only be edited by the hardware panel.
It is quite likely that such a site will soon become difficult to maintain in a wiki and in the future it might be appropriate to move it to a dedicated CMS website customized for the purpose. This will also give the opportunity to enhance some functionality, so that the website can be used not only to look for known hardware but also to obtain hardware recommendations. It should be possible for instance to rank components/systems/manufacturers, a useful and stimulating feature... Search capability could be enhanced by providing a lateral navigation bar containing the entries now in the main HardwareSupport page, as well as quick search, and a quick link dropdown list of manufacturers. Additional interactive sections could be added to the component/system pages with features such as: submit a bug (to launchpad), user comments, popularity contest, tips/how-to wiki... It would even be feasible to have a list of suggested retailers, provided they meet some criteria, like selling pre-installed Ubuntu machines... The visibility of components that have "opened up" could be highlighted within a news section... The website could therefore become a centralized resource for all hardware related issues and create a strong incentive for manufacturers and retailers, but it is essential that the main focus remains on the official list.
In any case there should be a prominent link to the list in the Ubuntu home page, both to confer an official feeling to the list and to make it easily accessible.
Rating System
As mentioned it is essential to clearly distinguish between supported and unsupported hardware. It is still possible to use subcategories for supported hardware, but the basic rule is that the lowest supported subcategory should always guarantee a satisfactory user experience, anything less should simply be flagged as fully unsupported. Unsupported hardware should never include subcategories, since those would qualify as grey areas. Hardware whose compatibility is unconfirmed should also be included in the unsupported category.
Suggested ratings for components:
Red: Not supported
Yellow: Supported but with some (minor) missing functionality and/or proprietary drivers are required
Green: Fully supported out of the box with open source drivers
Hardware that requires manual intervention and/or with limited capabilities should simply be included in the non-supported category. On this list even yellow hardware should guarantee a more than satisfactory experience, anything less should be classified as non-supported.
Suggested ratings for pre-configured systems:
Platinum: All components are green, and there are no known bugs
Gold: Most components are green and some are yellow, and there are no known bugs
Silver: All or most components are yellow and/or there are some minor bugs
Bronze: Some less relevant components are red and there may be some minor bugs
Lead: All the others
When it comes to pre-configured systems it is probably necessary to have a more articulated categorization. But the same basic concept applies: even Bronze computers should guarantee a good overall user experience, anything less should be classified as Lead. Some manufacturers can give the option of choosing one of several components. In this case it is assumed that the best component is used, there will be a footnote explaining it and more detailed information will be provided in the system page.
Hardware Information Collection
I would like to make a note that Martin Owens (doctormo@gmail.com) is developing an application to tie information which would be available on the above potential website into the Ubuntu hardware detection system. nicknamed Dohickey please send email request for more information.
BoF agenda and discussion
SupportedHardwareListProposal (last edited 2008-08-06 16:18:18 by localhost)