Written by diegoj the 10 Jan 09 at 00:13.

List what peripherals/hardware have their drivers ported to Linux and detail some experiences using them.

This can be done by asking user to colabore in a wiki or other web plataform.

List what peripherals/hardware have their drivers ported to Linux and detail some experiences using them. This can be done by asking user to colabore in a wiki or other web plataform.

Written by diegoj the 15 Jan 09 at 22:39.

List what companies (and their products) don't make linux drivers. So users know that these products have not got to be bought by them.

List what companies (and their products) don't make linux drivers. So users know that these products have not got to be bought by them.

Written by balaji the 16 Jan 09 at 01:41.

If Canonical/Ubuntu decide to distribute this sticker to hardware vendors, then you can look for products that have a sticker saying "Works with Ubuntu Linux x.yz". Just like most products come with a sticker saying, 'Compatible with Windows xp' etc., if we have stickers for Ubuntu the user can make an informed choice.

For this, Ubuntu/Canonical will have to set up a hardware testing team that will allow hardware vendors to test their hardware on Ubuntu for a small fee (or none if you don't get any hardware vendors in the beginning) and will get an 'Works with Ubuntu x.yz' sticker. This can help in many ways:
1. The Ubuntu logo will help gain popularity for Ubuntu in the consumer base.
2. Users will know exactly what products will work for them - and can avoid purchasing a product that won't work for them.
3. Shifts the pressure of hardware compatibility from the Operating System to the hardware vendor. This is essential because we all realize that some hardware vendors make lousy products that work only on some OSes. This has to stop - the 'Works with Ubuntu x.yz' mark puts pressure on the vendors to get this certification because if their product is not compatible on an OS, the market perceives THEIR product as inferior to others. This correction of people's notion of "who is the trouble-maker" is essential.

To certify if a product will work on Ubuntu Linux, is a matter that could vary quite a bit. Ideally it should be one of:
a) Ubuntu already has drivers for the device - i.e. the device uses open protocols and hence is simply pluggable.

If Canonical/Ubuntu decide to distribute this sticker to hardware vendors, then you can look for products that have a sticker saying "Works with Ubuntu Linux x.yz". Just like most products come with a sticker saying, 'Compatible with Windows xp' etc., if we have stickers for Ubuntu the user can make an informed choice. For this, Ubuntu/Canonical will have to set up a hardware testing team that will allow hardware vendors to test their hardware on Ubuntu for a small fee (or none if you don't get any hardware vendors in the beginning) and will get an 'Works with Ubuntu x.yz' sticker. This can help in many ways: 1. The Ubuntu logo will help gain popularity for Ubuntu in the consumer base. 2. Users will know exactly what products will work for them - and can avoid purchasing a product that won't work for them. 3. Shifts the pressure of hardware compatibility from the Operating System to the hardware vendor. This is essential because we all realize that some hardware vendors make lousy products that work only on some OSes. This has to stop - the 'Works with Ubuntu x.yz' mark puts pressure on the vendors to get this certification because if their product is not compatible on an OS, the market perceives THEIR product as inferior to others. This correction of people's notion of "who is the trouble-maker" is essential. To certify if a product will work on Ubuntu Linux, is a matter that could vary quite a bit. Ideally it should be one of: a) Ubuntu already has drivers for the device - i.e. the device uses open protocols and hence is simply pluggable. b) The device comes with a disk/CDROM that contains a Debian package that can be installed on a Linux machine. Of course this is a less preferable method, but then the device manufacturer has control on the driver and can choose to ship proprietary drivers. c) Debian packages containing Linux drivers for that device are available on-line. However, if the device will not work on just plugging in or if it would not work upon installing a driver debian package, out of the box, then that device should not get a "Works with Ubuntu" sticker. In fact, a device carrying such a sticker does not work out of the box, the user can directly contact the vendor for support or sue them if it becomes a nuisance. So the certification should ensure that the user buying the product should never have to tinker with the device on the Linux shell at all.

Written by danbhfive the 19 Jan 09 at 17:42.

First off, solution #1 is already done here: http://www.fsf.org/resources/hw

Ok, here is my solution: have a firefox plugin that adds a button to popular hardware vender sites, like newegg, that would connect you to a wiki (or whatever) that tells you about hardware compatibility.

This idea copies the basic elements of the more controversial firefox plugin which linked amazon.com and TPB (read about it here: http://blog.wired.com/27bstroke6/2008/12/amazoncom-add-o.html)

From a practical standpoint, the source of that other plugin might be available, and easy to modify. (I dunno, never done any ff programing). Also, the community wiki already has a hardware compatibility section that can be linked to.

First off, solution #1 is already done here: http://www.fsf.org/resources/hw Ok, here is my solution: have a firefox plugin that adds a button to popular hardware vender sites, like newegg, that would connect you to a wiki (or whatever) that tells you about hardware compatibility. This idea copies the basic elements of the more controversial firefox plugin which linked amazon.com and TPB (read about it here: http://blog.wired.com/27bstroke6/2008/12/amazoncom-add-o.html) From a practical standpoint, the source of that other plugin might be available, and easy to modify. (I dunno, never done any ff programing). Also, the community wiki already has a hardware compatibility section that can be linked to.

Written by ikajaste the 23 Jan 09 at 21:05.

The community could maintain a list of compatibility for different devices, with simple green-yellow-red -style status. There could be a system to search from this (online or offline cached) database at somewhere at System menu, that would automatically check which version of Ubuntu is being used. User could then search from that system with a device code, such as "CanoScan FS4000", and get a list of search results, along with the status color light.

The community could maintain a list of compatibility for different devices, with simple green-yellow-red -style status. There could be a system to search from this (online or offline cached) database at somewhere at System menu, that would automatically check which version of Ubuntu is being used. User could then search from that system with a device code, such as "CanoScan FS4000", and get a list of search results, along with the status color light.

Written by ikajaste the 23 Jan 09 at 21:13.

Similar to #5, but instead of an application, only provide a link to a web site that user can perform the search in. The link could provide the user's Ubuntu version to the site automatically as a CGI parameter.

Similar to #5, but instead of an application, only provide a link to a web site that user can perform the search in. The link could provide the user's Ubuntu version to the site automatically as a CGI parameter.

Written by sikko the 27 Jan 09 at 14:30.

Use a fixed list of rules. When productX is being vowed to meet these demands, the "works wuth Ubuntu" logo could be (freely) printed on their packaging.

The decision to print this on the packaging could be left completely with the supplier, and who does, should be held accountable for it. They could be given a "product logo ID", so everyone could easily check if they meet demands.

If too many complaints come in for a product, we could publicize them on a "wall of shame" for using our logo, because of not giving the community what was promised.

In the list the following items could be placed:
Installation Procedure,
License of components, like drivers
forum to ask questions
driver maintainer contact
SLA requirements (problems will be fixed within X)
Duration of support.
sponsorship of QA process site

Meeting different sets of rules could offer different grades of logo's "bronze/silver/gold"

Use a fixed list of rules. When productX is being vowed to meet these demands, the "works wuth Ubuntu" logo could be (freely) printed on their packaging. The decision to print this on the packaging could be left completely with the supplier, and who does, should be held accountable for it. They could be given a "product logo ID", so everyone could easily check if they meet demands. If too many complaints come in for a product, we could publicize them on a "wall of shame" for using our logo, because of not giving the community what was promised. In the list the following items could be placed: Installation Procedure, License of components, like drivers forum to ask questions driver maintainer contact SLA requirements (problems will be fixed within X) Duration of support. sponsorship of QA process site Meeting different sets of rules could offer different grades of logo's "bronze/silver/gold" I do not know how this would work legally, but for suppliers it could mean a easy way to get another "certified" logo on their packaging. For smaller companies they could decide to print it, without expensive costs for certification. This way they could get a competitive edge over the large companies, if they would decide not to join in immediately.

Written by Markec the 5 Jul 08 at 08:26.

Ubuntu Brainstorm was updated in January 2009. Since the idea #10738 was submitted before this update, its rationale and solution are not separated. Please vote accordingly, and if you have the necessary rights, please separate the rationale from the solution. Thanks!

<i>Ubuntu Brainstorm was updated in January 2009. Since the idea #10738 was submitted before this update, its rationale and solution are not separated. Please vote accordingly, and if you have the necessary rights, please separate the rationale from the solution.</i><br /> Thanks!

Written by Umang the 1 Aug 08 at 09:53.

Ubuntu Brainstorm was updated in January 2009. Since the idea #11706 was submitted before this update, its rationale and solution are not separated. Please vote accordingly, and if you have the necessary rights, please separate the rationale from the solution. Thanks!

<i>Ubuntu Brainstorm was updated in January 2009. Since the idea #11706 was submitted before this update, its rationale and solution are not separated. Please vote accordingly, and if you have the necessary rights, please separate the rationale from the solution.</i><br /> Thanks!

Written by DPic the 16 Aug 08 at 16:04.

Ubuntu Brainstorm was updated in January 2009. Since the idea #12265 was submitted before this update, its rationale and solution are not separated. Please vote accordingly, and if you have the necessary rights, please separate the rationale from the solution. Thanks!

<i>Ubuntu Brainstorm was updated in January 2009. Since the idea #12265 was submitted before this update, its rationale and solution are not separated. Please vote accordingly, and if you have the necessary rights, please separate the rationale from the solution.</i><br /> Thanks!

Written by Diggs808 the 4 Jul 08 at 21:23.

Ubuntu Brainstorm was updated in January 2009. Since the idea #10722 was submitted before this update, its rationale and solution are not separated. Please vote accordingly, and if you have the necessary rights, please separate the rationale from the solution. Thanks!

<i>Ubuntu Brainstorm was updated in January 2009. Since the idea #10722 was submitted before this update, its rationale and solution are not separated. Please vote accordingly, and if you have the necessary rights, please separate the rationale from the solution.</i><br /> Thanks!