If I was to take a box that had been cobbled together with various bits and pieces over the years and try to install Vista on it would it be reasonable for me to say to Microsoft "I'm sorry, but you sold me this Vista... now it doesn't work with my hardware... I hold you responsible" ???
In fact, I probably don't possess one machine that could run Vista properly yet do I complain?!?! No, of course I don't because Microsoft say "This is what you need to run our OS"... but would I be trying to upgrade? No, of course I wouldn't be because I could buy a new Dell base unit or whatever with Vista pre-installed for probably less than it'd cost me to upgrade memory, drives, peripherals etc. So let's just face the fact... we deliver Ubuntu PCs with compatible hardware, just as Apple deliver Macs with hardware all designed to compliment the OS and Microsoft certify PC setups for sale in retail outlets in exactly the same way. If we could actually get Linux out there we wouldn't have these discussions... 90% of potential customers won't want to install from ISOs they'll want to buy it all in a box that they then plug in and works... in this scenario incompatible legacy wireless cards are totally and utterly irrelevant. If you don't sell them wireless in the first place you put a big leaflet in the box saying "here are our recommended wireless cards, certified to work" and if they choose to buy another then they're just idiots - just like the Mac user who buys software designed for Windows. Sorry, I have little sympathy for this whole argument when moving forward. I run Ubuntu on machines designed for Windows and it does a very good job... but that isn't what your target audience will want to do... they'll want a complete solution, like Apple provides very effectively. Sean
-- ubuntu-uk@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-uk https://wiki.kubuntu.org/UKTeam/
