Ubuntu 'broken' on Dell Inspiron Mini 10

Install windows, like anyone sane.

do what every intelligent consumer does before a purchase? Namely, his homework.

Signed,

Curious

Blasphemy! Lies and lies, 2009 will be the year of Linux on the desktop! It has to be, it's free!

Linux is easy; Linus is a breeze; Linux is ready for the unwashed masses! Yeah right!

Do you Linux suppliers and pushers actually expect the ordinary, grossly non techy, grandma types to want to use this? Never happen.

Hey, my grandma uses Linux! Not on that Dell piece of crap, though...

Sonny - it obviously has nothing to do with the fact that there are standard Intel chips internally, surely Linux (and by association, your grandma) has up-to-date drivers?

Is it really the computer's fault, or just immature OS support? This is part of the problem with Linux: the fact that there aren't as many drivers for it nor do they end up being tested as much as for commercial OSes. With such a small segment of sales involving Linux, there is even less incentive to get everything right for it.

I'd also expect that if Dell simply said that the Mini 10 would not be available with Linux due to problematic drivers and software that these Linux goons would be in the same uproar.

Damned if they do, damned if they don't. My biggest complaint about my Mini 9 is the crap trackpad which I keep accidentally hitting and resetting my cursor.

After six frustrating months dual booting three different versions of Linux, and being unable to get any of them working with all my hardware in spite of numerous bits of useless advice, I finally gave up. It's nice to see a Linux guru in the same spot. Thanks for brightening my day.

Intel, you know. The drivers for Intel chips are written by Intel people.
But this problem does not sound like a video driver to me...

I thought most people were running OSX on the Dell Mini's?

As for choosing windows like anyone sane, it really depends on what work you do. I really would hate to have to go back to windows as my workflow is heaps easier under linux.

fwiw though, i'm switching from a linux desktop to a macbook pro... though I think i'll dual boot that, and not with windows. ;)

This is all pretty consistent with my Linux experience :(

You get what you pay for!

A lot of people just don't seem to get this.

I've had not a few problems over the years with Dell drivers in Windows. They seem to love shipping their own versions of everything, usually an old version of the manufacturer driver. In most cases I fixed my problem by downloading the driver for the part directly.

This is all at work of course, at home I build my own, wouldn't touch Dell with the proverbial barge pole.

Hey M$ fanboys,
I would like to mention that you are completely wrong.
The open letter by this guy was funny to read. He does not deserve this frustration, but he can't be Linux Geek also. Any geek knows that Pulsobo chipset is not working under Linux.
I was surprised to find out that this hardware found inside Linux laptop.
As for the rest, I personally had a lot of problems with Linux (it's my primary OS for over 7 years). But I had much more with any version of Windows since 3.1 up to 7 which I use at work.
If you don't like Linux, pay M$ and enjoy reinstalling each time (Yes I know some people have their Windows installations for few years, but they are rare).
Bottom line, do whatever you wish, use whatever you wish, just don't bash other peoples choices.
Anyway, this seems to be pure OEM fault.
And since according to Dell, they sell 1/3 of their netbooks with Linux and have similar to XP return rates, This case is not representative.
For those stating that most of the Linux laptops reinstalled with Windows, the other are also true.
Since there is limited choice of Linux or OS free notebooks/netbooks, we pay M$ tax by buying hardware we want with software we don't need.
I have 4 XP licenses from IBM's X31, HP notebook (don't really remember the model), Sony vaio laptop, and HP's xw4400 and xw4300. 1 Vista license from Dell's Inspirion 1520 (was cheaper then Linux version and had better specs).
And I can't claim money return for this licenses in my country :(
I have never used this versions they all where wiped out at the first moment.
P.S.
BTW, my parents using Linux for few years on laptop and desktop and they are perfectly happy compared to XP experience.

This is totally Dell's fault.

They select the hardware and the software and are responsible for ensuring the two work together.

Why use a Paulsbo chipset with a OS that can't support it?

And why ship with an OS that can't support the wireless card?

Dell is in violation of the Uniform Commercial Code for selling non-functional equipment.

Settle down Beavis.

Buy a netbook at Zareason or System76, those guys will help you.

Dell is not a reliable company.

crap like this only reinforces the public's belief that linux is only for neckbeards and servers.

I looked at the couple Dell machines and wondered why they offer 8.04 when 9.04 has been out now for some time. I have had 9.04 on my Acer Extensa for over six months now.
There is something else Dell and others do, they use Microsoft's ASL compiler when preparing the BIOS. This is a PoS that doesn't quite comply with the ACPI specification everyone else, including the free OSen, uses and leaves you with a broken DSDT on anything other than Windows. MS up to their dirty tricks again.

Let me see..Dell blames Linux, Linux blames Dell..familiar story.

I have an Asus P5E3 Deluxe mobo & 4gb OCZ 'High Performance'sic, DDR3 Ram(OCZ3P1600EB2GK),that refuses to NOT Blue Screen on me,because Asus put a piece of redundant crap on the mobo, as a memory controller.
The customer(me) thinks it's a piece of junk, masquerading as a memory controller, that's the real problem, but the point is, will Asus,who, incidentally have the crappiest site on the web for any hardware manufacturer support service,accept that it's their fault & update the drivers? Not a chance in a million,each just blames the other,while the consumer is stuck with a piece of expensive JUNK..Thank You ASUS.

Let's see:

* Dell agrees to preload Ubuntu;

* Dell consults with Canonical, various UIs are built and tweaked;

* Dell ships a fairly standard Intel reference platform;

* One showstopper bug slips through with the 802.11 card; Dell fails at due diligence as far as working in a patch and updating their software image of 8.04;

* Ubuntu totally breaks support for said Intel platform in a newer release.

So.. who sucks here?

The breakage is due to major Linux kernel and X.org refactorings; the giant 'UNDER CONSTRUCTION' animgif of open source strikes again.

Unfortunately, neither Dell nor Ubuntu considered including an older X.org as an option so a major installed base wouldn't be disrupted until the shiny newness is complete. I'm sure Ubuntu and Canonical consider this Dell's responsibility ("hey, you're getting it free"), and Dell thinks it's anyone else's responsibility ("hey, we're not a software company").

Unfortunately, Dell's preloading attempt is permanently SNAFU. This is not the first time they've shipped a system with one version only to see support regress in the next. This is also not the first time they've failed to pitch in at solving it for their customers and continued to ship a years-outdated image instead.

So - it's "not anyone's fault," but both organizations really deserve a smack upside the head. Now, note how much revenue Dell makes from Ubuntu (less than a rounding error), and how much Canonical make or receive from Dell (likely nothing monetarily, Dell hasn't submitted any patches so the Ubuntu project isn't gaining)...

...then realize that the best chance for Canonical (and by extension, Ubuntu) to become financially self-sustaining is to get users hooked just long enough to consider paid support when everything breaks in version N+1, and who were we counting on to fix this mess again?

[This is not really meant to be a slag, it's just that detailing the situation - and the lack of incentives for resolving it - sounds like a slag because it is in fact this awful.]

Let's see:

* Dell agrees to preload Ubuntu;

* Dell consults with Canonical, various UIs are built and tweaked;

* Dell ships a fairly standard Intel reference platform;

* One showstopper bug slips through with the 802.11 card; Dell fails at due diligence as far as working in a patch and updating their software image of 8.04;

* Ubuntu totally breaks support for said Intel platform in a newer release.

So.. who sucks here?

The breakage is due to major Linux kernel and X.org refactorings; the giant 'UNDER CONSTRUCTION' animgif of open source strikes again.

Unfortunately, neither Dell nor Ubuntu considered including an older X.org as an (automatic/clueless-user-capable) option so a major installed base wouldn't be disrupted until the shiny new hotness is complete. I'm sure Ubuntu and Canonical consider this Dell's responsibility ("hey, you're getting it free"), and Dell thinks it's anyone else's responsibility ("hey, we're not a software company").

Unfortunately, Dell's preloading attempt is permanently SNAFU. This is not the first time they've shipped a system with one version only to see support regress in the next. This is also not the first time they've failed to pitch in at solving it for their customers and continued to ship a years-outdated image instead.

So - it's "not anyone's fault," but both organizations really deserve a smack upside the head. Now, note how much revenue Dell makes from Ubuntu (less than a rounding error), and how much Canonical make or receive from Dell (likely nothing monetarily, Dell hasn't submitted any patches so the Ubuntu project isn't gaining)...

...then realize that the best chance for Canonical (and by extension, Ubuntu) to become financially self-sustaining is to get users hooked just long enough to consider paid support when everything breaks in version N+1, and who were we counting on to fix this mess again?

[This is not really meant to be a slag, it's just that detailing the situation - and the lack of incentives for resolving it - sounds like a slag because it is in fact this awful.]

When I was investing my time effort and money on a new box I knew that Linux was better at utilizing some hardware then other hardware choices. So before the money left my hand i did my research and I ended up with minimal problems using Linux as my primary OS. I suspect the user cited above could have looked harder at the available information before he laid out his cash and had a better experience.
Who is to blame for the problems? Ubuntu, Dell, Intel or the purchaser. To my way of thinking there is enough blame to go around to everyone involved.

Dell ships the laptop with the preinstalled OS. It's their responsibility to make sure that the version of the OS they have offered actually works.
If they can't get Ubuntu to work on the hardware, then they shouldn't offer it. Maybe have a nice note about how they're working with the OS provider to solve the issue.
If Dell are shipping non-booting laptops, they have a QA problem, regardless of the underlying issues causing the boot failure.

"If they can't get Ubuntu to work on the hardware, then they shouldn't offer it. Maybe have a nice note about how they're working with the OS provider to solve the issue."

Exactly, but they've decided to treat these models as if they were ship-and-forget appliances instead. A visit to http://dell.com/ubuntu , which is the only way to find non-netbook preloads - well, now they're down to only two models anyway, but not long ago their first batch of 6.06 and 7.04 systems were still posted, months after 8.10 was released.

Similarly, http://dell.com/linux is another 'secret' link. Short and memorable when handed to the selected audience, but good luck getting there from the homepage! Note how much it says about desktops (nothing).

Part of the problem is that Ubuntu makes two releases in the time it takes a big entity like Dell to begin to adapt to a single new cut of Windows (which only happens every few years). It's like watching a tortoise try to converse with a honeybee, and the source of my snark above (sorry, Mark, but give it some thought).

I'm so vocal about this because things shouldn't really be this bad, and I'd like to see them get better so I can get on with the rest of my life: it's a damn sight easier to point people to a preload with factory support than to get stuck providing it yourself. OEMs like Dell need to be more agile, but FOSS also needs to take a deep breath, remember that hardware and filesystem support can be backported as modules, and realize that every eggs-and-milk-minder doesn't need the most bleeding-edge dependencies. If Linux is a shining beacon of immaculate design and stability, why the constant stampede for a newer release? :D

Obviously. And the list of sh*tty workarounds -- patching, rebuilding, public keys -- are unrealistic for any servicable, engineering-grade system.

If the Linux platform can't provide pluggable drivers, as the unit of modularity, against a stable kernel API (or couple thereof) -- it's not an engineering-grade solution.

Sad, though.

Probably some geeks will disagree with me -- but the fact that they have nothing better to do with their lives than quidibble bits & confuplate re-gribbling some detailimon..

Just tends to prove it's not a "wrapped, high-level platform" capable of successfully encapsulating the low-level hardware & supporting users & applications *above* that bare-metal level.

Too many geeks, spoil the user experience.

This is the world of Linux. Aren't you glad you like Linux?

"Open Sauce" operating system? Is that the nickname for Windows 7?

People, please step back and think about the problem. This blind hatred for something is a clear demonstration of ignorance on EPIC proportions.

Realise the following:

(1) The Dell Mini 10 comes in two variants. One uses Poulsbo chipset. The IGP in this chipset is the GMA500. The other version (called Mini 10v) has the well known GMA950.

(2) The GMA500 isn't made by Intel. In fact, its based on the PowerVR SGX and done by a company called IMG tech. The solution is licensed to Intel.

(3) The driver for the GMA500, downright sucks monkey's balls! (Doesn't matter if its the Linux or Windows driver!)

(4) On Linux, its closed source and its specific to kernel versions. In the case of Ubuntu, it needs kernel 2.6.28-14...The latest one is kernel 2.6.28-15, as it has implemented the proper security update. (The 8 year old one that was recently found).

Effectively, no one can do anything if this driver is not properly maintained...And that's the problem! In fact, its a bloody mess when it was implemented!

This is a clear example if manufacturers don't actively work and cooperate, everyone gets hurt. (Dell, Linux, and Intel).

Currently, there's an attempt to write an open driver (really a hack job) to get the GMA500 working.

At this time, RESEARCH hardware for Linux compatibility BEFORE buying! Do NOT blindly trust the manufacturer recommendations! (If you want the Dell Mini 10, get the Mini 10v instead).

(5) The other major factor is that the whole graphics stack of Linux is being re-done...People from Intel, Xorg, and a number of other folks are re-writing and moving bits to make things better in the long term.

ie: Infrastructure is being laid down so that things can be implemented more easily. (Currently, only Nvidia's VDPAU being able to properly accelerate HD video playback).

This latter factor will cause pains for end-users. The pain is worth it in the long term if things like OpenCL, and wider support for video accelerated playback are the end goals in mind.

The above is the kind of information that tech news/gossip websites leave out.

How many people got screwed over drivers on various MS OSs?

Anybody remember HP telling everybody they had to buy all new printers because they refused to write drivers for the ones everyone already had? That's expensive when you have a big company.

And Lexmark?

And the win-modems?

And the sound cards?

And the wireless cards?

And scanners?

The list goes on....

Oh, and maybe the reviewer didn't notice people in the Dell forum complaining that the machine drops it's wireless connection under XP too....

Most of those now work in GNU+Linux and freeBSD but still don't work for people that paid for XP64, Windows Server or Vista or Win7....

http://linuxhaters.blogspot.com/

I cant wait until they get a hold of this!

Lets face it, linux as a desktop was and always has been broken to a wishbone, only the ignorant and arrogant continue with this philosophy of giving up everything useful to sustain their delusion that the OS will survive and compete with its propriety counterparts.

If you want something that works ,use Windows.
If you want to make something work ,use GNU/Linux.

I'd second zaReason, but I've no practical experience with them.

I loves System76, though. My current server (their nettop, actually) is completely filled with awesome. Because it's (in as much as they have influence on it) Designed for Linux, things actually work. They know their stuff and make sure your hardware works for you.

The netbook at zaReason looks better, though, and might be my next netbook purhcase (system76's nettop is fixed at 1GB RAM; thanks Windows users, for crapping on the netbook market; sadly, system76 and zaReason aren't big enough to be able to custom-build their mobos and things or force the mobo vendors to design for Linux :()

Funny how you mentioned that driver issue with HP. Ever noticed how, since they pulled that stunt in 2001, HP printers have become increasingly rare in the workplace?

I have seen an explosion in the deployment of Canon, Xerox, Brother and Konica devices - but nary an HP to be seen. And I've worked in a LOT of places.

It seems that you can pull a stunt like that only once: Nobody seriously considers buying HP printers anymore, and a lack of trust is one prime reason.

By the way, I wouldn't get too high-and-mighty about drivers, if I were you. Do remember that a vast number of drivers under Linux were rendered unusable when the 2.6 kernel was adopted. Many drivers were never updated, and consequently, never saw the light of day again.

@Thomas W: Point is, pluggable drivers exist and Linux actually makes an effort to keep the interface fairly stable - there's a reason why nVidia is able to ship a binary blob and have it work more often than not, and distributions (including Ubuntu) are using the feature.

But new FOSS hardware support (for the next new chipset, SATA controller, etc) generally isn't backported, since developers are working against the head of the stable tree and nobody can be bothered to do the work and test.

I dunno, this is probably a windmill, as far as tilting goes; pulling the latest 2.6 is supposed to be the equivalent of accepting security / stability / functionality fixes, and when nothing's regressed, it actually goes smoothly... but the sort of work that gets tossed into a stable series means at least one user is going to get an unlucky surprise. Which is why distributors like Ubuntu try to take a snapshot of a point release like, say, 2.6.123 and backport patches for a given named release, but "new hardware support" is outside the scope of that work.

Unfortunately this means that, if [Manufacturer] craps out a new chipset, or [OEM] deposits a device using the new chip, chances are that the existing stable release may not support it and there's no well-accepted protocol for OEMs or users to add that support short of waiting for the next release.

[Now, this graphics whinging is unusual because X.org is now extremely modular - and was 'modular enough' before - so bringing in a new graphics driver usually isn't a big deal at all. So that's something that most distributions don't have a problem picking up as long as X.org backports it to the last-popular-release of X.org (sometimes happens, sometimes doesn't). The discussion above suggests the problem with this particular hardware is really just the lack of a decent driver at all - which Dell presumably expected Intel to take care of, since Intel is Intel and all.]

That's Linux for you. Sounds just like installing Linux on any other hardware. The 3 weeks extra it takes is probably for some poor bastard who has to install Linux.

With amount of time it takes to get a Linux OS up and running with all the drivers, it's cheaper just to install Windows.

And the guy who wrote the article.

There is NO SUCH THING as a Linux Mini 10. There is a Linux Mini 10v.

The reason for there being a Mini 10v is *because* Linux cannot currently work on the Mini 10. There is currently no real support for the GMA500 graphics chipset.

Now it's possible of course that you can buy a Linux Mini 10 maybe. But (as suggested earlier) if you go to http://dell.co.uk/ubuntu then you will see no 10, only a 10v.

Linux, although better than Windows is many ways, is not yet compatible with all of the hardware available.

So when buying Linux hardware, remember to check it's compatible. Support companies that actively support Linux!

For WiFi: Products based on the Ralus chipset (Edimax in the UK)

For Graphics: Intel and ATI (except the GMA500, which isn't by Intel)

As long as you choose the right hardware, Linux JUST WORKS. But currently only a few of us have bothered to find this out for ourselves.

Isn't this risk and part of the satisfaction of using Linux. It's a homebrew solution and if doesn't work, you got what you paid for it--nothing!

I'll just point at the solid running of redhat servers which is another Linux distro. All you linux haters tell these companioes they are using a "substandard product"

http://customers.redhat.com/

I bring your attention especially to:
Wall Street Systems Boosts Revenues, Cuts Costs by Migrating to Red Hat Enterprise Linux

on page 2

But what does the worlds bank know eh?

As for the individual user in the article, he has been burned by Dell, not Linux. Dell have made poor choices in their choice of shipped Linux config and selected hardware for the device.

Dell have clearly chosen the cheapest hardware (common for Dell) and then tried to make it work with their chosen distribution. They could have been smart and selected very compatible hardware and had a tonne less issues and a lot fewer disgruntled users, but then they wouldnt be able to charge for support would they.

I use Linux on 2 of my systems and BSD on the other. Works great every time. I see no reasno to purchase an OS when a free one will do one for free and in many cases BETTER.

This is so obviously a conspiracy by Dell to make sure Linux got a bad name.

What? Not one soul switched a machine on and found "THEY DON'T FOOKING WORK!!!"

"Ubuntu 'broken' on Dell Inspiron Mini 10"

Ubuntu works on thousands of configurations. Dell are to blame for hurting the image of Linux and if Canonical had any balls they would sue and insist that every customer receive a 'fixed' machine (not OS as this article would have it).

Does anyone believe that Mark Shuttleworth was not angry about this? Ubuntu or Linux's chance to do well was squandered because as this article shows:- Dell couldn't be in the wrong here . . .

I've had the exact same problem with the mini 10 (my daughter bought it with her saved up birthday money in June) - I'm not an IT professional so have spent the past 3 hours in on hold in the telephone hell that Dell laughingly call Customer Services trying to get some help on fixing the problem.

I given up now - they've broken me. My 9 year old daughter is now the possessor of a six month old laptop that has been out of the box twice - both times to establish that it is still not working.