System76 News: Coreboot and Linux Advances
blog.system76.com
blog.system76.com
My only needs for distros are to install softwares I use and run them. It turns out to be significantly hard, none of the distros do that without glitches, screen tearing and inconsistency across GUI frameworks. Surely I can tweak them to my liking, but the rabbit hole goes very deep until it comes to a satisfying result.
Pop!_OS is the first OS that stay out of the way, I barely notice the existence of OS, and neither do I want to tweak it, and that is the way I want from a distro. The workspace arranging and switching is a nice touch, making it feel like home for tiling window manager users, coming from i3wm, xmonad or whatsnot.
I don't have any obsession with distros. I want one that works. Pop!_OS provides by far the closest experience I get.
From the user perspective, I would say smoother hardware integration (I download the ISO with NVIDIA proprietary drivers, haven't encountered any graphic card comparability problem), consistent theme across gtk and qt based applications , saner defaults and clearer setting structure, good keyboard shortcuts. There are merely less than a dozen shortcuts that are not found in Ubuntu, but very easy to get used to. like win + up/down to switch between workspace.
I know all these can be accomplished by extensions, add-ons and themes. But they do feel different when it is out of the box and carefully curated.
It does however, break things.
https://unix.stackexchange.com/questions/503481/why-does-apt...
I would steer clear of it unless it actually provides anything other than a default nvidia setup.
This is why I became a Mac user. After 15 years of Linux I was just done with all the bullshit, but I guess I could look into Pop!_OS.
Heard this from so many people. We have the latest (2017-2018) MBP at work and every single one has serious keyboard problems. Other than that, I have had crashes and random reboots when on battery, with a black screen error message, sound issues (solved by turning volume down, switching outputs back and forth, or rebooting) wifi problems (solved by switching off bluetooth). And don't get me started on the touch bar. From Mac fans I usually get answers like "you're pressing the touch bar wrong, you need to wait longer"... I'm also missing a decent software management. brew is miles away from apt.
So, for me switching to Mac didn't work out. And the new keyboard is a complete dealbreaker for me. I may still get an older mac with a decent keyboard and put Linux on it.
brew is also miles away from what it used to be. They have recently changed their philosophy about building from source and software support compiled into their built bottles. Did you know that neither mpv or mplayer bottles ship with libdvdread support?
Building mplayer from source fails due to an error building libavcodec against x264. For some reason, the x264 version is not being correctly picked up in the Homebrew build process so it is trying to use a deprecated x264 API that has been built, which is causing it to fail however building the same software outside of Homebrew (same source tarball that Homebrew downloaded) builds just fine with libdvdread and x264 in ffmpeg support.
I'd report it further but the time last someone asked about it they were basically told to fuck off. Their rules for avoiding burnout state the following which really summarizes their recent change in policy:
> 1. Use Homebrew
>Maintainers of Homebrew should be using it regularly[...]
>3. Prioritise Maintainers Over Users
>It's important to be user-focused but ultimately, as long as you follow #1 above, Homebrew's minimum number of users will be the number of maintainers. However, if Homebrew has no maintainers it will quickly become useless to all users and the project will die. As a result, no user complaint, behaviour or need takes priority over the burnout of maintainers. If users do not like the direction of the project, the easiest way to influence it is to make significant, high-quality code contributions and become a maintainer.
Yet proposing a patch for this gets met with "create your own tap and stop bothering us". I'd love to help you, guys, if you weren't gigantic pricks about it!
Maybe because Apple doesn't ship a computer with a DVD drive and hasn't for ~5 years?
Everything else has been miles better than Linux though. I mean, when I left fedora 21 for a Mac I had close to a hundred scripts for modifications to make it tolerable. On my Mac I have 0.
If so, good for you, but that doesn't make a non "one size fits all" approach "bullshit".
I had to manually disable the dedicated graphics card in my laptop or it would get ridiculously hot while idle. This is probably not an issue if you buy a laptop with preinstalled Linux.
I do a lot of presentations. Getting Linux to work with various projectors wasn’t great. Maybe that’s better in 2019, but it’s never been an issue with my Mac. The lack of ports have, but buying a converter solves that.
Updates broke my software and I had to spend a lot of time sorting it out. A more stable Linux distro might have been better.
My external displays never really worked without problems.
Having used a MacBook trackpad makes it really hard to use non-MacBook trackpads.
It’s a range of stuff like that.
I’m sure you could get Linux to be better, even for me, but I don’t want to use a single second on making it happen. I did when I was younger, that’s why I turned to Linux in the first place. I’ve spent my time building gentoo, but the older I get the more I want things to work out of the box so I can spend my time on other things.
Windows requires thumb acrobatics and Alt gr, whereas Macs used shift and option to modify "increasingly".
For everything else I have Emacs :-)
I've been using Gentoo Linux as my desktop/work OS for more than 10 years now, and I have no more problems with it than I do with macOS.
My Gentoo/Linux complaint is that I cannot for the life of me get PDFs to print correctly. While my one main complaint with macOS is that macports and homebrew are pretty crappy compared to portage, in my purely subjective experience of course.
Otherwise, I really like using both, each for different things. They each definitely do different things better than the other, but I don't actually know how much of that has to do directly with the operating systems.
Anyway, they are both unix-y enough for me that it's fine for what I want.
It's always interesting to me to read about people having such bad experiences with mac or linux or anything else really, since that has never been my own experience. Even with Windows, which I really dislike, I've almost never had any bad technical experience with it. (Bad user experiences, sure.)
I don't know if I am just lucky or just have lower standards?
Just because there are many choices doesn't mean you can't make one and stick with it, I've been on Arch for almost a decade now and there aren't many compelling reasons for me to switch all this time later.
I'd think for many the same is true with Ubuntu LTS.
Likewise, the days of the legendary OSX (sorry, MacOS) stability are long-gone. The team has been slowly gutted over the years to work on iOS since it makes them more money. The security issues from a couple years ago show a design team ignoring reasonably security standards and not implementing any kind of testing or QA.
I only have one mac system left and that's simply for testing Safari. Modern Linux is much more stable in my experience.
https://www.zdnet.com/article/dell-linuxs-new-best-friend-50...
Same here. For me the answer was KDE Neon. I have like one or two grievances with KDE Neon currently. One of them being that OBS Studio often stops responding when I try to exit it. But for my use-cases KDE Neon has been the best desktop experience I have had in the 10 years since I switched to exclusively using Linux and FreeBSD. Along the way I have gone through a few different distros.
Even if you disagree, if a pentester uses Kali Linux (a Debian-based rolling release distribution), and they get paid for it, yes. Even then, Kali Linux regularly breaks, so a solution is to run it on VMs with snapshots (or communicate to each other when it breaks, or use a microSD card for a working version).
There's also a clear advantage: you get the newest versions of software much quicker than an OS which updates every half year (or a LTS version which gets updated less often).
Its cheaper just buy a OEM laptop and slap ubuntu on it.
Look at it like you would a Macbook; Apple charges a premium but the benefit the buyer receives from that extra cost is hardware and software that feels cohesive and works perfectly together. I'm not saying System76 has reached that same mark just yet, but it's what they are working towards and they have made great progress in that endeavor.
With all of that said, there's something to buying a used or marked-down Thinkpad and installing your distro of choice; you'll (usually) get a great device with excellent Linux community support, and in my opinion the industrial design of the Thinkpad series is more appealing than System76 machines. Personally I don't care for Lenovo because of their past malware shenanigans, but they do make solid hardware.
I'm giving Dell a try. You can buy them with Ubuntu factory installed or buy with Windows and 'slap the distro of your choice' on it. I have an XPS-13 9370 and after nearly a year, the WiFi finally seems to be working reliably (using Debian Testing.)
I have also used regularly a t450 and t470 for work, and last year bought an anniversary t25 as a Xmas gift for myself :).
Prior to that, I've used T530, T410, T60p, T41, T30, etc.
My boss has been put on notice that a Thinkpad is a "condition of employment" for me - I cannot imagine using anything else.
All of them have been absolutely positively rock solid. No issues as daily drivers for a travelling consultant - lots of plugging and unplugging, moving, backpacks, etc.
Mostly various Windows versions, but T450 and T470 are RHEL full time, and I have a T61 with Lubuntu as well.
That being said, for any brand, there'll be people with good and bad luck/experience. You have to look at your preferences, and stats...
Just bought an X230, put OpenBSD in it and it is just perfect in the summer house. Put a SIM card in it and connect to the internet from everywhere. Superb keyboard, fast, small, durable, everything replaceable.
I also have a T25 at home for development and can't say anything bad from that either, albeit a bit too big for carrying around.
(my ideal complement to current stable would be a 10" or 11" think 8GB linux-compatible... and while dreaming, with a trackpoint. The whole netbook market seems to have bloomed than disappeared - but if ever there was a place to use the little red nubbin instead of tiny trackpad, that was it I think:)
I really feel it's much nicer to travel with this than my slimmer T25, but of course it's subjective.
Check the APN from your operator's settings.
- Try the card first in a phone. Preferably turn on the SIM lock and change the PIN code.
- Insert the card to the laptop, boot.
- `doas ifconfig umb0 apn your.apn.com`
- `doas ifconfig umb0 pin XXXX`
- `doas ifconfig umb0 up`
- Confirm the gateway from `ifconfig umb0` when it appears, should say inet and it's the second IP.
- When gateway is visible, `doas route add -ifp umb0 default XXX.XXX.XXX.XXX`
- Confirm the DNS works, but you should now be able to access internet.
Sometimes when you turn off the power or suspend, you might need to enter the PIN to the card, turn the device up and set the route again. A player automates this with a script. :)
You can store the settings to `/etc/hostname.umb0`.
[0] Lenovo H5321 gw
I have had a few Dells and I think hardware-wise it is the best, but that dual video card setup never worked quite right. Also until Fedora 29 came out (with a newer kernel) the only distro that I could install was the stock Ubuntu that came with the laptop (which didn't have full disk encryption, unfortunately).
I would recommend a Lenovo T580 or Dell XPS 15/5520. I think the Dell hardware is actually nicer than Apple, which is a high compliment.
I got the XPS15 and installed Ubuntu 18.04 (best choice of laptop I could find that had an i9 8950hk, although only Windows is officially supported).
I had heard it was best to replace the Killer WiFi with an Intel mini card. However the Killer WiFi has been rock solid for me with Ubuntu (I have read that Windows has more problems with Killer WiFi than Linux!).
Regular Linux BIOS updates from Dell from within Ubuntu 18.04 - I'm a happy customer.
Edit: comment from elsewhere in this thread: "only three years ago I had to replace the default wireless card in my Dell XPS 13 because the broadcom one was flaky as hell in Linux"
I think that Debian is getting the firmware updates too, though for the last one it didn't apply so I just booted Ubuntu and it worked w/out issue. (It uses EFI which is another benefit of that.)
02:00.0 Network controller: Qualcomm Atheros QCA6174 802.11ac Wireless Network Adapter (rev 32)
Subsystem: Bigfoot Networks, Inc. Killer 1435 Wireless-AC
Kernel driver in use: ath10k_pci
Same. My Thinkpad 25 has already been back twice. And both their field service and their factory service have really gone downhill.
As much as I love the keyboard, this may be my last Thinkpad.
I got my X230 and it's so fast I really question the need for the new CPU generations...
Kudos to them for doing so.
https://cassidyjames.com/resume/
Having used ElementaryOS for two years I had thought that if my next laptop was a System76 I'd give Pop a go.
I do hope they become the Mac of Linux.
System76 does much more than just pre-install the OS. The below comment is from a system76 developer:
https://www.omgubuntu.co.uk/2019/04/system76-launch-pop-os-1...
"System76 laptops aren't rebranded. Clevo is a manufacturer of standardized chassis models for OEMs who lack the sales figures to warrant high volume orders. The individual OEMs get to benefit from lower prices because every OEM is pitching in together to allow Clevo to design and commit high volume orders of chassis on their behalf.
Using a Clevo chassis does not make your laptop a rebrand, in much the same way that a Gigabyte motherboard or Vivo desktop case does not automatically make your custom-built PC a rebranded Gigabyte/Vivo desktop. They manufacture the chassis (incl. battery and motherboard), and then distribute these to OEMs, who then select the components to assemble the chassis with. This also has the benefit of giving the customer a highly serviceable laptop.
This really isn't all that different from what Apple, Dell, Lenovo, HP, etc., are all doing. Many of them are even getting their laptops manufactured in the nearby vicinity of Clevo in a similar fashion. They're just a step closer to the designing stage of their chassis models, because they are able to purchase high volume orders by themselves. They still often outsource firmware development to third parties, rather than writing their own firmware for the hardware they sell.
In comparison to other Clevo-based sellers, System76 also goes the extra mile to select Linux-compatible components during assembly, writes patches to fix drivers in Linux for the hardware selected, flashes custom firmware on them, and are now even driving the process of writing open source firmware for them. You're not going to find Clevo writing open source firmware."
The build quality is not MBP standards, but support has been great (replaced a keyboard no questions asked when a key failed, helped me debug some updates that I screwed up) and the price premium is higher than total DIY, but certainly nothing in the range of say, Apple hardware.
PopOS is pretty nifty and I like it more than stock Ubuntu. I also like the amount of work they are doing to advance the Linux ecosystem hardware wise, software wise, and evangelism wise.
I could quibble about some of the laptop tradeoffs (heavy AF and pretty awful battery life and fan noise) but I knew those going in, and decided they were worth it for a dev machine that mostly lives plugged in on my desk.
So far, yes. Once they start shipping coreboot, the balance changes. They provide something that no other OEM (other than chromebooks and purism atm) do.
There's LAC Portland and they were super friendly, I might try to buy a computer from them if my computer dies (and ask for debian or something).
Also, thanks for the heads up about LAC Portland.
They have the newer thinner versions of that laptop (we use them at work), but they have no enterprise-grade support and they all have different quirks (I mean at least have the same quirk, right...?!). If you're trying to replace a keyboard during business hours, and you're a high-level engineer charging hundreds of dollars per hour, and it takes a long time to change the keyboard and learn one skill one time, it will cost the business a pretty penny.
I'd get the Dell Precision 5530 or XPS 13 w/ Project Sputnik for a business setting. It's Dell, and it's the highest-level laptop they sell, so at least they'll take the machine back if it doesn't work (I believe the XPS/Precision line follow a special QA process from other commodity stuff), and I don't think Project Sputnik will disappear anytime soon (actually expanding IIRC).
Keyboard was so terrible and wifi dropped out in so annoying ways that I end up smashing mine (I reused the CPU and other components in a barebones later). This was 2013, though.
It is large and heavy so I still use my MacBook when traveling.
My laptop had a bad video chip.
My manager's desktop had either a bad SSD or a bad SATA bus.
I won't buy from them.
Their other models do have poor battery life though. The galago pro is especially egregious, I don't know why anyone would buy a 13 inch laptop that only gets 3 hours of battery.
Personally, I think the fundamental issue relates to IP. If the hardware design is made transparent by amazing and freely available documentation you invite infringement claims, particularly from IP trolls. (Threats from competitors are probably more existential, though, at least for large companies.) Often time companies will say that their products contain third-party IP that they cannot disclose, but that's just a roundabout way of saying neither the company nor its suppliers want the hassle.
There are other reasons, too. For example, if you can't consistently provide such documentation it can make you look worse than if you had never bothered as it makes you appear unreliable. But I think the IP issue is what makes it a simple decision, notwithstanding whether the threats are actually substantial.
There's not really any interesting IP in those cores from what we've seen.
If the issue is why Intel, AMD, NXP, etc aren't more transparent with their references, DRM doesn't really explain any of that. The only reason that makes sense to me other than sheer neglect is fear of IP infringement claims, a fear that any developer contemplating releasing their source code has surely struggled with. The patent landscape is a fscking field of indiscriminate landmines.
The "obviousness" test for patent eligibility is farcical. Just because the implementation of some driver seems obvious and straight-forward doesn't mean there doesn't exist a patent. Because of how technology develops--path dependency, foreseeable constraints--the vast majority of implementation details (including patented details) are obvious as understood by engineers, even if they've never encountered them before. But in practice obvious has effectively come to mean novel; were it any other way the vast majority of patents would never issue. And without omniscience you can never consistently know ahead of time whether something is novel or not; not if you're doing anything worthwhile. (Copyright is predicated on novelty, but copyright law permits independent development; patent law does not.)
Patent claims usually turn on minute implementation details. (A result, no doubt, of the surfeit of patents. Were it otherwise patents would stop industry completely rather than slowly bleeding it.) I'm not a patent lawyer, but I know that in general (in the U.S.) any claim needs to make a prima facie showing, which over the past several decades SCOTUS has required provide increasingly direct evidence. In as much as you raise the costs of discovering the evidence necessary to make a prima facie case, you've reduced your exposure to lawsuits.
If you're intent on targeting a particular company, and especially on targeting a particular company with a particular patent, opaque implementations are not much of a hurdle. But if you have a mountain of patents, the transactional costs of matching those patents to particular instances of [potential] infringement are quite significant. You not only need to expend effort to reverse engineer, but also effort to craft an argument to convince a court that your discoveries are legitimate. If an implementation is open it's much cheaper to accomplish both. Remember, labor is the single biggest expense in the Western world, and these types of activities are the epitome of labor intensive tasks. Reverse engineering a binary blob may be easy conceptually, but its absolutely costly in terms of labor, especially when it comes to pinning down the details in a way that matches particular claims in a patent.
The reverse is also true: if you have a mountain of products and components with significant exposure to infringement liability, opaqueness can substantially reduce your risk and effective liability. Even if exposure merely scales linearly with market or company size it suffices to explain the behavior of large companies, but I doubt it scales linearly. For one thing, larger companies are juicier targets, all else being equal, from the perspective of an individual claimant.
DRM for a general purpose device needs way more than that. You need a full 'Trusted Execution Environment' to run the code that uses those keys.
I only know it didn't render when I came in... disabled uBlock Origin, and it did render.
There was no need for them to create their own distro. That is a huge expense just to reinvent a wheel that has already been reinvented ten thousand times. And in the end most of their users will probably just load up the one they use already.
It is basically just Ubuntu, with a custom desktop environment (that is actually perfectly fine although optional), but more importantly, ppas for up-to-date NVIDIA drivers and CUDA.
It's sort of like if a machine learning person installed Ubuntu on their workstation, did all the configuration work to get it working with their GPUs, and then turned that into a distro.
As good FOSS citizens, they would be encouraged to try to upstream all of their tweaks to GNOME or Ubuntu instead, but that's no guarantee that the changes would actually be accepted. Isn't that how Unity started in the first place?
It's a few add-ons to Ubuntu.
> To call it a re-skinned Ubuntu brushes over all of the features and quality-of-life improvements that Pop! developers work diligently to create.
The risk is that some features like power management will only work well with their OS and not other distros.
Many free/open-source advocates have been complaining about NIH syndrome for years and years and years... to no avail.
Consider, for example, the situation with window managers and desktop environments. Off the top of my head, we have Gnome, KDE, Unity, XFCE, Openbox, dwm, Gala, KWin, Fluxbox, Enlightenment, JWM, and Ratpoison -- to name only 12 of the remarkably large number available for Linux. I suspect there are well over 100 window managers/desktop environments for Linux actively used in the wild today. And that's just window managers/desktop environments.
The number of people who have complained over the decades about this proliferation is... quite large. The number of words that have been written and spoken in waste, and the number of flame wars that have raged on, over which particular choice is best is also... remarkably large. Search for "Gnome versus KDE" or "Unity versus Gnome" if you want to see some examples.
I've come to accept this is The Way of free/open-source software.
On the flip side, some people love all this variety and choice.
To my personality type, I would wonder why you wouldn't want a replaceable window manager, and I consider a reaction like yours to be the product of some kind of odd software design authoritarianism.
But we're not both right or both wrong, this is just a point where we differ.
PS: a bunch of those desktop environments you cite are not actually window managers.