Category: Technology

Note: This entry is now wildly out of date.  Try these instructions at your own risk.  If I get a few moments, I will revise these instructions in the future. 

I’ve been in contact with an ALSA hacker, Tobin Davis, over a series of patches that provide support for the sound chipset (intel-hda) that is part of the HP DV2000 laptop.

His patches over ALSA 1.0.14rc3 enable the following new features:

• The headphone port now works, and the speakers automute when the headphones are plugged in.
• The microphone port now works, with great sound quality.
• The built-in mic on the monitor now works, though obviously with worse sound quality due to ambient noise.

The new patches aren’t perfect. I’m noticing some sound quality issues at high volumes, and in order to get it to work Tobin had to essentially enable two PCM channels (PCM and PCM-2), which have a very strange behavior. The first one controls the volume directly from the sound system. The second one controls the volume only between the sound system and the speakers (and thus, will have no effect on the sound when the headphones are plugged in). The master volume control effectively modulates both of these. Tobin has told me that the chipset produced by Conexant is particularly weird, which is why he had to this. I find that it’s not so bad, as long as I keep a launcher to gnome-volume-control set up so that I can control it, knowing these rules.

That said, it’s a huge improvement over out of the box sound support for Ubuntu (which is ALSA 1.0.11). Inside this post you’ll find further instructions, which are adapted from a text document Tobin sent his tester group via e-mail. These are step by step instructions to set up 1.0.14rc3 ALSA drivers plus Tobin’s latest patch.

Continue reading HOWTO: Get microphone, headphone, automute and sound properly working on an HP DV2000 laptop in Linux

A surprisingly articulate post on OSNews about Free Software:

Asking me to get off my a$$ and code drivers for this baby is what I consider elitist and a very unreasonable demand on the end user. It’s one thing that gives GNU/Linux zealots a very bad name in the real world.

I have sneaking suspicion that you get this response from the Linux community because we feel you’re placing unreasonable demands on us. Your points are valid, but your energy is misdirected. Unfortunately for those who don’t like to code, that’s how software is created and improved. We invite you to participate in our projects in a variety of capacities including but not limited to programming, but of course participation is not required.

I think that Linux “zealots” get a bad name because much of the “real world” believes in a culture of entitlement. Look at everybody living life with a chip on their shoulder, blaming everyone else for their problems and scoffing at the notion that they take responsibility for their own situation. Somewhere along the line we stopped believing in opportunity as a means of realizing our dreams and began to foster the idea that we’re entitled to our expectations. In “Linux land,” we believe that the opportunity to participate in our information society is fundamental to our inherent desire as human beings to better our situation and control our own destiny.

Of course, money can make just about any dream come true. Mark Shuttleworth, for [example], invested $10 million to help make the Ubuntu project a reality. But years ago my great-grandmother told me the story of how my family came to America with nothing but the promise that here they would find a land of opportunity. This is the same promise we make with free software. This isn’t elitist, this is egalitarian.

I have to say, this is part of what makes me love Free Software.  It’s this idea of widespread opportunity.  Sure, F/OSS has power structures and means of coercion/control built into certain parts of it, but for the most part, it’s based upon a very simple, powerful, and egalitarian idea.  “Anyone can improve this, anyone can make it better.”  It’s that kernel of an idea that makes any process — whether software production, book editing, encyclopedia editing, or even beer brewing, more enjoyable to those involved, and, as a side effect, better for the general public.

Take a look at these two posts from a ZDNet debate:

A poster under the name “jerryleecooper” says,

Vista is far more powerful than windows XP, and runs twice as fast. It is also much harder to pirate, and this point more than anything else has the Linux crowd in a panic.

and, in a follow-up post,

Are you saying that this linux can run on a computer without windows underneath it, at all? As in, without a boot disk, without any drivers, and without any services?  That sounds preposterous to me.

Is this serious, or satire?  If it’s serious, it’s absurd.  If it’s satire, it’s genius.

A friend from NYU, Luke Geldermans, pointed me to this website the other day. It’s really an amazing example of how much real demand there is for Linux on the desktop.

The website provides a way for Dell customers to vote on the issues which are most important to them. The number 1 issue right now is making Linux available as an install option on their Dell PCs. There are a slew of issues below that related to gaining driver support for Linux, and offering Windows with OOo and Firefox, and even offering OS-less computers to avoid the Microsoft tax.

It’d be interesting to see how this pans out, but in the meanwhile, go ahead and contribute a vote!

I just picked up a copy of Dreaming in Code from Barnes & Noble. Will probably devour it in the next couple of days.

Google has an interesting talk about “How Open Source Projects Survive Poisonous People” at Google Video.

On February 13, they’re going to have the creator of VIM, Bram Moolenaar, giving a talk on VIM7.  What’s funny is that Bram, who has been working full-time on VIM for the past few years (living entirely on donations and money votes for VIM features) has now been hired by Google.  Smart move.

I got fired up by the evidence coming out of Microsoft from yesterday, and decided to write a post to Miguel de Icaza’s blog.

Here’s what I wrote:

Hi Miguel,

It looks like a new set of “Halloween Documents” have come out, thanks to a case in Iowa, Comes et. al. v. Microsoft (http://iowaconsumercase.org/index.html). I’m wondering if you have any comments on this document in particular, which suggests that Microsoft management knew full well they were “stealing Java” to intentionally marginalize the cross-platform language issue.

A select quote from the document, “Screw Sun, cross-platform will never work. Let’s move on and steal the Java language.”
Here’s the e-mail archives, which was submitted into evidence:

Click to access PX_2768.pdf

I’m wondering, given these thoughts from within Microsoft management, and given the recent news of Sun open sourcing the Java language under GPL terms, how is it that you can still push for the Mono project on Linux? Aren’t we always going to be fighting an uphill battle against a monopoly company protecting its biggest cash cow: the Windows platform?

Although my question was more “devil’s advocate” and meant to rile him up, Miguel provided some of the strongest and most cogent arguments for Mono that I’ve seen on record.

I just want to say great work to Miguel and the Mono team, and that if you ever doubted your raison d’etre, all it would take is reading this thread to be convinced! You’ve certainly convinced me!

Update: it’s really this kind of dependency on Windows I’m worried about in .NET. I think it’s just that the culture of the Java runtime is one of platform independence, whereas .NET from Microsoft is one of “platform dominance,” and Mono is some sort of stepping stone between Microsoft’s single-platform vision and those of us who want to write cross-platform apps using .NET.

Well, I’ve always suspected that C# was nothing but a Java rip without cross-platform support, meant to marginalize Java so that cross-platform languages don’t become as pervasive as Microsoft’s single-platform, Windows-only languages. Now, evidence has come out of Microsoft e-mail archives that proves not only that they just “stole Java” in those pivotal years, but that managers knew full well they would never make an effort to keep the language cross-platform.  A classic “embrace and extend” situation.
A select quote from the document, “Screw Sun, cross-platform will never work. Let’s move on and steal the Java language.”

You can read the entire thing in a scanned copy from the Iowa case Comes et. al. v. Microsoft Corp.

Update: my discussion with Miguel de Icaza makes this seem “less official,” but I still think the mentality from this document also pervaded the mentality of .NET development, specifically that cross-platform would never be a goal of Microsoft .NET.

Just saw this on Salon.com, in a letter to the editor about Scott Rosenberg’s new book, “Dreaming in Code”:

There are three options you have when developing software:

1. Quality

2. Lots of features.

3. Low cost

Pick any two.

When you actually go through the combinations, it’s quite funny, and poignant.

Also, check out this excerpt from Rosenberg’s book, called “Words fail us.”  I’m currently working on a software project and we’re doing lots of new and innovative stuff, and I can’t even express how much I connect with this article.  Choosing the right vocabulary may be the single toughest thing in working on software team projects today.

I just read an interesting position paper that suggests the new version of the GNU GPL will marginalize the Free Software Foundation.

I’m not going to say I agree, yet. But I think the author may be right.