points by alex43578 3 days ago | 0 comments
It’s not the OEMs job to ensure compatibility with every OS. They shouldn’t have to ensure it works well with Windows XP, for example.
[–] incompatible 3 days ago
They should at least be releasing sufficient hardware specs so that people can use the hardware they've purchased how they like.
[–] unethical_ban 1 day ago
They can do whatever they want, of course. But why wouldn't they support Linux? It's a weak argument to compare Ubuntu and Fedora, modern freely available operating systems in wide use by the tech community, to Windows XP.
[–] herpderperator 3 days ago
[–] alex43578 3 days ago
[–] bigyabai 3 days ago
They basically do. ChromeOS runs a Linux kernel, so the userland has everything it needs to run CUDA. FreeBSD is a first-class target for Nvidia drivers, and macOS used to be supported too but stopped signing Nvidia code. Nevertheless, AArch64 is still supported for CUDA et. al..
It is up to Nvidia to support whatever platforms they want users to be on. In their case, it means supporting many OSes.
[–] alex43578 3 days ago
My point is that's not Nvidia's responsibility. The article itself admits the laptop "ships with Windows on ARM", so support for another OS shouldn't be expected, even if NVIDIA supports other platforms and other product lines differently.
[–] bigyabai 3 days ago
There are OEMs that refuse this responsibility. If that's the vindication you wanted, there you go. This specific issue is not a catastrophic oversight though.
[–] mrheosuper 3 days ago