Difference between revisions of "Talk:Suggested hardware"

From LinuxMCE
Jump to: navigation, search
m
Line 4: Line 4:
  
 
Macca, I think that the opposite should happen.  [[tested good hardware]] and [[tested bad hardware]] should be redirected here.  There's nothing worse than having to look on 2 pages and still not knowing the answer.  There are 3 states of hardware good, bad and unknown.  So you should at least promote a page called "untested hardware".  Now if I have a piece of hardware I'd have to check [[tested good hardware]], [[tested bad hardware]] and "untested hardware" in order to know the status of my device.  IMHO that sucks.  Why can't I just go to 1 page and see what the status of my device is ?  I suggest a table with a status column.
 
Macca, I think that the opposite should happen.  [[tested good hardware]] and [[tested bad hardware]] should be redirected here.  There's nothing worse than having to look on 2 pages and still not knowing the answer.  There are 3 states of hardware good, bad and unknown.  So you should at least promote a page called "untested hardware".  Now if I have a piece of hardware I'd have to check [[tested good hardware]], [[tested bad hardware]] and "untested hardware" in order to know the status of my device.  IMHO that sucks.  Why can't I just go to 1 page and see what the status of my device is ?  I suggest a table with a status column.
 +
 +
 +
I don't want to get into a turf war or pissing contest here. That helps no-one. A few notes;
 +
*A single page is best.
 +
*Any list of this kind needs to be clear and concise. Currently the suggested_hardware page is neither.
 +
*For ease of use, the list should be alphabetised. Is there a way to do this automatically?
 +
*The device naming convention should be standardised. ManufacturerName_ModelName works well and seems to be widely in use on this wiki.
 +
*Similarily there should be a standard layout for the device articles. At the very top should be a status section stating if it works, what version of linuxmce it works with (future-proofing. Like all things, easy doing it from the start, hard to add on later) etc. This should be short and to the point, any extra information about why it doesn't work etc should go in the problems and pitfalls section. This layout should also include a personal experience section (at the end) which users should tag. This allows follow up questions on the forum or the discussion page. Maybe we should create some templates called template_motherboard or motherboard_layout for each device type?
 +
*If the status of a device is not known, it doesn't go on the list. Otherwise you end up with a list of every motherboard etc known to man. There are [[http://motherboards.org  other sites]] that do this, and far better than we could here.
 +
*Is it possible to set up a table that can be filtered or sorted?
 +
*Maybe a traffic light system? Green works, Red doesn't and Yellow works but maybe isn't worth the trouble( or maybe experimental).
 +
*Page naming. Maybe hardware_status? The name suggested_hardware sounds like it should perform the same function as what_hardware_will_i_need or maybe a list for a complete, top-of-the-line do-everything system. Tested_hardware doesn't sound quite right either.
 +
*It should be linked prominently on the main page of the wiki, maybe also a sticky subject in the forums.
 +
There's probably lots more, but its late here, and i'm tired :) --[[User:Macca|Macca]] 07:08, 7 September 2007 (MST)

Revision as of 15:08, 7 September 2007

I suggest this page should be redirected to tested good hardware and tested bad hardware.--Macca 02:56, 3 September 2007 (MST)

May I suggest using seperate hierarchical categories under Hardware instead of sections? I know it's a bit of a hassle since we're the first, but I'm hoping everybody will add their own hardware over time. Anyway, thanks for helping out, much appreciated. --Zaerc 08:49, 8 July 2007 (MST)

Macca, I think that the opposite should happen. tested good hardware and tested bad hardware should be redirected here. There's nothing worse than having to look on 2 pages and still not knowing the answer. There are 3 states of hardware good, bad and unknown. So you should at least promote a page called "untested hardware". Now if I have a piece of hardware I'd have to check tested good hardware, tested bad hardware and "untested hardware" in order to know the status of my device. IMHO that sucks. Why can't I just go to 1 page and see what the status of my device is ? I suggest a table with a status column.


I don't want to get into a turf war or pissing contest here. That helps no-one. A few notes;

  • A single page is best.
  • Any list of this kind needs to be clear and concise. Currently the suggested_hardware page is neither.
  • For ease of use, the list should be alphabetised. Is there a way to do this automatically?
  • The device naming convention should be standardised. ManufacturerName_ModelName works well and seems to be widely in use on this wiki.
  • Similarily there should be a standard layout for the device articles. At the very top should be a status section stating if it works, what version of linuxmce it works with (future-proofing. Like all things, easy doing it from the start, hard to add on later) etc. This should be short and to the point, any extra information about why it doesn't work etc should go in the problems and pitfalls section. This layout should also include a personal experience section (at the end) which users should tag. This allows follow up questions on the forum or the discussion page. Maybe we should create some templates called template_motherboard or motherboard_layout for each device type?
  • If the status of a device is not known, it doesn't go on the list. Otherwise you end up with a list of every motherboard etc known to man. There are [other sites] that do this, and far better than we could here.
  • Is it possible to set up a table that can be filtered or sorted?
  • Maybe a traffic light system? Green works, Red doesn't and Yellow works but maybe isn't worth the trouble( or maybe experimental).
  • Page naming. Maybe hardware_status? The name suggested_hardware sounds like it should perform the same function as what_hardware_will_i_need or maybe a list for a complete, top-of-the-line do-everything system. Tested_hardware doesn't sound quite right either.
  • It should be linked prominently on the main page of the wiki, maybe also a sticky subject in the forums.

There's probably lots more, but its late here, and i'm tired :) --Macca 07:08, 7 September 2007 (MST)