I've been in a fortunate position this past year of having some extra money to throw at shiny new hardware and I've experienced a side of Linux I haven't dealt with before...its poor support for shiny new hardware.
I grabbed a Ryzen 9000 CPU and an X870 motherboard...only to find that ethernet didn't work on kernel 6.11. I had to use a usb-c to ethernet dongle for several weeks until 6.13 released.
Just today and what prompted this post, I splurged on a 4k 240hz HDR monitor. HDR is obviously in-progress and I did not expect it to work out of the box. Critically, what I did expect was for the 240hz part to work, but I couldn't set it to anything beyond 120. Skip forward a couple hours, and I now know what EDID files are and how to use different ones. For more insight on my night, see this issue, this blog post, and this blog post. After all that, 240hz is smooth, goddamn.
For me, I'm not complaining. I love desktop Linux far more than shiny new hardware. I would return this monitor before considering not using Linux, and in the latter case it was a good chance to learn more about how Linux deals with display devices.
But I'm also one of many people here who wants to see desktop Linux become more popular, and if a regular person encountered either of those issues, they're going straight back to Windows. While that monitor issue has been fixed upstream, it's still broken in an up-to-date distro like Fedora and the monitor is over 6 months old at this point.
When it comes to stuff like HDR, that's obviously progressing quickly and is likely to become a non-factor in the future. But new ethernet controllers and new monitors with invalid DisplayIDs are likely always going to be coming out. Unless you're willing to tinker, your only option is to wait weeks or months before buying the new shiny thing if you want to use Linux.
That brings me to my question, is there a future where this isn't the case? And what would be required to get there?
Do motherboard/monitor/IC/etc manufactures need to submit their own kernel patches well in advance of product releases, like what AMD and Intel do for their CPUs and GPUs? Are we just waiting for them to give a shit?
Is there any possibility of hardware support-related patches getting backported to older kernel versions sooner rather than waiting for new major releases?
This is kind of an ungooglable question, and I figured it might make for an interesting discussion topic if anyone has more insight or thoughts on this.
What you're asking is very difficult due to resources, creating new bugs etc. The reality is, go with true and trusted hardware. Linux can not possibly support every new shiny thing. That's Windows' job, because that's where the drivers are made for. And since it's difficult to install Linux drivers manually for most users, manufacturers don't bother with Linux at all. Especially, since Linus doesn't care about compatibility with older kernels as much as Windows does. Either support is in the kernel, or you'll experience problems.
Personally, all my laptops and PCs are more than 4 years old, for that reason. I often buy refurbished too. I write this in a refurbished Macbook Air from 2015, where I nuked MacOSX to run Linux Mint (with a binary broadcom wifi binary which is thankfully well supported by ubuntu). On my main PC, the only new thing I bought was an Intel gfx A- card, a 2 years old card, but I knew it had support before I bought it.
And even then, if it's some weird thing, e.g. some over-complicated sound capture device, gaming mouse with a thousand buttons, etc etc (in other words, non-standard hardware), don't expect great support for it, even if the years are passed. Stay with vanilla hardware to be compatible. If you had bought a 60 Hz 4k monitor, you wouldn't have had problems and you would have saved money. Personally, the only feature I look in monitors these days (apart from good color and enough ports), is that they are 32" instead of the usual 27", so that I don't have to use scaling (which creates yet another problem with Linux). I use 4k in its 100% resolution, fitting lots of windows in it, and not destroying my eyes because they're well visible.
Not being smart.
When i see a monitor having network hardware built in, on the spec sheet, i get very suspicious.
I don't game, so it's smart. As long as I have the color I want (I used to shoot music videos for bands, so I'm into filmmaking), and enough ports, the only other thing that I need is to not scale. I don't need too much refresh rate, I don't need hdr, I don't need ethernet, I don't need webcams etc etc.
I think they mean “smart” as in “smart tv” i.e. spyware (at best)