Slashdot Mirror
PC Mag Slams Cheap Wal-Mart Linux Desktop
An anonymous reader writes "PC Magazine reviews the $200 Linux desktop wonder sold by Wal-Mart. This desktop sold out quickly and has been cited as proof that consumers are tired of the Windows tax and ready for Linux. Not so according to PC Magazine, which gave the gPC a 1.5 star rating." Previous discussions we've had about system reviews were realistic but not quite so harsh; is this just nitpicking or is the 'shiny' starting to wear off of the cheap Linux PC concept?
I'd say a 1.5 star rating is actually quite generous, considering the amount of money Linux spends in PC Magazine. It probably wouldn't get a mention at all if not for the huge sums of money Microsoft spends.
In other words: move along, nothing to see here.
Proud member of the Weirdo-American community.
Look who the biggest advertiser is in PC Mag ... you know ... follow the money ...
The box does everything most people want - safe browsing on the web, email, and word processing. Throw in an extra stick of ram, and its a decent second box for a developer.
Kevin Smith on Prince
Think of the source, dudes. PC magazine does not write about linux or Macs. They write about PCs--which are implicitly Windows-based. If they did not do this, they would be pissing in their own soup and Microsoft would never talk to them again.
It's a $200 computer. Dell doesn't even sell anything that cheap, and their cheap stuff is pretty crappy. But, for $200 any computer at all is pretty good. The iPhone costs twice that much and it doesn't even come with a mouse!
No sig for you. YOU GET NO SIG!
So, they nitpick and trash this PC while advertising every other (windows) PC on their page. I'm sure their sponsor's have no influence, I mean, it's America, lobbyists, er, sponsors don't control anything.
For the target audience of the magazine, the rating is mostly correct. Its not a very good system for those people.
But for grandma? Do you really trust PC Magazine to be *capable* of reviewing something the way your grandmother would see it, rather then how a full time PC user would? Its a similar problem when someone like 1up does a review of a "casual" focused game. The review is meaningless because who the game is aimed at and who the review is aimed at are completely different markets.
The only way to review this thing properly is to give it to someone in the Walmart crowd who doesn't use a PC very much now, and see how they do with it. Unfortunately, I don't know of a magazine that does that sort of review.
-- "So they told me that using the download page to download something was not something they anticipated." - Bill Gates
FTFA
"programs written for Mac OS X or Windows that you can buy online or in a retail store won't work on the Linux-based gPC--it's mainly a Web-based PC."
Amazing concept. Absolutely brilliant. There must be some kind of prize or medal to get this reviewer...
Those who live by the sword, get shot by those who live by the gun...
I went and skimmed. Half a gig of RAM, 80G h/d... and it runs "Ubuntu, but not speedily"?
Pardon me, I'm typing this running on an AMD Sempron 2600, 512M RAM, and running SuSE 10.3, and it runs quite nicely, thankyouverymuch. In fact, it seems faster than the SuSE 10.0 I was running till earlier this week.
And I was running SuSE 10.0 on an old 900 MHZ machine in the first part of '06, and it ran just fine.
I'd say that evidence shows PC Mag's review for what it is: bs.
mark
Less the $200 in hardware, and an OS that never saw light before. A couple of things about the OS are less then optimal, and it runs slower then the Alienware desktop running XP they reveiwed last week. Gee, isn't that the same as saying it is just like any computer running Vista?
...you get what you pay for. This was a good attempt to break out to the average consumer; live and learn.
In an effort to conform with internet communication standards, please note that the above comment is 100% biased opinion
Last I heard, Wal-Mart's business model was to restock their stores based on demand, not based on whether some magazine recommends their products. I don't think people who shop at Wal-Mart are all that concerned about quality or performance, so much as price and 'does it work'.
The last batch sold out, so chances are they'll sell it again, and again, until demand starts to falter or until they can no longer profit from them.
- RG>
Hey pal, this isn't a pleasantforest, so don't waste my time with pleasantries!
Linux, WalMart, and Everex are such big sponsors of PC Mag, I figured it'd get the maximum number of stars for sure.
How serious can you take this when more than half the page is filled with advertisements for HP, Lenovo, Sony and anti-virus software? Just a little conflict of interest there, maybe?
Look at the general population at wal-mart. Most of the people there want something with a cheaper price tag over quality. Do you honestly think that these consumers are purchasing this PC with the mind set that "Oh I'm sticking it to Microsoft by not buying a Windows PC!" Hell no. They buy it because it's $200 bucks. You could load any operating system on it and people would STILL buy it.
This has nothing to do with the operating system, it's simple, it's cheap, and the consumers at wal-mart will buy it.
The majority of your PC buyers just want something cheap.
The greatest revenge in life is massive success.
This review isn't just nitpicky - it completely misses the point on a number of fronts. Here are a couple:
Save up for just a little longer and buy something for at least $450 that runs Windows Vista, or get the ASUS Eee PC 4G laptop.
A major selling point of this is that it is cheap and his first recommendation is buying something more than twice as expensive. Not only that, but he recommends buying a $450 system with Vista. Are there companies selling systems at that price with hardware even capable of running Vista? If so, sight unseen, I can gaurantee you that they suck. The Eee PC is a sweet little machine, in my estimation, but it is no replacement for a desktop. Whenever I see someone griping about the Eee PC it is because they are expecting it to act like a desktop and it isn't one. Also - the Eee PC doesn't answer his critique of this system not running windows and mac apps. So he is just fishing for things to pile up against the system even if they aren't consistent with one another.
The upside is that the processor consumes only 20W peak by itself, and during use, the PC did keep its overall power usage to the 20W-to-50W range.
Another nit to pick about gPC's green claims: While the VIA processor is low-power-consuming and Everex claims the gPC is fully RoHS (Reduction of Hazardous Substances) compliant, it has no Energy Star rating or EPEAT certification.
That's not a nitpick. It's stupid. The thing uses less energy than most other systems, he says so himself, so he complains that this fact is not certified. Apparently certified and using more energy is more environmentally friendly than not certified and using less energy.
You could buy this PC to use for a hardware project, such as for installing Windows Home Server or another flavor of Linux. For those purposes, however, I would recommend you just use that old Pentium III box in your closet,...
Windows home server? So now you are better off buying an underpowered Vista machine at twice the price or taking Linux off this box and replacing it with a buggy windows product. Nice. But dig up an old PIII because for some reason that's better. No explanation of how or why but the mind boggles.
The setup sheet rightly notes that, for the PC to fully function, you need a broadband Internet connection with an Ethernet cable. The picture on the setup sheet, however, points to the included modem...
The words are right, the picture is wrong. In other words the documentation doesn't exactly match with reality. I have to say that this has been true of more products that I've bought than has not been true. Anyone wanting to run a PC that is advertised as relying on the internet for full functionality over dial up, is going to be frustrated by anything they buy, no matter how powerful because dialup sucks.
He had to change the monitor resolution. That's rough. He had to install Flash and had choices that confused him. That's a curious oversight on the part of the manufacturer but hardly a show stopper.
Needless to say, programs written for Mac OS X or Windows that you can buy online or in a retail store won't work on the Linux-based gPC it's mainly a Web-based PC.
Wow - that's almost like investigative reporting. It's a web-based PC? I'd have never guessed that from all the advertising. I shouldn't get snarky I guess, but come on. He's upset because this isn't a high end desktop that can run mad and windows apps. He wants it to be a G5 but it isn't so it gets a low rating. If he rated cars only high-end sports cars would get a chance. Anything else would be under powered and without the luxuries he expects on every vehicle regardless of price.
He is right about getting what you pay for. And more is quite often better. But the slightly more difficult question is "How much is enough?" And for many people, in my experience, this cheap little machine is enough. Why should it be punished because he wants more?
It's hard to believe that's how Micronians are made. Why don't we see it right now by having you both kiss one another?
From their site: BOTTOM LINE: The Everex gPC is ostensibly either a "green PC" or the "Google PC." While it mostly fills the first description (without all the certification), the second is held up in legal wrangling and lackluster implementation. The gPC is not the alternative to Windows or Mac OS X it's cracked up to be; it's very frustrating to use. It's a "green PC," but if you're expecting to do more than the basics (aka go online, chat, email, office stuff) then this isn't a PC for you -- you'll need something edging $1K because the graphics won't cut it. PROS:It's cheap. You don't have to worry about Windows viruses and malware. Available at over 600 Wal-Mart stores and online.
CONS:Ethernet "Internet Connection Required." Modem is nonfunctional (for now). 1,280-by-800 resolution forced by internal graphics. Adobe Flash installation can be confusing for a novice. Google search window goes to WebRunner, not the expected Firefox. Programs written for Mac or Windows will not run. It's very cheap, because it's a Mini-ITX. It runs Linux, so forget 99% of all the problems with Windows. And if you got low-end broadband you're running through the Ethernet port anyway, so why install a modem? Plus, you got Firefox, OpenOffice, and Thunderbird. You're good to go if you're an old geezer who wants to keep in touch with the kids and don't want to pay too much (since you got that low-end DSL that's just fast enough).
The market for the gPC isn't for everyone, just folks who want to get online and not worry about getting in trouble. PC Magazine missed the point, and the 1.5 review can just be tossed out the window.
--
# Canmephians for a better Linux Kernel
$Stalag99{"URL"}="http://stalag99.net";
Is the grass blue today? Is the sky green today? If I didn't know better, I would almost say that--instead of being excoriated--Walmart is being defended on slashdot. Mark the date. Oh well, common enemy, strange bedfellows and all that.
It comes with a modem that doesn't work in Linux. Flash isn't installed by default.
Of course, the reviewer is also a moron for complaining that it doesn't support programs written for other operating systems. It certainly does support Windows apps much better than Windows supports Linux apps.
...that anyone is surprised that PC magazine slammed it. PC magazine is one of the oldest Windows knee-padders around. Maybe they should install Vista on it so they can test the hardware with something they know how to operate.
More than 60,000 Windows programs won't run on Linux.
Stopped reading after this sentence...
"My advice to these people? Save up for just a little longer and buy something for at least $450 that runs Windows Vista..."
Good thing anyone that matters probably doesn't read PC Magazine, with the exception of maybe the Windows fanbois..in which case they're just preaching to the choir.
As a normal computer, this thing might not come up to snuff with what's expected.
I'm not sure that Enlightenment was a good choice over Xfce or any of the others. The Via C7 CPU really probably underpowers it for the average person who wants to watch some flash videos, etc. I have one in my house running MythTV, but only after I realized that it was very sluggish for trying to do my day to day work on.
The fact that it didn't ship with a flash plugin is pretty inexcusable. At least put in a quick script or something that would install it for the user if you couldn't ship with it installed. I've had one hell of a time keeping my flash plugin working over multiple upgrades of flash/firefox, etc. on my regular Ubuntu (64-bit though, so that makes it tougher).
I would've appreciated a little more polish on a good linux PC. I especially loathe all their gThis and gThat, and "Google-powered!" stuff, when in reality it's not a google product. Pretty low. Low RAM, and others too.
It just really seems that you can get a good computer with much better specs for not much more, and not have to deal with all the marketing BS of this company.
I know that we all creamed ourselves when a major retail store started carrying a linux computer, and that we creamed ourselves again when it sold out, but let's call this what it is: an anemic offering at best.
First, without justification he says the computer is "slapped together." Well, at least he showed his true colors right out of the gate.
Next, and without justification, he recommends buying a Windows Vista. Which is bizarre because most people are avoiding Vista like the plague. It's hard to believe this guy is objective when he makes that sort of recommendation. (And I can only imagine how excruciating Vista would run on a sub-basement system.)
Next he calls the system "relatively low-performing" and "enough to run Ubuntu Linux," but in the next paragraph he says the hardware would be good for "installing Windows Home Server or another flavor of Linux." That doesn't make any sense to me. Why dump a working version of Ubuntu for another version of Linux. He never explains the problems he has with Ubuntu.
Next he bizarrely criticizes it because "programs written for Mac OS X or Windows that you can buy online or in a retail store won't work on the Linux-based gPC." Well duh! That's just a cheap shot to confuse the ignorant.
I could go on, but I think you get the idea.
If someone says he and his monkey have nothing to hide, they almost certainly do.
I have quit reading computer-related magazines after Polish edition of Amiga Mag went down. When I sometimes browse a PC magazines on a display I wonder how anyone can even try to read it. It's filled with ads, has poorly written articles that reads like adverts, lame "Ten Things About Whatever" and interviews with people who are unintresting but have ties and a CEO business cards.
When I want to get some opinions on new hardware I'd rather to browse Internet, it's quicker and there's more different stories. When I want computer related news or reviews, there's /., Ars.
So, they gave poor rating to cheap Linux computer. No story here. I wouldn't expect them rate it any different. No Vista, no cash for publishers.
Rocksteady, are you ready to ska?
AND the first thing that stuck out in my mind was the length of the review of the gPC. It is three times as long as the other Compaq, Dell and eMachine reviews.
Wouldn't an unbiased review spend about the same amount of time on all machines reviewed?
The article writer went out of his way to embellish all the bad things about this one computer. To me that means a bias against this computer, and a bias in the review. He focuses on the bad to drive people away from a purchase of this computer. Why??
I say follow the advertising dollars.
Again, nothing to see here.
Nathan
Did you notice how they listed that it doesn't run Mac or Windows software as a drawback? Vista doesn't run Mac, Linux, and some XP software, but you never see that listed in the reviews. To take a $200 computer and review it compared to one costing twice as much (or more), it should be obvious which one is superior.
This thing is crap because it is crap hardware, not because it runs Linux. If you put another OS on it, the hardware would still be crap. That would be expected from a $200 computer. Hell, I'd expect any computer under $1000 to be pretty dodgy when it comes to quality and performance. You get what you pay for.
Seriously...something like this should probably get either top marks or bottom marks - there is no in between. This is a computer for people who want to get on the internet, type a letter, or do other simple operations on their computer. These folks would never use Photoshop even if it was preloaded. They just want (and need) it to work. It didn't. The search bar problem (not opening firefox), and the lack of simple flash support is, imho, a serious flaw. There is too much on the net which requires flash not to include it (and it truly pains me to make that statement). And to not have a driver for the installed modem? That's pretty damned bad.
This computer needs to just work. First time. Out of the box. It's not going to get bought by anyone who knows squat about computers, and you just know that if there is any tech support available its going to suck royally (at $200, what did you expect?).
Sadly, the software matters more than the hardware in this sector, and it appears there just wasn't enough development and testing done on it.
Is it just my observation, or are there way too many stupid people in the world?
This is a very sensible article. The PC you get from walmart for 200 bucks is a PoS. It runs slowly even for a linux box. The fact that I could go to a dump and build a better computer for free is pretty funny. All the fanboys here are liek OMG ITS A GREAT PUTER IT RUNZ TEH LINUX. Well guess what just because it runs the OS of your choice doesn't mean shat. It runs crapply. People that shop at walmart are misinformed anyways. The only reason they buy it is because its cheap. Think about it. Anyone that wanted a cheap system and knew of linux would just build their own. However people are stupid and don't realize they arnt getting M$ and then they all get mad. Then people start to realize that they can't use their computer for work related things because their work supports microsoft. WAKE UP PEOPLE WAKE UP.
This is the same magazine that happily rates the 'best' laptops and desktops among those starting in the 4-figure price range, and apparently wouldn't dare dirty itself with cheaper gear. It cheerleads Windows to the hilt, with only occasional nods given to OSX - so as to drop hints as to what Redmond should be paying attention to for ideas.
Meh - PC Mag's audience are those who aren't geeks, but can afford to toss money around on stuff they barely understand. They're what most people think of when they think of a Mac Fanboy stereotype, but minus the Mac:
All glitz, no substance.
Trying to give them credibility is like trying to give the "Fast and Furious" wannabe ricer-car types credibility.... they suck down the industrial propaganda without understanding it, but will furiously defend it as some sort of lifestyle. It's all plastic and bubblegum, but for some odd reason there's no shortage of dumbasses out there who will happily devote themselves to it.
Quo usque tandem abutere, Nimbus, patientia nostra?
Its not a Windows PC so it wont run windows apps. Well go figure, it would not be a low cost PC if the specs had been enough to satisfy Vista and the Microsoft OEM-tax was added to the price.
The gPC is more than suitable for what most people use their computer for theese days. Almost anything people do is done inside a browser.
The PC market is more than enough matured to divest itself into niche markets like the gPC where you only aim for a specific application and not everything and the kitchen sink.
When i recently bought a new computer i cought myself thinking "-I dont in any way need this horsepower for what i do". The gPC would have been more than enough for my needs as it would to most peoples needs.
The thing is that the writer assumes that a computer should cater every possible need in existance while most people just want something that does their specific need, and cheaply.
HTTP/1.1 400
I'm actually glad to see this getting any attention at all. A cheap do-it-yourselfer is the perfect box for a hobbyist or a beginner to get their feet wet with. Since it's not too expensive you don't have that "I don't want to ruin it" nervousness that keeps people from getting their hands dirty mucking around with a machine ten times this price.
Linux also requires users to have a little more familiarity with your hardware, so you're not just learning about how to use the system -- you're learning about what's inside, too.
On the downside, 512MB of RAM is barely enough these days; I'm sure they could have left out the speakers and gone with a full gig, unless part of their plan is to make money on these kinds of aftermarket options.
It's also very cool how they integrated the Google apps into the system, albeit without the official blessing of the big G. I guess the real question is, when are they going to put out a similar product on their own?
this and that but, what's the point when the review is "over there" and its readers won't see what I right over here...
People here seem to be convinced from the start that this review is biased, but when what the review actually says is true, this box indeed does suck. Incoherent interface, lack of UI feedback while waiting for an application to start, non-intuitive way of installing things (flash in this case)..
Those are some of the things that get people confused when using computers, and shouldn't happen - there's been enough work and research done on human interface guidelines, about time they actually get implemented.
Truth arises more readily from error than from confusion. -Francis Bacon
This is the same useless periodical that continually gives Nortron Internet Security a 4 or 5 star rating year after year. Enough said.
Before yet another post dismissing the review in its entirety is posted, there are some totally valid claims.
1. Lack of flash plugin. Yes, they totally side-stepped the legal problems, but how about a script to do the job on startup??
2. Lack of polish. I backported everex's e17 gui onto an older kubuntu and I found the same issues the reviewer did. Plug a flash drive in and watch what doesn't happen. No system tray and none was ever planned. I discovered pulseaudio though and that was worth the effort.
3. It's under-powered. Until Microsoft sells PC Magazine's editors on a "new low-power market" PC Mag will call low-power anything bad.
It should go without saying that a $299 PC is the worst possible thing to happen to PC Magazine. Everex certainly isn't going to spend money on PC Magazine's editors or buy adverts with the tiny profit margins.
As an FYI: Everex's one or two of the e17 source packages are very broken. They aren't even ubuntu quality and they would never make it into a Debian repo. I took careful notes during the whole build and I'll forward them to anyone who is interested in building the desktop.
Attention KDE developers! Add native pulseaudio support to the kde desktop ASAP!
http://www.maxineudall.com/2010/02/should-economists-be-sued-for-malpractice.html
For either group the OS makes no difference. if the machine runs and can do these simple things, that is ok. I know that this computer does not have the advanced MS features of one click changing of the background image, or one click changing of the orientation, or other critical one click hourly tasks, but for $200 I think many people can live without those luxuries.
Of course, if one needs a second computer that runs specific MS Windows only applications, then buy an MS Windows machine. But in most cases to run such applications, one will not be able to buy the cheapest machine on the market.
"She's a scientist and a lesbian. She's not going to let it slide." Orphan Black
Anyplace where this rig might be popular, it's hampered by the fact that the modem doesn't work out of the box. In the rather broad nation of WalMartia, there is no broadband, there is only dial-up. I think that's what really drives the final nail in the coffin of this product.
Which is a shame, as it fills an otherwise not-well-filled niche: a cheap PC for people who just do email and websurfing.
Its so stupid to always look for the cheapest solutions and then say ...lets go with "Linux". If you want a GOOD functional PC with the good stuff in it - running nicely and doing what you want - you'd want a STRONG PC with the good stuff in it, it doesn't really matter if you run Linux or Vista... I can't believe they always tout the cheap pcs with Linux...like Linux where the cheap alternative, it's not the price - its what you want to do with your system, silly! A hardcore PC config will most likely kick major B*TT with Linux (I know it does with mine, and I never went for the cheap stuff as I know what the outcome will be anyway)...even if you ran windows on it. The point is - dont tout Linux with a small system - give it the major system you'd sell as a top notch windows machine - then compare - you do the math, the Linux systems have come a LONG way now - and they're as serious for the Desktop as any Windows (even better on security) would ever be, I know because I've been running both systems for over 10 years now (ok...not vista for 10 years...but windows) side by side, today I'm like using Linux 95 percent of the time...windows for the essential games only, but really...its all about c choice - not the price!
What this world is coming to - is for you and me to decide.
Besides value for money, the product has important value to society: many people who cannot afford a more expensive PC will be able to buy this product. Of course, it might be better to recycle an older PC for such purposes, but that would take more tech-savvy. Look at it this way. If schools used this machine, they could have machines in the lab, library, home-ec/industrial arts and classrooms for the same price as machines in the lab only using the more expensive machines. That really opens opportunities to use IT in a school and get more done faster. This machine deserves more respect just for the price. Running GNU/Linux is a bonus.
I predict that 2008 will see a large increase in production and sale of low-end boxes and laptops to satisfy a need in emerging IT markets, BRIC (Brazil, Russia, India and China), for instance. If OEMs can ramp up production, this technology could rapidly displace that other OS, globally. Vista, with its obscene bloat and MIPS-eating ways has no future in that market.
A problem is an opportunity http://mrpogson.com
He does make some valid points however I think it's fundamentally flawed to think any Windows user can adequately review a Linux-based system. Invariably they will try to compare it to things they already know. They will talk about how limited it is because subconsciously they miss all of the Windows apps they know and love. Nothing is in the same place they are used to. A basic frustration sets in and bias ensues. I know this is a generalization but to some degree or another its true in most every review like this you see.
What's more important to me are reviews where a PC like this is put in front of youngsters or novices. People who don't have preconceived ideas about where things should be and how they should work.
Because users are retards.
So you are saying the magazine that voted VISTA as one of the worst products of 2007 has a Microsoft bias?
I think the big problem with these Linux machines being sold by the likes of Walmart and others is that they're cheap. They put the cheapest hardware they can find to barely run Linux, and throw it on a shelf. It's great from their perspective because they're going to sell to the people that don't know any better. They can get away with the cheap hardware because Linux is generally more efficient and is able to run on hardware with lower specs than what Windows is going to require.
I think that, in the long run, this is only going to hurt the credibility of Linux. Many people are going to start to use this great thing called Linux, and they're going to hate it. They'll compare their brand-new laptop from the Walmart clearance isle with the brand-new laptop their brother or cousin or dad or son bought from Dell or Apple. Their systems run Windows or Mac OS X, and they're FAST. Very FAST. And easier to use (seemingly).
Their next purchase will be something they can't necessarily afford so they'll pay Dell or Apple an additional 29.875% interest on it for the next 7 years.
I've been thinking about getting one of these (or maybe a zonbu) specifically to be a MythTV frontend, however I can't find any information on whether or not these things can play back 1080p HDTV streams. Obviously the C7 processor can't do it on it's own, but the unichrome is supposed to help a lot.
Anyone with some experience or pointers on where I could find out?
Actually, they probably see the large PC-CDROM or PC-DVDROM icon in the corner, and assume it can play on their brand new PC...
Yep, a sell out on a $200 Linux desktop is proof that consumers are sick of Windows. Just like a sell out on a $250 Wii is proof that consumers are sick of XBox and PS3.
:-)
Point: There isn't enough data in "$200 desktop sold out" to justify *any* broad conclusions. About the broadest you're going to get out of this data set is "people like inexpensive computers"; and that might be pushing it!
Because its this 'computer' thingy. Every computer they have bought from retail over the past 5 years plays stuff they pick up at the store and now this one doesn't. They don't know why, they just take it back and get something that will.
that bit is certainly a give away. Isn't it possible the Walmart box has chintzy parts and it doesn't work very well?
Of course there will be idiots that don't know the difference, but there will also be plenty of people who know exactly what they are getting. Characterizing WalMart shoppers as universally stupid is, well, universally stupid. For tech items like cameras and mp3 players WalMart often sets the floor price by which other retailers can be judged.
The linux box they were selling was a great deal: a complete, functional, preconfigured PC that will do basically everything BUT gaming. Plenty of people understand that and the ones that want more will buy more or build their own.
What's really stupid is the tendency to judge products by an unattainable ideal. You can't buy a PC for $199 that is a screaming fast, green gaming machine that runs linux, windows or anything else. It is what it is - buy it if you want it, if not buy something else.
I have mod points. The reign of terror begins now.
Becuase to a lot of users when you say windows, they don't think OS, they think GUI. They have a desktop, with icons on it, and when you click the icon, the program launches, just like in windows. Most people would not know that this would no run a windows app.
Think... If you bought your parents this computer, would you honestly be surprised when you get the call that quicken or whatever won't install?
Copyright 2010. All rights reserved. This comment may not be copied in any way including, but not limited to caching.
Same reason I got wii games for my xbox 360 this christmas, only with those I dont have to open up the packaging (thus making it unreturnable), and stick it in the drive to find out it won't work.
Citing a better example, a budget game like bejeweled in the cheapo section is more likely to be the game in question.
As such it would be perfect as a quiet, low-power server. I tried to get one but they were all gone.
the guy is recommending vista. He obviously has no idea what he is talking about
This reviewer makes some really excellent points. Although, the fact is, the things that are inexcusable about this system are inexcusable about all Linux systems. People like to say that Linux "just works." That's a huge stinking load. It took me hours to get wireless networking going recently, and that's only the most recent set of headaches. Ubuntu, I have to say, is the best Linux distro I've ever used. But the fact that I have to so frequently drop to the command line for ANYTHING, in this day and age, is completely unacceptable. Hell, the fact that I need an application to manage other applications (rather than just dragging the app into the Applications folder) is unacceptable, but I digress. I can say all this, because I used Gentoo for years and enjoyed it. Eventually, I got tired of doing stuff manually that damn well should have been completely automatic. Then I bought a Mac. MacOS X is lightyears ahead of Linux in terms of usability, although it has plenty of other drawbacks. Indeed, I can complain almost as long about MacOS as I can about Linux, although the sets of complaints don't have much overlap.
This green PC suffers from some serious oversights, like the builder really didn't try very hard. Basic things are missing that should have been pre-installed. There's no excuse.
On the other hand, no idiot would think that trying to use Vista would be any better. At least with Linux you CAN fix things. With Vista, what's broken is broken. Oh, and don't get me started on having to install antivirus and antispyware tools. There are ways to make an OS secure, but Microsoft just does a half-assed job at it. You want a rock-solid secure OS, spend a little time looking at the measures taken by OpenBSD.
I read the PC review with an open mind because I was curious about how a $200 machine would be. For a 1.5 star rating, I was expecting the review to say things like 'it died' or 'refused to work' or 'it was impossible to install the software that was provided' or something. Instead, the PC criticisms were: 1) "slapped together" (what does that mean), 2)"low-power, relatively low-performing VIA C7-D processor", 3)"the gOS team is working on a modem driver" 4)"the gPC defaulted to 1,280-by-800 resolution", 5)"it has no Energy Star rating" (but used only 50 watts), 6)"programs written for Mac OS X or Windows that you can buy online or in a retail store won't work on the Linux-based gPC", 7)"It would've been nice if the folks at Everex or gOS preinstalled Flash support".
The article summarizes the above with: "In the end, though, it has so many shortcomings I would have a problem recommending it to anyone." With the possible exception of 2), these are all minor nitpicks and hardly justify a 1.5 star rating. Based on the author's own description of his use of the machine, it should have been given a 3-star rating and that would be marked down from 4-stars because of the low-power processor. PC Magazine feeds on Microsoft to survive and this article shows that.
I had an absolutely great experience with Ubuntu installation. I popped in the CD, booted up into it, clicked install, and it just worked. The only thing that I didn't have was some of the latest drivers for my graphics card, but then again, Windows generally doesn't either.
I do agree that the average joe should not be installing an operating system anywhere, but ubuntu's installer system for drivers works with about as many steps as Windows does, so, even though its different, I wouldn't say that it was "more daunting". If anything, Ubuntu's LiveCD approach to an OS installation is nicer because you can surf and answer installation questions while you are installing the OS. I think that's pretty damned slick.
Really, the central problem with the PC, according to the article, was that it didn't have Flash preloaded, and it can't run Windows applications. The first is a stupid problem correctable by the hardware integrator. I think if you plink down a few bucks, get the codecs licenced, get flash licensed, you can have a PC that has everything you need and is ready to go, out of the box, running Linux, that will work fine for surfing, email and a bit word processing. As for not being able to run Windows Apps, any more, I don't think consumers have a problem understanding multiple formats. After all, they know the difference between XBOX 360 and Playstation 3! Why should it be any different for PCs?
Windows compatibility is a non-issue.
In fact, I would even argue that Office compatibility is a non-issue. People use Office to make documents for themselves, and then, they use those documents and throw them away.
This is my sig.
Although many comments have complained about silly remarks like "it does not run Windows apps" in the review, remember that this PC is marketed as a low-cost computer for non-tech-savvy users. To them, this is something that might not be clear. Remember that downloading and installing some random piece of useless software, something that the targeted user group also regularly does, it just not as easy under Linux than under Windows. Many of them will just try to download that .EXE-installer, just as they saw their friends do, and wonder why it does not work (and then call you and tell you that "their computer is broken":). So I think they actually do have a valid point there ...
I read TFA. Are all the negative points it brought up real or fair? Of course not. For one thing, I don't like how the author criticizes gPC for not preinstalling the flash player. I believe that was due to licensing limitations.
On the other hand, I see very valid criticism. For instance, according to TFA, gPC defaults to 1280x800, and will revert back to it after rebooting even if the user manually sets it to 1280x1024. I think that's something inexcusable - defaulting to an inordinary screen resolution, and somehow mysteriously insisting on it.
My point is - not a novel one at that - if people truly want Linux to be adopted more widely, they should learn not to take criticism the wrong way.
Tyranny isn't the worst enemy of a democracy. Cynicism is.
Since when did they ever market this PC as being able to run the latest software? I think the reviewer was setting his standards too high.
A 1.5Ghz/512Mb machine is perfectly adequate for the average computer user. I would even suggest it's a little overpowered. Hell, my parents still use a 300Mhz/256Mb machine with absolutely no issues since all they ever open is Thunderbird and Firefox.
As for the learning curve, he's being ridiculous. You can learn rpm in about 10 minutes if you read the manual.
So how can it be a BIG sponsor of PC Mag?
The average Joe SixPack who shops at Walmart is hardly to read PC Mag so I would love to be proved wrong about Walmart being a sponsor (advertiser?) in PC Mag.
IMHO think that AC is posting out of their backsides.
I have read many PC Mags of various titles over the years and have found many of them just promo vehicles for Microsoft.
This naturally excludes those who are aimed at one niche or another (MacUser, Linux Format).
I'd rather be riding my '63 Triumph T120.
I got the kids one for Xmas.
.05 review:
My
gOS sucks. I was about 2 minutes into things and wanted to remove some of the icons from the 'dock'. I right-clicked - hit 'delete' (or maybe remove) and the whole dock disappeared! Ooops. A few more unintuitive things like that and I ended up formatting it and installed Edubuntu. Installing Flash took about 1 minute. Added a few other things TuxPaint, etc and was ready to go.
Kids are happy!
We actually got a windows user as far as actually taking a look at a linux box.
He missed the point altogether. He's right, the consumers *don't* care that they're "sticking it to Microsoft". They care that the price point is under $300, something that is almost impossible to do if you are paying for Windows in addition to the hardware, i.e. you're paying the "Microsoft tax".
Avoiding the MS tax is indeed why users buy this. The reason it's come to the fore now is that hardware is cheap enough that buying a license for an MS OS is a significant part of the price.
Since when is Enlightenment Google-oriented? And since when is it a theme?
*slams cheap PC Mag uneducated revluser*
I guess you could just use Wine... it should work pretty well with those titles.. :)
Doesn't run Windows or OS X Apps? Inconceivable!
Doesn't have flash preinstalled and had to click through the automated prompts in Firefox to install it? Inconceivable!
Doesn't have tons of hardware power? Inconceivable!
Purchasing this computer would be one of the most classic blunders ever, you should get a computer with Vista instead.
Schools could buy these at that price and load up some usefull educational software. Or they could teach kids how to type, I learned an Apple 2e why because a keyboard is the same regardless of the PC price.
The reality is "Linux ain't Windows" just as "Mac ain't Windows."
Recently, I have converted two of my most important users over to MacBook Pros. I promised them stability, flexibility and usability along with a "fall back" by having VMWare + Windows installed. One user refuses to use the VMWare Windows and insists on using his Mac without any crutches. He's made terrific progress even if he still refers to his network home folder as "M: drive." The other user is using her VMWare crutch and uses it frequently.
It is shocking at how something as simple as a drive-letter basis for file management/hierarchy can be a stumbling block for users.
There is a huge amount of stuff to over-come when it comes to what people consider to be "computing." For most of us (slashdot users) such differences are trivial. For the mindless users out there, that difference is anything but trivial and it doesn't matter that "Mac is easier." It's different and that's what throws them off so badly.
It won't matter (even if it's necessary) if "Desktop Linux" were to rise to the level of MacOSX, it's not Windows and that's the problem.
On the other hand, if someone were to create an UBER-WINE that presented a desktop complete with drive letters and all, then perhaps some progress could be made... but still, users would generally not go any further than "Windows Emulating Linux" if they went that route at all. People are reluctant to change even if they really want to change... and most actually do!
What's really stupid is the tendency to judge products by an unattainable ideal. You can't buy a PC for $199 that is a screaming fast, green gaming machine that runs linux, windows or anything else.
...there's nothing else you can get at the $200 price point that has comparable consumption/performance metric. The article totally skipped around this issue, touting alternatives at twice the price.
I saw an ad for these at PC Club, which included these items for $90.
Case with 300W power supply.
Motherboard with C7 1.5G CPU
I added these items:
2x 512M sticks of 533/667 DDR2 RAM ($50)
320G SATA HD ($80)
Nvidia MX4000 PCI graphics card ($25) (later)
Keyboard (spare)
Mouse (spare)
Monitor (spare)
As far as software, I also tested the gOS, a Ubuntu derivative. It was ok, and it worked as advertised in both "live" mode and when installed on the hard-disk. I prefer to run Slackware, though, so I installed Slackware 12. That worked out of the box in "vesa" graphics mode. But DRI drivers for the unichrome video chipset as used on the motherboard is not supported by the official X.org project, yet. I also wanted the box to run "google earth," so I tossed in an Nvidia graphics card. It is a great box for $245.
Obviously, this is not a top end box. A similar system using the Intel E6600 would be twice as much for components. The box makes an excellent web-browsing tool, headless server (NAS), etc. The onboard USB 2.0 and SATA ports, low power consumption, and quiet operation give this board a big advantage over "Pentium III" boxes retrieved from your closet.
So as far as I am concerned, this box works as advertised. I have no intention of running any MS product on the box.
all that's needed to finish Ms windows is for the makers to ship a LINUX base system with FIXED software
NO SOFTWARE MODIFICATIONS ALLOWED, PERIOD.
that would put a wrench into the wheels on the hackers , all they have left is what they can load in memory and guess what: Boot before you Bank and the RAT is DEAD.
actually, with computers coming with FLASH hard drives we may be closer to this that anyone thinks
there is NO REASON the computer can't be an appliance and I keep MY DATA on a FLASH STICK
if I feel the need to compute I just pick out any handy computer, plug in my FLASH stick and go to work
these "appliance" computers would be made NOT MODIFYABLE except by the OEM
the SOLARIS operating system might be the place to start and if I was with Sun I'd be looking at this from the serious side. if this is done right it can be guaranteed virus proof. this simply because a virus has to modify its target and we are talking about a FIXED non-modifyable system.
( you have to take this computer offline to update the software and can only do that using OEM updates from CD or FLASH -- with digital signatures )
I would honestly be surprised. I would not expect my parents to be that clued in.
That said: various forms of wine have been quite good at running Quicken for quite some time now.
There is even an "install WoW" menu item in the current version of Crossover Office.
Since it is Linux, I can setup all of this stuff for them from across the country if need be.
5 years ago there was a fellow on COLA that did just that.
A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
The average consumer saw a really cheap PC. I doubt 90% of them actually understood it was missing the 'windows tax', took it home and pronounced ' it looks funny ', 'why isnt xyz game working'.
---- Booth was a patriot ----
OK ... I am not really understanding many of these bashing articles.
... we are talking about a $200.00 machine.
... buy that. But don't complain that your $200.00 PC is not the $5000.00 one.
For crying out loud
Put that in perspective, that is the same price as an ipod nano or a 20" analog TV set.
Do you see articles bashing 20" analog TV sets for $200.00 and comparing them to $20,000.00 LCD TVs and expecting the same performance??? I think not.
If one wants a $5000.00 PC, then buy that. If you want a $200.00 PC
Clearly they will not condone anything that cannot run Vista. "Spend more and run Vista" says it all. These people are bought or exceedingly unflexible. The review has no merit.
Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
When one of their chief complaints is "programs written for Mac and Windows will not run," you know something is wrong with the review.
LOL, /. strikes again, angry self important tools griping about something that doesn't effect them at all...
In the initial paragraph Joel made the point that the "gPC's energy-efficient status is to some extent smoke and mirrors" and I fully expected to see a serious explanation for this conclusion as I know from my own experience that the Via Cx processors are amazingly low power units.
.tar.gz and .rpm format, to install a firefox plugin when in fact he installed the plugin through firefox as would a Windows or OSX user.
However, when we get to the rant about power consumption of the system it turns out that the system consumed a peak of 20W to 50W compared to 50W at idle for an HP low power system and 500W to 1KW for some gaming systems. In fact, the only mention of any "nit pick" which might suggest reasoning for the smoke and mirrors conclusion is due to the fact that "it has no Energy Star rating or EPEAT certification". So the box as tested uses less power than any other system he has tested and yet he calls the energy efficiency status smoke and mirrors because it doesn't have a sticker? Perhaps its this review that is smoke and mirrors.
And if that were not enough he knocks the PC for not running Windows apps when he already acknowledged that the purpose of the box was for basic web surfing. And he complains that a user will require "a lot of time to learn the basic nuances of Linux", I'm assuming because of the comment about viewing the Flash plugin downloads in
Joel did have a couple of valid points, i.e. the documentation explaining the requirement for broadband internet and an ethernet cable but showing a modem and modem cable in the diagrams, or the idea of reusing an older PC by installing linux as a greener solution. But overall what could have been a solid review of the gPC is overwhelmed by inaccuracies, expectations outside the specifications of the $200 box, and exagerated claims of failure to meet claimed specifications.
I'd give this review 1.5 stars but then I'd say its really not even worth mentioning.
I wish I had mod points for this.
Why am I asking this you wonder ? Well, if you have seen it, you most probably read the predictions of the so-called innovative corporation CEOs' views of the 2037 or whatever year far ahead. Every person, is seeing the future as his or her company rulung the electronics world. According to almighty Gates, the surface computer will rule the world, according to CEO of iRobot corp. (forgot his name), there will be a proliferation of home robots; etc. etc. The point I am trying to make is, PC magazine has become the automatic mouth of the advertisers. If you need unbiased reviews of items, it is one of the last places you should look. The issue has a long rhetoric about why they are changing from 22 issuer per year to 12 issues per year. The real reason, people are so much fed up with their kakameme advertising ridden articles, nobody really wants to read it. In the past, I used to look forward to the day that thing dropped in my mailbox in almost a book thickness every other week. Now, it is just a bathroom reading, as I do not like to carry my laptop into the commode. Most of the time, it does not even take a full 10 minutes to go from one end of the magazine to the other.
Walmart PC? Heck, if you expect the world from a $200 pc regardless what OS you run on it, you are sure to be disappointed. I still have an almost 10 years old HP Omnibook laptop. I gave it to my mom for reading her news over the internet and I never hear her complaining how slow the dang thing is, even though it only has a 233 Mhz P-2 processor with 96MB RAM. I don;t understand why this, comparably ultramodern PC for $200 was such a big disappointment.
Seriously considering canceling my subscription to PC Mag and getting a prorated refund.
__________
The more I know people, the more I love animals
is probably the most qualified journalism outlet to review the gPC.
Nihilism means nothing to the dancing peasants
Honestly, remember this is the magazine that lets Dvorak have two columns (although they are right next to each other). You have to take into account the audience for this magazine. This is essentially a magazine for inexperianced users. Consider that they have a write in segment in their magazine which normally consists of "how do I do this in MS Office." For the audience that this magazine is written for, figuring out how to install flash (even though there is a readme file which gives you explicit instructions) could very well be an issue. Truth be told, the only reason I have a subscription is because it doesn't cost me any money (got it through one of the millions of easy to track down online free subscription offers).
PC Mag was once a trusted computer periodical. I currently have a free subscription that I'm about to cancel.
Have you picked one up lately? Every other page is a paid advertisement. When will 1&1 web hosting just come out
with their own periodical for cryin' out loud?
Maybe if Northwest or Falcon sold a $200 PC, it would get better reviews.
I question how many of these were purchased with the intent of running Windows on them. $200 for a system's pretty cheap. My motherboard & RAM alone cost that much. Dell, you are looking at $450-500 bottom of the line.
I have a legal copy of all OSes I'm running. My laptop came with OS X, my home PC has Windows XP PRO tied to the motherboard (which just crapped out), and my wife's PC has XP Home which came with the laptop. But I am aware of many that come to me to try and fix their pirate windows system using hacked WGA executables. I don't touch those, but I see enough of them to suspect people are going to be pirating XP onto these system.
Just my hunch.
Go figure. It can't make a Venti mochachino, play Modern Warfare, encode a movie while downloading hentai midget porn.
So long as any media is owned by the corporations and not entirely by the people, it will never be honest or in the peoples best interest to even read it. when advertising revenues can skew the opinion of the editor "free press" is no longer free press and will never tell the truth. I am sure that these machines are not by any means kick ass gaming rigs, but decent working machines that will suffice for the people that don't care for all the shiny sparkle of the latest GLX89000 deLUXor!
I'm still surprised that they went with an e17 desktop, given that enlightenment's own website says: "Still in heavy development, several applications that will be part of the DR17 release and examples of what is possible are already available in CVS, such as Entice, Entrance, and Evidence."
I've checked in with e17 development periodically over the last few years, using it for a week or two at a time. Every time, I've said to myself, "this'll be sweet when they get it done" and gone back to using XFCE or KDE. I'm very much looking forward to the final, stable release, but until then, it seems crazy to use it on a daily basis.
For example, I'm a photographer, and I take my laptop with Xubuntu installed along to weddings to download CF cards so I can reuse them on that job. If you plug a CF card into a card reader, a window pops up on the XFCE desktop that shows the folders on the card. From there, it's a simple matter for my freelance assistant du jour to copy the files to the hard drive. Try explaining that process to them if you're using e17 where a whole lotta nothin' happens when you plug in a CF card.
e17 seems like a bad choice for a desktop environment to be used by Joe Sixpack.
For a $200, you get very little. Reading the review he didn't slam Linux in particular. He slammed the machine's implementation of it with the gOS. Maybe it was the first implementation of it or he wasn't that all familiar with it. His intuition is that it would be hard for the average person to use. His recommendations are under attack because he recommended Windows. But he also recommended Linux too like the ASUS Linux laptop.
He is right. If you want a more functional PC, save up your money and spend the extra to get something better. At $450, a Vista Home Basic system won't allow you to render Pixar's next movie, but it will allow the average user to do the basic PC functions. Remember this machine was slapped together with the cheapest parts possible. That includes a processor that isn't the most performance minded. A PIII is probably faster than this machine with regular Ubuntu installed.
Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
No the article doesn't as much criticise Linux in general as it criticise the problems with the gOS :
- screen detection code is sloppy and not on par with what's available in most Boot-CD (Knoppix, etc.) : it's unable to automatically select the correct resolution.
- the maker didn't pre-install flash by default (a big negative point for a computer which is touted a as "web- and google apps- oriented PC").
- there's some confusion with browsers (some links start pages inside FireFox, whereas the search bar open a minimalistic browser).
- lack polish for some useful user feedback : there's no "startup notification" installed and thus no way to know if an application is just slow to open or didn't start at all.
This Walmart PC could have been a brilliant idea, but the designers got it wrong and botched the included "gOS" Linux.
Why should I buy an OS which cost more than the hardware on which I intent to run it ?
Here in Europe absolutely all Vista version still cost a couple of hundred of dollars. Getting it thru your university if it's MSDNAA is the only way a poor student could get a legal Vista at a reasonable price.
"Sufficiently advanced satire is indistinguishable from reality." - [Tips: 1DrYakQDKCQ6y52z6QbnkxHXAocMZJE61o ]
read the review written by a member. It is glowing, but then he supposedly rates the system a 1. Something appears to be rotten. And not just in Denmark.
I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
As one who has worked both with Linux and Windows extensively and watched both mature in their resective markets.
There seem to be three points here that are largely missed by the review.
1) the $200 puts a very low price floor on a rather relatively functional PC (browsing, networking, etc) compared to higher prices systems in the $400-$800 ranage. The features will now no doubt a) smooth out some of the kinks and set a baseline for improvements at this $200 price.
2) At $200 a large market can afford one to do the mundane computing tasks that are typically take up about 80% of most PC users time (few PC users actually spend their cpu cycles actually "computing" in a strict sense).
3) with such a large potential MASS market (from THE MASS marketer) Linux is being tried and becoming comfortable to a much wider base of users, which puts considerable pressure on other OS makers who expect to make a profit in the "commoditized segment" of the PC business.
As a Vista user, this is a win for me as it puts pressure for the first time on Microsoft to really make their OS perform with a minimum of penalties both in terms of cost and performance, lest they be replaced by cheaper, as nearly functional equivalents.
As a Linux user, this is a win for me because it puts additional pressure on Linux software developers to make their software run in more standardly configurable modules to conform to the dimensions of an increasingly larger Linux market, so that installation, maintenance, and peformance tuning become ever easier.
The nice thing is that if you don't like it, you don't have to buy one, but at $200 (sans monitor) a lot of people, especially younger, poorer users with limited budgets will.
You don't have to open the packaging of computer software either to determine what system it's designed for. You just have to know to look.
The comments on Walmart's site were rather interesting. Many people gave this a five star rating, but those people also mentioned that they knew Linux, were upgrading the hardware on this computer, and seemed to be very tech savvy.
Then there were the one star raters. These people talked about how cheap the PC was, and couldn't understand why it couldn't run their other software. They found the desktop confusing and the programs it came with overly complex.
It appears that this was a thrown together piece of cheap hardware. However, those who were tech savvy viewed this as a bargain of computer parts. A little tweaking -- better keyboard, more memory, more diskspace, etc., and you had a fairly cheap Linux machine. The rest were typical computer customers who bought it because it was only $200. They found it sloppily put together, cheap and unusable components, and a confusing OS. These people didn't have the time, energy, nor technical skills to tweak this computer to make it usable.
This computer was an interesting experiment, and we'll see many more in the years to come. There's no way companies can sell $200 computers while buying a Windows license. Something is going have to give. You're going to see a lot more Linux computers for the masses before the end of next year. Someone is going to get it right.
I don't think there *were* C7 processors out then, and not at that Mhz.
What you've probably got there is a Via Ezra or a Nehemiah predecessor, maybe an early C-3. They weren't very useful for much more than things that required low-power-consumption.
Once things got the Nehemiah (C3 1Ghz-1.2Ghz) they weren't too bad. I've used one as low-power video+game (MAME) unit. The C7's are better and newer than those now too.
Not likely. People I've worked with who don't know what an OS is also don't know how to install software or even understand the whole software/hardware dichotomy. They don't buy their own software, they have their grandchildren do it. The grandchild will just load Wine and get it running.
Intron: the portion of DNA which expresses nothing useful.
Well, yeah, it's a different OS. If you know what you're doing, you can run Windows software on Macs, but most people generally don't. The point is to have alternatives available, but still have compatibility where it counts; for example, MS Office isn't available, so you use OpenOffice or StarOffice, which can read MS Office files if necessary.
So the question is not whether you can run Windows/Mac software, but whether there is enough functionality there to allow the user to do the same things they would on a Mac or PC. From what I read in the review, the answer is a somewhat shaky "yes," though there are some serious performance issues.
I think manufacturers have long overestimated the market for simple, cheap computers that are little more than word processors and web-surfing machines. It's true that for a lot of people out there, those are the main functions of their computer--but I don't think that means people want to be limited to that functionality.
Gifts for Geeks - Stuff that really matters!
I am a linux user of a few years. I love it, and would never return to Windows...
I worked for Microsoft for 6 years...maybe that is what turned me to the Light Side...
People need to understand that this PC is not the "replacement PC" for everyone...it is, however, a great alternative for those that want to get email, surf the web, write a term paper, or whatever it is that 99% of people do with their computer...
If you bought it with the idea that it was a gaming PC, well, you didn't read the ingredients. If you bought it with the idea that it was exactly like windows, well, again, you didn't read the fine print...
Seriously, people, it wasn't intended to be the perfect alternative, it was designed to be ONE OF THE AVAILABLE alternatives.
As far as it goes, I got one for my Grandmother, she has everything she needs (chat, email, internet, word processing, spreadsheets...) and she has had ZERO problems with it...but then, she wasn't indoctrinated with Microsquat Crapware first...
--E--
"Programs written for Mac or Windows will not run." ^ That line kind of irritates me when it's cited as a bad point for the machine. Isn't it pretty much a "No shit?" type of comment? Also, do they say "Programs written for Linux or Mac will not run" on every single Windows PC they review?
TEHY JUSS H8 TEH LUNIX BEKUZ M$$$$ GIVE TEHM STOKS!!!!
KOUNT YOR STOKS, PC MAGZOR!!! WEH TEH LUNIX TAKE UBER TEH WERLD, U BE SRY U DUNT HAF TEH LUNIX STOKS!!!!
BTW, shouldn't you guys be bashing Walmart for selling a Lunix machine in the same pricepoint as the OLPC? After all, teh OLPC is supposed to save the world, heal the sick, clean your bathroom, and is both a floor wax and a desert topping. Do you really want teh evel Walmartzor to bring their evel for-profit Lunix-based capitalistic machine into a market which is OLPC's by divine right? That's what you guys say about Intel's evel Classmate PC, so why is it ok for Walmart to release a $200 Lunix machine, but not ok for Intel to release a $200 machine which can run either Lunix or Windows?
Just wondering. Because, on the surface, your views seem hypocritical and contradictory. But that obviously can't be the case, since views held by Slashdotters would NEVER be hypocritical OR contradictory.
The freeness of Linux is a virtue. But the Freedom of Linux is where it's real value lies. Tying the Freedom to cheap-ass hardware and trying to sell that to the price-conscious market on the low end is a miscalculation. A lightweight Linux distro will certainly run better than current Windows on low-end hardware, but if a PC OEM wants to use Linux in this way, it shows that they only understand the bottom line dollar value aspect of why Linux is good for customers, and fails to recognize the stability, performance, security, and Freedom aspects of Linux's value. If Linux were interested in achieving marketshare (which, it kind of is, and kindof isn't -- Linux is not a single-minded entity, although I'm going to talk about it as though it were) then it would be in Linux's interest to position itself in the market on a high-end system that will be coveted and envied by users with high-end needs. Linux needs to dispell the myth that just because it is free, doesn't mean that it's cheaply made, and running it on low-end, barely adequate hardware is not going to accomplish that end.
You see? You see? Your stupid minds! Stupid! Stupid!
The review made some interesting points, if you read between the lines.
"gPC" = "GooglePC"? Where did this come from? WalMart didn't advertise that, did they? This little tidbit seems completely made up by everyone else. I was *never* under the impression that this was a Google anything.
The need to install a Flash module will introduce many/most gPC users to the always helpful advice from the Friendly Linux Community. Many forums will be awash with requests from gPC users about "how do I...", and responses ranging from "Go back to Winblows, dum$%^", "RTFM, %&&**"!, and " I wish them luck, thick skin, and a bag full of Tums.
Not to mention that the modem probably won't work ever. Ubuntu et al aren't motivated to make Winmodems work, modem are pus, dialup is inadequate for maintenance, blablabla.
But, on a positive note, I'm hoping the lusers do return these gPCs for refunds. I'll snarf one up if it shows up in clearance. Kinda cheap for for a basic little Samba/MythTV server, certainly a better than a Windows Home Server, no?
deleting the extra space after periods so i can stay relevant, yeah.
No surprise here in the Slashdot reaction. Rather than looking at this review objectively, and asking whether there are some issues with the gOS PC and whether improvements could be made to make Linux more palatable to grandma and Joe six-pack, the Slashdot group mostly jumps all over the article with stupid comments about how the reviewer is being paid off my Microsoft, and how "the gOS sold out, so it MUST be good!"
There seems to be this weird attitude in some of the pro-Linux crowd that everyone who isn't using Linux must be either stupid or incompetent, and that people should line up to buy any Linux product that is offered, regardless of how good.
The review did make some reasonable points that indicate why this is not a reasonable PC for grandma. And why just using an old PC with Ubuntu is a better option.
A google search that doesn't use the default browser? No indication when programs are launching? No flash install, and no obvious way of doing so? Difficulty changing the montior resolution? These and other issues make this a very questionable PC to be offered at Wal-Mart. It isn't like this PC is being offered by some store catering to geeks...this is freakin' WAL-MART! They must expect that a large portion of their market is going to be non-technical and the issues listed are fairly serious to a non-technical user.
Rather than taking criticism as an opportunity to evaluate why Linux hasn't penetrated the market to any great extent, the typical reaction seems to criticism seems to be "I don't believe it".
But in the words of a famous Jedi Master: "That is why you fail."
walmart sold out....wonder how many of those would be returned if walmart allowed returns after the box is opened.
they are comparing a cheap set of hardware against the standard hardware that Windows runs on. Just try to install Windows on the Wal-mart pc and then do the comparisons!
http://www.gibby.net.au
Maybe it's just me, but... $450 isn't something everybody just has lying around. A junk computer, on the other hand... well, I personally can't seem to rid myself of them, so I load Linux on them and *viola* I have what amounts to an internet kiosk in every room of my house. I could also run an assortment of other useful services on them if I so desired.
Windows would cost money and be basically unusable and un-updatable on many of these systems. Perhaps the energy they use cancels this next bit out, but at least they aren't in a land fill. They still have a lot of life left in them.
These new systems are way over powered for the system requirements of web browsing. Old systems work just fine for that, if that's your main goal. These new systems are so powerful (and thus pricey) so they can run Vista, and perhaps a few games. Not everybody needs that to review their stocks and pay their credit card. (Personally I have some killer systems, but I still put the junk to good use.)
Don't underestimate the power of FREE.
Move all sig!
You're saying that people who spend hundreds of dollars for a machine to play a game that costs sixty dollars and is actually digital crack aren't retards?
I will grant you that Guitar Hero is pretty fucking cool. And I admit to being addicted to Quake way back in the last century. And Road Rash. And...
Oh hell I'm a retard.
mcgrew's razor: Never attribute to stupidity that which can be explained by greedy self-interest
Save up for just a little longer and buy something for at least $450 that runs Windows Vista. That is if you want an object lesson in frustration and futility. A $450 PC is not going to Windows Vista well. My cousin did this very thing and bought his kids a Compaq from Fry's with Vista Home. It was a dog. The kids ended up using his old PIII laptop with Ubuntu installed on it because it was faster. So he installed Ubuntu and it now runs great.
While installing Linux is intimidating to the novice user, when correctly implemented and preinstalled it's quite usable as a Web platform and for basic use. Its obvious that the reviewer has never installed Ubuntu because I've found its easy and quicker to install on most PC than any Windows installation. Heck you can run it from the CD.
Finally, if they need to have Windows programs installed, why not install VMWare or dual boot with a fresh install of their old version of Windows. Of which I'm assuming here that this would be someone that knows what they are doing and is setting up this computer for their kids, parents, friend, etc.....
Badges!?! We don't need no stinking badges!
From the description, it sounds like the machine gets some criticism it deserves buy how many people expect a cheap home OEM machine to have RAID out of the box? What next, bitch about the lack of tape drive?
I stopped reading PC magazine when it became Microsoft Windows magazine.
Something like that isn't so much a PC as a piece of consumer electronics. Meaning that it should work flawlessly right out of the box, and should have no need for supplemental installs. Unfortuntely it didn't and it had.
The issues mentioned in the review (screen resolution not set properly and reverts to improper default after changing, flash not installed so no Youtube, firefox not default although it said on the box that its browser is firefox, firefox launches so slow (and without feedback that it has been launched at all, so you find yourself launching it two or three times)) seriously detract from a "consumer electronics" user experience. So yes, from that point of view the offering falls short, and PC-Mag is right to be critical.
What I can't understand is: why can't they simply make it work perfectly straight out of the box? Without *any* need to tweak or adjust or install anything whatsoever. Well ... the Flash player might be impossible to include (because of its license conditions), but a simple and fool-proof install prompt when you first switch the thing on and connect it to the Internet could take care of that without the need for user intervention beyond choosing between: "Yes download and install Flash player now" and "No, don't install" and pressing return.
The flaws mentioned are fairly minor, but totally avoidable. That they were there at all is just a measure of sloppiness that's OK for IT gear, but not for consumer electronics (which is what this PC is being pitched as). Besides, an option of having 500 Mb of extra memory for say $20 more to make the whole thing run fluidly wouldn't have been amiss either.
This Everex seems to be a shit and it's a shame. Not that PCMag guy's fault. It isn't about Linux. He says that people'd better "get the Asus EEEPC", a Linux based laptop, very small, cheap and very good which had a 4 stars on PC Mag. Everex did a very bad job that stains Linux's image and they are the ones to blame.
Doesn't apply. Or is there anyone here who doesn't live in a basement?
Amen brother. Actually, more to the point Walmart shoppers are retards.
Badges!?! We don't need no stinking badges!
It's a computer that poor people use! Why don't they just save more money and buy a good one? I got it at this place called "Wal-Mart" and it cost almost as much as a tank of gas for our stretch hummer! And they didn't buy ANY advertising with our maaah-gazine! I'm afraid I'm going to have to release the hounds. Let the bitchy reviewer out of his cage!
I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?
The man's an idiot. He recommends Vista.
Just a mumbling, bumbling, paid M$ shrill.
Nothing to see hear, Move along.
I have one too. It works fine. I'll be buying more of them.
Some things were a little bit of a nuisance -- getting the resolution set to 1680x1050, installing flash and citrix client, getting it to boot from a sata drive. They weren't too hard to overcome but for a newsie type like the author probably a little too much to handle.
Performance though is not a problem at all. Blender works nicely for me, as does transcoding video. It plays videos and DVDs just fine. I used OO.o to edit some spreadsheets from work and that went fine too. The machine boots quick. The office apps load quick. It's not a games machine and it never will be but other than that I love it. It's sweet that you can install thousands of programs just by clicking on the menu and you don't have to go searching all over the internet to download them from potentially dodgy sites.
TFA was wrong about RAID. It has via's standard SATA RAID controller. I am not using it but it's there. You have to enable the SATA RAID to get it to boot from SATA even if you only have one SATA drive installed. It is a C7 processor. It's quiet. If performance ever does become an issue, I'll probably upgrade the RAM from 512MB to 2GB. Since this box uses DDR you can do that right now for about $45.
I don't know what he was looking to get for $200 but to me this was well worth the money.
20W at idle, 60W running full tilt is going to save me a bunch of money in electric bills also.
Help stamp out iliturcy.
When someone says "you get what you pay for" hang on to your wallet, because he's about to take you to the cleaners. The fact is that you often DON'T get what you pay for. Scammers never give you what you pay for.
You usually pay for what you get, but even then, not always.
How much did that air you're breathing cost?
In fact, most of those old sayings are utter balderdash. How about "money doesn't grow on trees", tell that to someone who owns an orchard. And I guess whoever says "there's no such thing as a free lunch" never had a grandmother.
In fact, the only one I've ever heard that has always been accurate I only heard one place, from my dad. He said "don't believe anything you hear, and only half of what you see."
-mcgrew
mcgrew's razor: Never attribute to stupidity that which can be explained by greedy self-interest
"Save up for just a little longer and buy something for at least $450 that runs Windows Vista..." VISTA!?!? Vista is HORRIBLE. I'm one of the lucky few that had the smarts to downgrade back to XP. I can't believe this writer still has a job.
All is prevelant in the world...
Really cheap parts means near-disposable. This means motherboards with compatibility issues and lockups, hard drives that melt, CD drives that periodically get confused between reboots. It means a bad computing experience, and whatever operating system is running on that machine will get blamed for it.
It seems to me that giving poor people cheap junky computers will result in more landfill, more tech support calls, and more angry nothingtalk about how technology sux.
Anti-Globalism
And the users that know what that symbol means, probably won't buy it.
How many times has Mom, Grandma, Uncle John bought that game "becuse it looked so fun" and then you had to explain to them you had a {Wii,360,PS3,DS} and the game they bought you was for the {Wii,360,PS3,DS}. I've heard stories of people getting offended at their Christmas present being returned. Even if it was just exchanged for THE EXACT SAME GAME on the popper platform.
Please, describe to me how you're going to explain to Grandma that Brain Age won't work on your 360 and you have to return it.
To me, this machine would have been much more worth the money if it had come in an appropriately sized case. It's a MiniITX board, and it's still put in a full-size minitower case, just to make it look like you get more than you'd think. If it had come in a small MiniITX case instead, it would have made a great little thinclient or web browsing station.
Ummm. Can someone explain about the smoke and mirrors? No Energy Star? Please.
That's exactly how a publication like PC Mag works if you don't have a big PR machine and advertising budget behind you. They use odd reasons peppered throughout a review to discredit the product. It's all vaguely based in facts that are used to come to a non-sensical conclusion that the product is "bad."
It's important to acknowledge the legitimate shortcomings of the product. In this case it's the fact that their e17 desktop has many shortcomings.
http://www.maxineudall.com/2010/02/should-economists-be-sued-for-malpractice.html
I think the fact that this post was moderated as "Insightful" and neither of the two responses (as of this writing) sought to qualify or refute it is a perfect explanation for why Linux hasn't made it to the desktop mainstream in the 7 or so years they have been trying to do so. Con Kolivas was right -- there are a lot of closed (and not very high-functioning) minds in this community.
Regards,
Shane
I went looking on walmart.com for the Linux box and could not find it. However, I found that they are selling an Everex Impact GC3502 Desktop with Windows Vista Home Basic for $278!
Now the specs suck, but it's comparible to my old laptop which runs Vista just fine (without Aero). It's an 80 GB hard drive, 1 GB of RAM, ethernet, modem, and comes with OpenOffice installed. Just no monitor.
You can upgrade the RAM to 2 GB or throw in a USB stick and use ReadyBoost. And external drives are cheap.
Sounds like a much better alternatve for the kids and grandma.
-David
Why pay $200 when you can get everything you need for less than $50 at Goodwill or another thrift store and slap Ubuntu on it?
What?
I have a feeling the gPC selling out has little to do with people getting tired of Windows. After reading quite a few customer reviews, a lot of people didn't even realize it didn't have Windows on it. I'm sure if they had questions about it, there weren't too many people working to help. Have you ever spoken to someone working in electronics at Walmart? It's amazing they got the job there. You'd think they would hire people suited for the task.
What this system really lacks, from what I have read, (I haven't really bought or even used one.) is synaptic, and a quick link to a Debian repository. Then the Author could get whatever he wanted. Firefox/Iceweasel, games like Freeciv, Westnoth, whatever. He could get his fill of ofice type apps too.
For the specs I've seen Abi or Koffice might be a better choice than Open Office, the specs for the machine are minimal. If I had one of these machines the first thing I'd do is add memory. It's still slow, but would at least run some interesting stuff.
Still, it is a nice first stab at a decent low end home machine. I can remember being happy with my old K6 300. This thing has better specs than that. You just have to be choosy in what you run.
Everybody knows 3 people with my name.
I bought a 64bit dual core GeForce, HP portable with 2 Gigs of RAM, webcam and Vista Premium for my teenage daughter. After a day I was asked to remove it and install Linux (or XP). Having no XP lying around it now dualboots with Ubuntu and Vista and she never ever uses Vista.
:)
From power on to a responsive Vista and Open Office: ++5-7mins
From power on to a responsive Ubuntu and Open Office: at most 3mins
Oh yes I did use the closed source NVIDIA driver as well as fiddling a bit to get the substandard WiFi card working. But now she's got a non DRM'ed machine that readily recognizes her ipod and every other gadget wev'e tried including the built in webcam not to mention the coolness factor of having a much faster machine than any of her friends
moral of the story: if you are a linux noob, you might not enjoy a linux machine because its not windows
The author's words are so profound
Klingon Software is not released, it escapes, inflicting terrible damage onto the enemy as it does
Without wanting to comment on any bias in the article, I would have thought that a Linux-based desktop would be perfect for basic web surfing and email. In fact, five years ago when I was finally able to drop the need to open an Access database on my home PC, I realised that I only used my home PC for email and web browsing, and that I could finally dump Windows 98 for a Linux desktop and not regret it a bit. I use XP and Vista at work because that's what I'm employed to write software for, but I haven't ever had it at home since then.
I just came back from a holiday meeting more relatives where I was asked to take a look at yet another PC that's acting broken. It's a budget PC running Windows XP for little more than web browsing and email. Unfortunately they're so afraid to run Windows XP that they won't do so without crippling it with megabucks worth of frustratingly stupid Norton utilities, none of which cope well with the budget 256 MB of RAM. Notably, there's so much swapping due to the crap starting up that it takes an agonising 10 minutes after switching on before the desktop starts responding to user actions and it's possible to actually do anything. Ironically, the initial problem I was asked to look at was her inability to properly install a Norton upgrade that she'd been frightened into paying yet another $80 for.
Other people's experiences may have been different, but this is fairly typical of the web surfing and email Windows systems that I've come across at people's homes -- they're either crippled and slow (or they're expensive high=end systems), or they're completely overrun with spyware and viruses. It's up to each person to decide what's best for them, but personally I think that a well configured Linux-based system can be an excellent desktop for email and web browsing, if there's a way to get it to people and reliably support them on occasion.
Ok, he says it's no good because you can't install Windows or OS X apps on it. STUPID.
And look at all the sad little Microshaft fanboys on Slashdot defending the review. tsk, tsk.
...is such stuff modded down. Truth we don't like to hear, because it's not pro-linux! This is blatant mod absuse.
I had a friend who was gonna buy a mac at some point (pre-OS X). Until I explained to him they don't run windows, and his existing games (and likely most of the ones he was gonna expect to play in the future) wouldn't run on it, nor basically any of the apps he used.
TONS of end users don't know any better. It's a computer, right?
I've seen tons of people try macs and linux, but they eventually all go back to windows, because that's the only thing that will run the apps they want/need.
A big problem with everyone who complains about Linux is the fact that you are the installer, whereas most people who run Windows got it on their computer, which means it is all set up for everything on it. I would be more into a comparison of a Dell Inspiron with the Ubuntu pre-install against one with Vista. This would be a fair comparison. The comp was $200 dollars, and sold in Wal-Mart. Don't make a big deal about it. Concentrated on the pre-installs from Lenovo, Dell, Asus and HP.
To say it all, clearly the guy is trying to sell Vista for Microsoft. He really has no valid complaint, but since PC mag makes money from Microsoft for Vista advertising his review of the product (which has gotten very good reviews all around) he's dumping on it.
I'd say he has no leg to stand on. I wouldn't doubt that he simply made up a list of what was wrong from what he read, glanced at the box, and then published his list.
He is selling Vista for Microsoft, he's not writing reviews. His words are baseless, they have little value, other reviews show he's off the mark. He forgets that we all know that a $199 computer wasn't meant for high end use. This product performs. It is sweet. The software is more than magic. He's just griping because it is a huge seller, very popular, and it has linux instead of Vista.
You can lead a man with reason but you can't make him think.
EXACTLY. People always comment on how much friendlier Windows is.... I just don't see it. If it was so damn friendly, then why do I still have to keep answering questions about it from my family and friends? And seriously, at what point are we going to be noob-free? Teenagers these days haven't known when computers didn't exist. My 2.5 year old daughter can use the mouse and play her Reader Rabbit games on the PC pretty well, whereas an elderly neighbor had no clue how to use a mouse - she was hovering her hand over it and moving her hand around. Quite a clash of generations. I guess we'll always have noobs in a sense, but they won't be as prevalent.
I've been using Linux on my home machine since RedHat 6.1, and the advances it has made on the desktop are nothing short of amazing. But there are still things I don't know, and things that frustrate the hell out of me with it. But I wouldn't have it any other way. I'm more comfortable with Windows than Mac, those things just do not mesh well with my brain. It will be interesting in 10, 20 years to see how things have progressed. Hopefully I'll be able to keep up.
My beliefs do not require that you agree with them.
Because users of Linux have attitudes? I have to disagree with you Shane.
He claims it's too slow "even in the out-of-box state when a PC is expected to be at its fastest." Which just shows an incredible Windows bias. Someone should hit him several times with a clue stick screaming "Real operating systems don't slow down just because you use them or install software!"
That said, I have basically this machine (built from scratch). I use it for a file server. I might consider something like this as a terminal in my kitchen, but I'd never suggest anyone use one as their main machine unless they really can't afford something more.
If they had only paid for the review insurance to ensure a good review, then they could have gotten like 3 out of 4 stars.
Clearly a Wintel shill.
Athiesm is a religion like not collecting stamps is a hobby.
That's only $133 per star. Sounds pretty good to me.
-Dave
It looks like he has some legitimate gripes. (App-launching feedback, in particular.)
But he says one really dumb thing, and one pretty-iffy thing.
The dumb thing:
Oh, please. Windows may be appropriate for people who need legacy applications, but you sure as hell don't want something like that in the hands of novice users, especially if they're going to be surfing the web. Grandma will install Malware if you give her Windows. Give her Linux, and Grandma is not going to know to chmod u+x her viruses before running them.
Until recently, I recommend Macs to novice users, but after using one at work for a while, I saw how automatic/easy it is to download a disk image file, click it to mount it, and then you're ready to execute .. whatever. Linux is now clearly the best choice (compared to the most popular alternatives) for novices. Maybe gOS isn't the right flavor, but .. Windows?!? You gotta be kidding. Nobody hates their grandmother that much.
The iffy thing:
This really sounds reasonable, at first.
Alas, it's time for people to think about whether installing Flash is really a good idea. If you've followed stories like this, you'll know that Flash, like Windows-on-the-Internet, has also become inappropriate for novice users. Yes, that position might seem extreme. The problem is, the opposing position (that Flash is ok) is even more extreme. These are interesting times.
I'm not sure it's a bad idea for general computer experience (i.e. the ability to install RPMs) to be a prerequisite for enabling Flash; my only concern is that the bar may be too low. If you think I'm nuts for saying that, then you didn't click the above links.
I'm not saying gOS did the right thing for the right reason, but what they did probably worked to their customers' advantage.
As copyright owner of this comment, I authorize everyone to defeat any technological measure which limits access to it.
why would an end user expect the game to run any more than one would expect a Wii game to run on an Xbox 360?
[sigh] You haven't worked in tech support, have you?
The ______ Agenda
Because one also must answer the question "why did it sell out?". Did it sell out because it was cheap? Did it sell out because it was Linux? Did is sell out because it wasn't Windows? Did it sell out because it wasn't a Mac either?
Rumours and anecdotal evidence around the release date suggests that a large number of them went not to John Q. Public, but to Linux devotees wanting a cheap and preconfigured box. If this is true - then it suggests that the next batch may not sell quite as well.
A single data point does not define a curve.
But they can bet on XP being installed - and that is a lot of boxen. The "network effect" is still there, faded only slightly at best.
I tried installing gOS on a machine with a 450 MHz P-III processor and 512 MB of RAM. Apart from the issues noted by the review's author, I also discovered that gOS does not have an easily available or apparent trash can. Newbies all too frequently delete important files. The idea of not having an intermediate step between click and *gone forever* is, to me, a significant shortcoming. In addition, with all of its eye candy and glitz, the UI is relative resource hog (compared to the UI's of other distros) and there's little payback in terms of usability.
I'd call this OS a pretty, if useless, attempt at an OS for everyone else. It falls far short of the mark.
As for the peecee, it seems OK, if underpowered. I'd give it a try with Win XP Home. I wouldn't want to use it for work, but for every day surfing it might do the job. On the other hand, the modem this machine ships with doesn't work? That's a very bad call from someone, Wal Mart's buyers?
-Joe
Get off my virtual lawn, you damned virtual kids!
Why would I buy a brand $200 PC that can't even accept SATA or AGP/PCI Express video card, Pentium III performance CPU, and have no OS, when I can get the $200 refurbished PC that includes socket 775 Pentium 4, AGP slot, bigger hard drive, and XP Pro licence? It may not be a brand new PC, but it sure outrun, outperform, and outexpand whatever everex/Walmart tried to get people to buy, plus more environmentally friendly.
...or at least Adobe's handling of it and Linux. If you didn't know, Ubuntu's flashplugin-nonfree package is broken because Adobe upgraded the package (r115) and deleted the last version compatible with konqueror and opera (r48) in dapper/edgy/feisty/gutsy. You can manually upgrade but it'll only work in Firefox while the others will crash.
Last I checked they were reviewing whether to make a huge backport on konqueror or not to fix it. Obviously Adobe doesn't give permission for the distros to redistribute it, or they couid have kept back. I wish gnash was a usable alternative but like so many GNU projects it's outdated and in my experience so buggy and crashing the browser to be useless. Another example of this is java, I always install Sun's packages because honestly, they're *way* better.
All that said, I find the annoyances get fewer and fewer and overall they're tolerable. There's still a bit too much that needs to be manually fixed (e.g. this 1440x900 LCD monitor isn't detected correctly, side buttons on my explorer mouse) but the things that are hackable are at least... hackable. Proprietary formats/codecs are annoying as hell, though there's hope. As usual, almost everything you find on bittorrent works great but the "real" things you have to fight tooth and nail with.
Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
I have never used Linux before, but I did use Unix on Sun workstations for a little while in the 90's. I own about 10 windows based computers.
....
Here are my comments on the Walmart computer.
Good
- Cheap! $200.
- Very Quiet!
- Seems stable.
- Comes with lots of installed software: Word Processor, Photo Editing, Spreadsheet, a PDF viewer, FireFox,
Bad
- Somewhat slow (which I had expected.)
- I think that it will take me a long time to get used to GOS (Linux?), but my kids are doing fine with it. It took me about 5 minutes to figure out how to change the screen resolution. There are icons that I can't seem to get rid of, but I haven't tried too much.
- The little documentation that came with the machine was not 100% correct.
Overall: Seems like a great cheap computer for the kids and it may even be good for surfing the Web and learning about computers in general.
You could buy this PC to use for a hardware project, such as for installing Windows Home Server or another flavor of Linux.
It is interesting that he thinks someone could actually run Windows Home Server on this box. In the light of the Microsoft warning to the effect of "don't save any documents using windows software to a machine running windows server", the author is very bold.
IMHO the article little more than an example of rating:investment skew.
Having to work for a living is the root of all evil.
As Fred A noted in a post above, it's about what people are used to. It's, IMHO, the reason crappy Ipods tethered to Itunes sell so well and Jobs' reality distortion field plays only a small part there.
If we stay true to the open source course there will eventually be enough prolifiration that adoption will be more feasable to the masses thereby introducing the resources necessary to improve the products and increasing global tolerance for their problems much like they already do with respect to Windows. Linux fanatics aside, how many thought we'd see anything but a Windows or Mac system sold through a distributor such as Walmart already? Albeit baby steps we're getting there folks and should expect this from general tech media who as of late seem to only want to find what's wrong with technologies as it's safer (irrefutable) but still brings in the dollars (ex. readers, buyoffs, etc.)
In a past post I opined how ridiculous the computer review process is in general. It's like putting a Hummer against a BMW. If you test it from the perspective of off-roading, cost or virtually any factor it's pointless as they shouldn't be compared directly to begin with. Comparing this system with Windows or Macs is silly as I don't see any available at that price point. So why state you can't run Windows or Mac apps on it and make other such expectations of it? If I were to review it from solely the perspective of using it for my grandma that wants nothing more than net access it'd be the greatest, no? I don't see Dremel cordless rotary tools being compared to full band saws even if both can technically be called upon to do a number of the same tasks.
That's just my POV... no more, no less.
First off, PC mag is owned by Ziff-Davis, and I believe that Ziff-Davis is owned by M$.
Problems with the article I saw were:
Comparing the gPC and monitor against just a HP without monitor in power usage, then going on to note that most machines can use 500w while the gPC only uses 80w. I don't get how using less isn't green.
He complains it's slow and he knows it's a ViA CPU. He must not really understand much bout CPU's.
Slams the gPC because it's not certified and therefore isn't green. Certification doesn't really guarantee anything. A lot of those certifications have loopholes that let manufacturer's get away with stuff.
He says it wouldn't make a good machine to tinker with, but only talks about it's interface limitations out of the box as a reason why.
He complains that it won't run Windows or Mac software...DUH
He basically nitpicks the interface without really giving any solid reasons why it's bad. If you wanna nitpick, have a look at Vista or Leoard, you could spend days on that one.
He says at the end that isn't alot to recommend about the machine, from the article all I heard him say is he doesn't like the interface. Guess he's the type that is only comfortable with his old worn shoes and not new things.
It's a pity that PC mag is so petty and has articles that pretty much shill for it's parent company instead of offering anything of value.
Even though it is well-known that they give good reviews to advertisers and vice versa? Micro$oft is one of PC Rag's biggest advert buyers. Gee, I wonder what they're going to do to one of Micro$oft's main competitors . . .
The Geek weights the dice by quoting retail list for the most expensive incarnation of a program in its class.
But the truth is that the GIMP doesn't compete with Photoshop. If you are thinking Photoshop you are the guy who doesn't go into sticker stock when he sees the $1500 price tag for a Sigma lens.
The GIMP competes with Paint.NET. Paint Pro Pro. Photoshop Elements. Etc.
Programs which are easily mastered and easily affordable.
This isn't the first - or even the second time - Walmart has slapped a $200 price tag on an OEM Linux box with bottom-feeder specs and tried to make it mass-market.
Nothing ever comes of it. The poor aren't buying PCs at any price. The middle class can afford better.
The OffficeMax Christmas special was an $800 HP bundle: HP Dual Core Laptop with Vista Premium. HP multifunction color printer-scanner, 6.2 megapixel HP digital camera.
Blah blah blahblah blah blah
blah blah blah blah blah blah
Spend a little more (over 100% more) and buy something with Vista on it.
Blah blah blahblah blah blah
blah blah blah blah blah blah.
Please note, they found NOTHING wrong with the PC except the missing Microsoft operating system which btw. has been called "The worst Windows since ME", "Microsoft's biggest failure" and "The worst product of 2007".
"When you were born, you didn't even know how to roll onto your side! Now it's inconceivable for you not to be able to do that. "
I still don't know how to do that. But I hear it's in Service Pack 3.
"- stop switching kernel API's around every few releases, release a binary driver spec and stick to it"
Too bad it probably will not happen.
For some reason people seem to think that this will make companies release FOSS drivers. The fact that nVidia and ATI are still releasing closed drivers doesn't seem to matter to them.
Then you have the statment that they don't have to write FOSS drivers they can just release the specs and the FOSS community will write better drivers than they can.
Well ATI is releasing the specks for some of it's GPUs so I guess we will see.
"- get rid of all those duplicate halfbaked projects and put all the effort into a single set of office software.
What use is to have 3 different versions of everything, with every forked and me-too project the chance of large scale end-user adoption for linux goes down."
That can not be done. How do you tell someone that they can not write a program? Why would you want to?
I figure choice is a good thing. And since most of these projects are free what right do I have to tell them what to do?
See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
How many units did Walmart sell? How many were returned?
Who were the buyers? Walmart's core lower and middle class customers? The Geek in the market for a Christmas toy? A kit of parts?
How did Linux at $200 perform sales-wise and profit-wise in competition with Windows Vista?
If Vista sales and profits were stronger at two or three times the price, consider this experiment a failure --- and don't slide over the potential for after-market sales of Windows hardware, software and peripherals.
If Vista sucks rocks why is it that in the W3Schools stats Vista is the only OS that has shown consistent growth in market share all year? While Linux shows all the movement in the last four years of a snail on a salt lick?
Stable API Nonsense
I didn't bother to read the whole review when I see THIS nonsense:
"Ethernet "Internet Connection Required." Modem is nonfunctional (for now). 1,280-by-800 resolution forced by internal graphics. Adobe Flash installation can be confusing for a novice. Google search window goes to WebRunner, not the expected Firefox. Programs written for Mac or Windows will not run."
Obviously if you're buying a box that requires Google software, you need a NIC and an Internet connection. Nobody ever said this was a standalone box. And almost nobody buys a standalone box these days anyway. A non-issue.
Since 60% of more of people in the US have broadband, the modem is irrelevant. Sure, it would be better if it functioned out of the box for the small number of people who don't have broadband - and such people are probably the only ones who'd buy a $200 box for price reasons - but obviously the designers went for some el-cheapo WinModem crap to lower the cost without considering the lack of support. Not a big deal considering the price.
Flash installation is confusing for any Linux distro for a novice. No news here. Not really a deal killer given the price, again.
The Google Search design appears to be stupid, big deal. Again, hardly a deal killer given the price.
But the killer phrase: "Programs written for Mac or Windows will not run."
DUH! No shit, Dick Tracy! It's fucking LINUX, you MORONS!
This is obviously written by the Windows PC reviewer, not some unbiased reviewer.
Richard Steven Hack - This sig is TOO GODDAMN SHORT TO DO ANYTHING USEFUL WITH! MORONS!
Maybe 4.0 still has some rough edges for now (considering that it isn't even out yet), but from the features standpoint it totally rocks. I wonder how KDE 4 will compare to Vista once Kubuntu 8.04 or even 8.10 comes out. 2007 was the year desktop Linux was accepted. 2008 will be the year Linux takes over the desktop.
The only problems I've had with my Flash9 install are the windows-oriented sites that don't recognize that it's installed, and that it's a good idea to have symlinks from /usr/bin/mozilla/plugins to every other browser plugin directory on the computer so when I update Flash, the upgrade shows up on all the browsers I use.
Tech Public Policy stuff
I recently helped out a friend with a low cost Dell Ubuntu desktop. They already had Windows XP and wanted to install that but also wanted to play with Linux. I setup the system to dual boot XP and Ubuntu.
The first issue she had was getting the proper resolution working on her widescreen 24" monitor. Reconfiguring resolutions in X windows can be daunting for a new user. This is a brain dead simple thing to do on Windows and on Mac.
The second issue was with running the Java based game Runescape in Firefox. Firefox recognized the need for a plugin. Installed the open source (iced tea?) one which proceeded to fail. To get Runescape to work required clearing out that mess, installing Sun Java and choosing to install the Sun Java plugin in Firefox.
It would be nice if at least on computer sold with Linux preinstalled there was a script that could enable using common components like Java and Flash.
Sometimes my arms bend back.
When I walk into Best Buy - where is the Linux hardware section?
Dude -- you are a glutton for punishment. Best Buy? You must enjoy pain.
If I go to Best Buy and pick out a TV Tuner and inside that box there is a disk with a driver that will make it work on my system.
Oh -- this reminds me of another painful thing about installing Windows -- The driver CD shuffle. Then this is followed by the software install CD shuffle. Each one requires a reboot.
Linux has better driver organization. The drivers are organized by the internal chips used in the hardware. Each driver has a list of vendor ID / device IDs that it supports. If Linux supports the hardware then it is painless.
You are a masochist in 3 ways:
You go to Best Buy -- ( This is the most masochistic thing you do! )
You do the driver CD shuffle with multiple reboots when you install Windows.
You do the software install CD shuffle with multiple reboots when you install the software.
Religion is the main cause of atheism.
It's official. Most of you are morons.
I wanted one of the 199.00 Everex computers, but I didn't want to order one. And I wanted a system with 1 Meg of RAM in it, and the 199.00 system only has 512. I ended up with the 273.00 Everex from Wal-Mart. It has a Gig of RAM, instead of 512, and a licensed copy of Vista. I added two 160 Gig IDE drives and made my first dual boot system (and hope to boot into Vista as little as possible), but my second Ubuntu box. For what I paid, I'm really happy, but I still think it is a little underpowered, making me really glad I paid extra for the extra RAM.
The thing is slightly quirky, too. I ended up changing the boot priority of the hard drives to make the IDE master boot first. A couple of days later, it just totally lost this setting and I had to go back into the BIOS and reconfigure it.
There are also issues with Ubuntu and the SATA drive it came with. Only my IDE drives showed up during the Ubuntu install, and they do not show up in Ubuntu either. The SATA drive will show up in Ubuntu, however, if I change the SATA controller type to RAID instead of IDE in the BIOS...but this setting makes the system reboot when you try to boot Vista from the SATA drive (yeah!).
Now the dual boot system works the way I want, but what trouble would I have run into if I had just wanted to wipe the SATA drive and install Ubuntu on it? One reason I went with Everex is that they are selling basically the same system with Linux on it, so I figure I'm not going to have many issues installing Ubuntu onto it. I think I might have to rethink that one.
And for the not newbie friendly thread running here: Of all the things I have issues with, the one place I really think Windows is way ahead of Linux in ease of use, is if you add a hard drive to Windows, 99% of the time, it just shows up and you can use it. For the love of all things holy, I never understood why this can't be done in Linux.
If it is a security issue, I wish it would just just do something like this, "a new drive has been detected, would you like the drive secure and locked down, or do you want to just use it? press Y for a usable drive, press N for a locked down drive."
You know, I can figure out a way to get something to work, but I don't think it is acceptable for someone to simply add a new hard drive and then have to spend 45 minutes to a couple of hours reading forums trying to figure out how to actually access it.
Transporter_ii
Doctors destroy health, lawyers destroy justice, universities destroy knowledge, religion destroys spirituality
I have an old 800mhz iMac with a bunch of stuff connected to it. MacOS can use everything out of the box except for my Epson scanner, which requires manually installed drivers. For kicks, I downloaded Ubuntu to see how it would run on my Mac. It was 100% functional including the scanner. Any OS that is more functional out of the box than MacOS deserves respect.
-rd
He is saying you could find a better PC at the Salvation Army's Thrift Shop or your neighbor's garage sale.
It is more like 40% than 60%.
Walmart is still associated with low income shoppers in outland suburbs and rural areas where broadband penetration is weak.
That is one reason why there has been a resurgence in the mom & pop dial-up ISP. Why Walmart.com still advertises dial-up AOL. AOL Essential Service $9.95 a month.
But the killer phrase: "Programs written for Mac or Windows will not run."
DUH! No shit, Dick Tracy! It's fucking LINUX, you MORONS!
But that is the killer phrase, the deal breaker for most Walmart shoppers. There are hundreds of bargain bin games and other apps that will run on a Windows PC that you can find anywhere at garage sale prices.
The original Half-Life is approaching ten years in print.
Print Shop has been around since the Apple II and there is still nothing in FOSS to replace it.
If it had sold for $250 and come with windows xp instead would he have given it 3 points instead?
at your parent's place. You could admin it over ssh and spare those IT-Support trips.
...a stunned silence fell upon the hall.
I am even more surprised that the only reader review for the article, says only good stuff about the computer, but at the same time it gives EVEN WORSE RATING (1 vs editors' 1.5): http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2704,2227810,00.asp#member_rating
Is it reader's oversight, or who assigned or changed the rating then...
Why don't these people who review Linux based computers and give the OS a bad review just come clean. Its not hard to do. All they have to say is the following:
" I'm an idiot and too lazy to want to learn a new Operating system like Linux"
Is that hard. Please someone tell me. Is that really hard to say?
I've been using Linux for 10 years and doing Microsoft tech support for the last five. In 10 years I've never had the problems with Linux that my customers call in every day with windows. So I ask which system is harder to use? Windows which you have to call tech support all the time for or Linux which you never do.
It kicks ass. Some of you other geeks out there that picked one of these up know what I'm talkin' 'bout.
Yeah, I wish it had an actual mini-itx in there (I think its a flex-atx), but I'm still going to bend it to my will. Why, just the other day, for shits and giggles, I yanked that modem (woops, bye-bye warranty) and jammed in my old AverMedia 350. A few package downloads later and I was watching who-knows-what while I was scratchboxing some stuff for my Nokia N800. This was all happening configure-free in 1920x1080 on my 37".
It might not be for everyone. It's not even really for me. But it sure is funny to think of me and granny (if she were still alive) IMing each other some Windows humor from our $200 POS's.
Other note: It has an S/PDIF OUT header (coax I think) and a 2nd serial port header. Plenty of good green times to be had.
Get your dogma outta my yard!
I took my Dell Ubuntu laptop back to my family home this Christmas. I let my younger brother (16 years old) use it a bit to reduce contention on the family PC, which runs Windows XP Home.
My brother quickly got the hang of it. He found Firefox. He found OpenOffice. He made the UI theme for his user account look really ugly and teenager-y, just like on the Windows machine. I realised on subsequent days why this is: kids these days are exposed to all sorts of computer-like tech that doesn't run Windows: mobile phones, handheld consoles, non-handheld consoles, set-top boxes, fancy televisions... they're used to quickly adapting to new user interfaces.
It wouldn't surprise me if ten years from now the precise UI is largely irrelevant, and software and devices will be judged on their functionality and design.
Finally, a computer that doesn't have mumbo jumbo humbo massive pieces of hardware for everyday people to read their emails and watch DVDs and word process.
To me, even 1 ghz is overkill. All you need to surf the web, read emails and watch DVDs and word process is a 533 Mhz 256mb ram with a big HD, running a sane operating system.
Of course, gOS can be a total piece of crap, so this is probably where this fails. The idea is good, you can't argue with that. People DON'T NEED massive rigs to do everyday stuff, it'll just eat loads of power and do nothing at all.
For people who don't game, this would be a good alternative if not takes a bit to get used to. But hey, $200. thats often less than 1/10th the price of a modern comp with Vista with asically the same functionaliy. Yet the massive hardware will just be wasting all its resources on just running the operating system just so that it can give you nice transition effects and glossy glass windows.
For people that do game, err..Windows Vista, game? yeah, good luck, smartarse.
No! You don't get it. There is a difference between VALUE invert (i.e., creating a new adjustment -> Invert layer and setting it to LUMINOSITY and then masking it via layer transparency if needed) and plain-old invert. Sometimes you need to invert the colors without inverting the values, so in GIMP you would use filters->something->value invert, which would only invert the luminosity.
I know these don't look like much, but obviously desktop screenshots aren't the best example.
Value invert: http://img407.imageshack.us/img407/4690/valueinvertgb8.jpg
Invert: http://img407.imageshack.us/img407/3048/invertni3.jpg
Well, damn, what a great revelation. Whoda thunkit? After seeing that, I didn't bother reading the rest of the review.
Excuse me, but please get off my Pennisetum Clandestinum, eh!
You have a valid point. 4 years ago I set up a PC for a 86 year old Grandma that had never used a computer before. For the first 8 months when it was running windoze I got calls every two weeks that something was broke or it was doing weird things. After 8 months and the system got severely infected I ask her to try Linux. So I loaded Fedora and set it up for her. Well it has been running for three years now and not one call of problems. I hear from her about every 2 months to say "Hi!" and the only thing she has to say is how well "Linus" (that is what she calls her computer) is doing. About every 3months or so I shell into the box from my house and run yum to update the system and check on things. Yes Grandma loves Linux running on a older used PC. It does email. It surfs the web. She can look at and save photos of the Grand Kids. She can write and print a letter. Thats all she needs and the icons are on her desktop. She loves it.
All beading edge distributions use alpha/beta applications which cause the instability that most complain about. Ubuntu is NO different despite all the rave.
I use my system for production and business management and have no time for system crashes, software glitches, or file system corruption. As such, I have settled with Debian Etch i386 and KDE as my distribution and GUI of choice. It is extremely stable and far more advanced than any MS product that I care about. Even operations that will choke Windows "Extra Proprietary" run quickly and smoothly in Debian 4. I have the most recent 2.6.23 kernel, OOo 2.3, K3B 1.x, full multimedia, USB hotplug, self-healing journaled filesystem, etc, etc, ... Win2k/WinXP can hold NO candle to this. Occasionally I must boot 2k or XP for QuickBooks or Autocad, but the MS experience is always frustrating, buggy, gets in your way, and pisses me off to the point of wanting to throw my PC out the window. Most anything else that you can do in WinBlows can be done in Linux faster and easier. There is always a learning curve to any new technology, and I prefer to learn and use the OSS solution than using any "dead end" MS based crap-ware.
The best thing Microsoft can claim to it's credit is an Internet full of spyware, malware, spam bots, trojan horses, ... and WTF is up with all those dipshit asshole web site designers that comply to IE specification in lieu of W3C compliance. Anyone that writes a web site that cannot be properly rendered using a web compliant browser should be strung up by their balls in the center of town square.
"Suppose you were an idiot...and suppose you were a member of Congress...but I repeat myself." Mark Twain
I've been using Linux for my desktop for over a decade, and I have very rarely even used KDE / Gnome at all. Mostly just to try them out (and see what a peice of crap they are), and sometimes I use Konqueror for file browsing and a KDE app hear and there. In fact, most of the time I avoid KDE/Gnome programs like the plague. If I hear they have dependancies of either, I usualy don't even bother to download a program. Yeah, I'll use a core KDE app sometimes, but it isn't my "platform".
You can't tell me using GNOME/KDE is the only way to run Linux. In fact, they more or less seem to be just ways for MS Windows users to transition to Linux, not a real system. Who the hell would call something trying to emulate the horrid horrid Win98 a usable system??? The devil above Bill Gates?
Good point. B+ trees are O(1), right? So, the file system doesn't take longer to find and manipulate files as the indexes grow (not sure why it's bad on Windows though, since NTFS uses B+ trees, too). Oh, and background services run in the background, so they clearly don't get any time slices that would appear to cause slowdown.
And rather than refute my point that users are often too stupid and/or ignorant to tell the difference between a Windows logo and a Linux one, you've simply told me my mind is closed.
Nice refutation.
Actually, I more meant that people who don't understand that a Windows game won't run on Linux (at least not in the traditional "Insert Disc, Install, Play" style) are retards.
Unless something happened in the last couple months I don't know about, Myth didn't take away the free HTTP tv schedules. For the past couple years Myth had been legally piggybacking on a free XML tv schedule service provided by Tribune Media Services. TMS terminated their service so you have 2 choices for scheduling data now.
In North America, you can pay a minor fee ($20 a year) to the non profit schedulesdirect.org which licenses the data for redistribution from TMS. Or you can use one of the http scrapers that you refer to which are still available for Myth (outside of North America I think it is the only option). The scrapers are against the TOS of the websites they scrape from. They are generally tolerated, but the websites regularly make updates to their http schema which breaks the Myth scheduling package until someone gets around to fixing it. If $20 a year is too much for such a valuable service, I suggest you try becoming a freegan.
I couln't argue with that.
mcgrew's razor: Never attribute to stupidity that which can be explained by greedy self-interest
My point was that a 1-sentence summary declaration that "users are retards" getting moderated as "+5 Insightful" is a telling reflection of the lack of tolerance and willingness to understand user needs that has kept Linux in backend environments for so long. Most users were raised with Windows PC's throughout their lives (except for elites like you and I who were exposed to Linux), so their expectation that common games running on all of their freinds computers would run on theirs is not necessarily a reflection of their lack of intelligence. Consoles have a long history of heterogeneity, so this expectation does not exist; it is an apples to oranges analogy.
But if a refutation is what you want, then here it is: http://www.useit.com/alertbox/20010204.html
Regards,
Shane
This review is a complete and utter waste of the seven minutes time it took me to wade through this obviously biased Micro$ux-worshipping sycophant's anti-Linux rant. I have tried gOS, and while flawed, it is considerably less intimidating than Vista, it is more fully featured out of the box, and it runs on a TWO-HUNDRED DOLLAR computer. Also, because of Linux, the computer is $200, as opposed to the $200 for Vista and the $600 in hardware you will need to run it. These are the things that should have been pointed out. Delivering to the market an inexpensive and capable computer is something Everex should be applauded for. Instead they are criticized by a hack.
As far as the target audience, this computer is for anyone that either a) knows about Linux or b) knows absolutely nothing about Windows (read as: is completely unaware of the need for anti-virus, anti-spyware, and a firewall but will use Norton, because it came with the computer), which is most of M$'s loyal following of lemmings. Being that gOS is based on Ubuntu and the Ubuntu forum is probably the single greatest OS-centric resource for a computer user, the reviewer should have taken the time to point out these facts, instead of nitpicking a slightly easier learning curve than any version of Windoze. But I guess that would means fewer people reading his useless articles, PC Mag would quickly become useless to them. For someone who has never used a computer (there are still a few out there), it doesn't matter what OS they use. They will still have to learn how to right-click and drag-and-drop. But for the morons who continue to use and even get paid to advocate the use of Outlook (the entire staff of PC Mag, PC World, and others) this is something completely alien. Just the thought that a community of users can provide better support for a far superior OS created but a community of developers being at least as capable as PC Mag (whose entire business model is based on answering to same 10 questions every year) and the multi-million dollar flop, known as Vista, probably turns the reviewers stomach.
I do agree that including hardware that doesn't work (a Winmodem on the gPC and the webcam on the Asus EeePC) is a bone-headed decision, but try using some of your old hardware with Vista, some of that won't work either. How about pointing that out?
For this reviewer to even suggest that anyone not take advantage of the financial and technical benefits of the gPC in favor of any of the flawed software oozing out of Redmond, Washington is a discredit to his profession and a slap in the face of all of his publication's readers. For printing this review, the editor should be fired and the reviewer euthanized.