Linux For Housewives. XP For Geeks.

Talinom writes "ZDNet has an article sure to raise the hackles of any self-respecting geek. They report that housewives buying small laptops like the Asus EE are causing Linux usage for that demographic to spike. A reporter for Tech-On states that 'Retailers and contract manufacturers in Taiwan say that novice PC users there, like students and housewives, tend to buy the Linux version of the Eee PC701, while geeks go for Windows XP.'"

Comments

Not sure it applies here as much

[jeiler]

Taiwan culture is not US culture, of course. I imagine that even Geek culture is different between the two cultures.

Re:Not sure it applies here as much

[Icarium]

It's interesting to observer how the mere mention of the word 'geek' on /. is automatically assumed to mean someone who has at least an interest in IT.

Geeks were around before computers. Not all geeks are IT savvy, not all IT savvy people are geeks.

Hmm..

[iXiXi]

Well, I am not sure that housewives can't be geeks. Maybe they confuse geeks that are buying XP with idiots? I wouldn't think that a true 'geek' would give a rat's buttocks about what OS came on the hardware. I put what I want on there when I get home.

Reasoning?

[LightPhoenix7]

The article was short on details (aside from the study being in Taiwan), but my guess would be that the "geeks" are the ones playing video games, and unfortunately most of the big titles are constrained to Windows. On the other hand, a computer you're only using for e-mail and web browsing should opimally be as cheap as possible, and you certainly don't get cheaper on an OS than free.

Re:Reasoning?

[UnknowingFool]

And also for the most part the average person doesn't really care if it runs Linux, Unix, Windows, BeOS, or whatever. They just want it to work. Being cheaper is a large factor when the price of the computer is only $200, and $50 difference is a lot. Also being so cheap if the consumer knows if that the Linux version isn't fully adequate, they can just get the Windows version. Yes, you can install XP over Linux on the EEE PC, but for the average consumer going to the store and spending $250 is a lot easier than figuring out installation of a new OS. Especially these days where you can't get XP at retail anymore.

Windows

[blind biker]

I didn't know that the day would come, when I would feel more unfamiliar (didn't say uncomfortable - but I guess that's coming, too, with Vista (oh yeah, I don't intend to move to Vista - ever)) in Windows than in Linux. But, alas, that day has come and now I have no clue how to troubleshoot Windows anymore. It's just way too arcane and complicated. In Linux and Solaris I know how to at least start troubleshooting, and then I can search the 'net for specific keywords (error messages, log entries, etc.). Some of this could probably be done with Windows as well, but I just find the "whole experience" of troubleshooting it, more hairy and unsettling.

Sounds reasonable

[427_ci_505]

I've never bought a copy of linux.

Or windows, for that matter.

_>

Re:My girlfriend has got an eee

[Lonewolf666]

And this shows that Linux is now usable for non-geeks when preinstalled. Many of those users wouldn't be able to reinstall their Windows either ;-)

There is still a lot of software that is only available for Windows (in particular games), but the OS itself is just as usable as Windows.

Browsing and Mail

[fermion]

Honestly, what does the average person need. Browsing, mail, photos? Sure, for multimedia Linux may not have the integration that something like Mac OS does, but neither does XP.

In many cases a more technical person has to have a Windows OS, either because they have to test against it, or they code in Visual Studio, or run some XP only app.

The prevailing mindset is that it is better to run the same OS at home as at work, if, for no other reason, the work software can be often be used at home as well. But with all the free and cheap software, and with the often extreme difficulty of keeping a MS Windows machine running, it is no longer a sure bet to run MS Windows at home. Many people are realizing that MS Windows is targeted to the corporate user, and requires corporate resources for the average person to use.

*nix, OTOH, if it is kept simple, and has some vendor support, can be run by the average person.

Re:Browsing and Mail

[AusIV]

I've said for a long time that Linux is great for the least technical users and the most technical users, but the more mid-range users will have problems.

In my family, my mom does just fine on Ubuntu. She checks e-mail, browses the web, writes documents, etc. Occasionally she'll say "Do you know of a program that will let me ...", and I'll install it for her and show her how to use it. That's how it worked on Windows, that's how it works on Linux.

On the opposite end of the spectrum, I want complete control of my system. I want to be able control exactly what services run. I want to script specific events to happen at specific times. If the mood strikes me, I want to modify a program to better suit my needs. I have the knowledge and ability to do this, and Linux fits the bill far better than Windows.

In the middle, there's my dad. He got me my first computer when I was three. He has some exclusively Windows software that he needs for work, and they won't run under Wine. He'll frequently go out and download or buy a software package and install it himself. The expectations he has of his computer were defined by Microsoft going back as far as DOS. He's a quite competent computer user, but I suspect he'd have problems adapting to the differences presented by Ubuntu.

Games

[swordgeek]

Geeks play games that run under XP. Housewives (househusbands, most of the rest of the universe) don't play games often, and when they do, they're browser-based or included in the OS.

Nothing to see here.

Re:Games

[dyfet]

So let me get this straight, geeks want to play games on tiny screens and, for most games in today's market, what would be greatly underpowered hardware?? What do they play, minesweep??!

While I don't have an alternative explanation to immediately offer, I do find that particular argument far less than compelling to explain this phenomena, at least from the geek part.

Re:BLASPHEMY!

[CKW]

No no, this makes perfect sense.

Housewives don't play video games and download a bajillion "utilities". Geeks do.

Housewives want to browse the web and use e-mail, and have a stable safe system.

Geeks love the chaos and security challenges that is posed by Windows.

Re:My girlfriend has got an eee

[Lonewolf666]

Nice troll, but I'll explain the difference to all the previous Linux installations:

Among geeky types, it was already widely believed that Ubuntu (for instance) is just as easy to setup and use as Windows. But those people already have computer knowledge which may help them over some points where a non-geek may feel stumped. So they do not exactly represent the average user.

Computers that come preinstalled with Linux have been rare, and this is the first time lots of them get into the hands of non-experts. So people like GP's girlfriend are the real test of how newbie-friendly linux is. One of them is anecdotal, lots of them make a valid test. Give it a few months and both your and my post will be irrelevant because the results of the test are out.

Actually it somewhat makes sense

[foxalopex]

I actually like WinXP SP2 despite having the knowledge to hack Linux onto a Linksys NSLU2 and compiling some of the packages myself on it. As much as folks complain that WinXP crashes, I've haven't seen that nasty blue screen in years. It comes from knowing how to set XP up and making sure your hardware isn't messed up. I haven't met many folks who actually go through the number of steps I do on a new WinXP setup which might explain why it works so well for me. When you use Opensource software such as SeaMonkey or Media Player Classic and FDDShow with WinXP it actually becomes very useful. I remember back in university when XP came out we were impressed. And these are CompSci students working on Sun Enterprise systems. Where Linux still shines the most however is as a stable server and of course it has a front-end interface (compiz) light-years ahead of Vista. XP's strengths are in games, video playback and pirating. To a geek like myself that's why I've stayed with XP. Everything works with near perfect stability and I have a blend of opensource and closed-source / pirated tools to fit my needs. For a regular person who doesn't care however and just wants to surf the web, Linux would probably work fine.

Re:BLASPHEMY!

[Anonymous Coward]

I have been living this reality for awhile now. My parents and grandparents use Ubuntu (I forced/tricked it onto them), and are getting along just fine. When it comes to basic computer use, Linux has been ready for the Desktop for about a two years. I myself cannot stand using it, since all the weird apps I use only work with Windows. I like Linux, but it is the applications that are important, not the operating system.

Re:BLASPHEMY!

[spymagician]

Since the Asus EEE mini laptops actually come with a Linux distro pre-installed, I'd have to say your theory is critically flawed. They're buying the LAPTOP not the OS. It's incidental that the laptop has a Linux distro on it.

Re:BLASPHEMY!

[Blakey Rat]

Ugh, tell me about it. We had to buy a Vista laptop for my wife to run a medical practice management app, and it's a dual-core system with 2GB of memory. By all accounts it's a fast computer, but by the time Vista finishes booting, all of the "update me!" dialogs have been clicked, and it's actually ready to use, she's cussing at the thing.

Let me guess, it's an HP with (approx) 40,000 pieces of crapware installed?

Re:BLASPHEMY!

[hitmark]

given how integrated the hardware and software is on these machines, one could say that they are buying a internet appliance...

Re:BLASPHEMY!

[hitmark]

at that point, stick to linux...