Slashdot Mirror


Linux On Netbooks — a Complicated Story

An anonymous reader writes "Keir Thomas has responded to the recent raft of news stories pointing out that Linux's share of the netbook market isn't as rosy as it used to be. Thomas thinks the problem boils down to a combination of unfamiliar software and unfamiliar hardware, which can 'push users over the edge.' This accounts for the allegedly high return rates of Linux netbooks. In contrast, although far from superior, Windows provides a more familiar environment, making the hardware issues (irritatingly small keyboard, screen etc.) seem less insurmountable; users are less likely to walk away. 'Once again Microsoft's monopoly means Windows is swallowing up another market.'"

40 of 833 comments (clear)

  1. People just don't understand Linux by Lord+Byron+II · · Score: 5, Insightful

    My gf knows that Linux is on her computer, but even so, she can't understand why she can't go to BestBuy and get software. Or why she can't download Silverlight. If you put Linux on a machine and don't explain the difference between it and Windows, then you're just asking for trouble.

    1. Re:People just don't understand Linux by CastrTroy · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Oh so true. Linux is good for the geek market where people can truly grasp the difference. But for people who aren't techies, well, most of them would rather spend an extra $50 to get an experience that they are familiar with. These netbooks are pretty cheap to begin with. Not only that, they are kind of a luxury, and used a secondary computer. People who can afford multiple computers don't mind spending a few extra dollars to get the Windows license.

      --

      Anthropic principle: We see the universe the way it is because if it were different we would not be here to see it.
    2. Re:People just don't understand Linux by MrNaz · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I don't think it's a case of Linux being unable to win the desktop. I think it's just that, while we may have superiority on the desktop and under the hood, we still need to gain ground in the area of software. This does not necessarily mean that we have to get Photoshop ported, IMHO building a following behind The Gimp, Inkscape, Blender, KinoDV and other open source apps on both Windows and Linux will help the war effort generally.

      While these applications are (to be honest) still far behind their commercial counterparts, a greater user base and higher profile will attract developers and help them catch up, just as higher profile has helped garner support for the Linux kernel itself from developers and companies.

      Projects like Big Buck Bunny and Elephants Dream have proven that high quality, professional results can be achieved using open source tools, a proposition that more and more companies will find attractive as new talent enters industries that use these tools.

      Give it time. The Linux ecosystem is growing. Growing far faster than the commercial fields. We're already competing toe to toe in areas like web servers (Apache and LigHTTPD) blow away IIS and other web servers, PostgreSQL easily competes on a level field with Oracle and DB2 and Inkscape isn't as far beind Illustrator as Gimp is behind Photoshop. Blender was proved to be a highly capable 3D modeler and animation tool in the BBB and ED projects mentioned above.

      It's only a matter of time.

      --
      I hate printers.
    3. Re:People just don't understand Linux by coryking · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Linux advocates frequently over promise and vastly undeliverable. Your soon to be 5+ post is a shining example of that.

      If you think Gimp is even close to the same as Photoshop, you are smoking crack. Blender vs the other guys? I dont know, I tried blender for about 30 seconds before giving up and playing around with the student editions of the big-boys stuff. PostgreSQL is awesome (seriously, I love PostgreSQL), but it is not even close to Oracle (DB2, maybe). Apache, Lighttpd and my current favorite nginx are awesome, but they dont have the close integration with their development tools and operating system that IIS does. Speaking of development tools... there is no open source equivalant of Visual Studio and there is no MSDN of open source.

      If you want Linux to gain acceptance, you need to stop with the hyperbole and start accepting the truth. The truth is:

      - There is no common way to install and remove software.
      - There is no stable base to write drivers (thus no hardware support)
      - There are too many distros with too many proprietary ways of doing things. Too many proprietary repositories, too many proprietary package systems, to many proprietary filesystem layouts.
      - Gimp is *not* Photoshop. Sorry. I know I mentioned this, but I'll repeat it again. You insult people who actually use Photoshop by making this claim.
      - Ponies.

      It's only a matter of time.

      Only if Linux advocates and developers take a realistic look at their product offerings and their standing in the market.

    4. Re:People just don't understand Linux by walshy007 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      - Gimp is *not* Photoshop. Sorry. I know I mentioned this, but I'll repeat it again. You insult people who actually use Photoshop by making this claim.

      This is true, however how many people actually use the entirety of the features of photoshop? I would daresay that the overwhelming majority of non-professional raster editors would suffice with gimp, simply because they don't need half of the functionality photoshop provides

      - There is no common way to install and remove software.

      Look up packagekit, it hooks into rpm, apt, etc etc, and lets face it, all distros, more or less use apt or yum, two different things with nearly identical uses... yeah, so difficult. which brings us onto our next point

      - There are too many distros with too many proprietary ways of doing things. Too many proprietary repositories, too many proprietary package systems, to many proprietary filesystem layouts.

      This is worse than the hyprebole you were complaining about, 'proprietary package systems' name one used in a common distro, please?, proprietary file system layouts you could be referring to fat patents and ntfs, but both have been supported under linux for a long time now.

      And so far as proprietary repos only really fedora requires the click and install installing of a single rpm to get rpmfusion and all of the patent-encumbered things they won't ship, again, so difficult to look up 'fedora faq' to find out that mp3 etc etc can all be gotten working just by installing one lousy file. The majority of other distros package the proprietary bits with it anyway, so no complication. and finally...

      - There is no stable base to write drivers (thus no hardware support)

      So far as packaging a binary for release, I think nvidia has the best method here, binary blob with compilable source that links it to the kernel, works wonders. But really, if your making device drivers for the linux kernel, why not aim for inclusion in the main kernel tree? having it in there equates to basically free maintenance of your drivers almost indefinitely (so long as people have the hardware). Having the hardware 'just work' when linux boots as a side benefit.

      Funnily enough, one of the biggest problems I find with windows apart from it's lack of usability is it's lack of in-built driver support. I can install linux on a 2-3 year old machine, with various ethernet cards and sound boards etc, and have all the hardware just work. Whereas with windows you have to hunt down exactly what the hardware is, where the drivers are, and hope to god drivers were written for your version of windows.

      there is no open source equivalant of Visual Studio and there is no MSDN of open source.

      So far as MSDN replacement, try devhelp has documentation for most used libraries etc etc. So far as visual studio replacement, people aren't going to make an IDE EXACTLY the same as visual studio, that would be idiotic, however if your after a nice usable ide with similar features, may I suggest looking into eclipse, kdevelop etc.

      Only if Linux advocates and developers take a realistic look at their product offerings and their standing in the market.

      Their product offerings typically aren't a problem... except to those who assume for instance that gimp must be 100% exact clone of photoshop, or eclipse must be exact 100% clone of visual studio. The fact is, people do use these open source products for professional quality work (admittedly fewer of them), and it does work. But you will never make someone happy who expects a clone.

      So far as standing in the market, I agree it's minimal, but it's rising all the time, ten years ago I could tell someone about linux and they'd go 'what?' nowadays most even non-techs I meet know about to to at least some extent, even if they have never used it. But really market standing is irrelevant if they have a piece of software that functions well and does it's desired purpose. Who cares if linux takes over the world or stays as a niche, if it functions well for those of us who choose to use it.

    5. Re:People just don't understand Linux by coryking · · Score: 5, Insightful

      This is true, however how many people actually use the entirety of the features of $PRODUCT_X? I would daresay that the overwhelming majority of $USERS would suffice with $LESSER_PRODUCT, simply because they don't need half of the functionality $PRODUCT_X provides

      The reason these claims are wrong is while they sound true, they are infact very wrong. Sure nobody uses every feature in a product (say, $PRODUCT_X). The thing is, every user has a different subset of features they use.

    6. Re:People just don't understand Linux by Malaak · · Score: 3, Insightful

      As you made your Photoshop point pretty clear... For me Gimp IS pretty close to Photoshop. Of course I am not doing professional image editing, but so is the majority of people who use Photoshop as a replacement for MS Paint. They use it because a friend gave them this wonderful editing software where they can use this magic wand and edit contrast and brightness. You are right, Gimp is probably not even close to Photoshop for a professional user, but it is for Joe Sixpack.

    7. Re:People just don't understand Linux by TheModelEskimo · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I use Photoshop and teach it professionally. *You* should not be insulting people who actually use GIMP by making those ridiculous claims. Sure, I've heard maybe one or two GIMP users say they think it's a perfect replacement for Photoshop - completely out of ignorance. But can I tell you how many Photoshop users I've seen who use their Photoshop license-purchase as a reason to bash GIMP without any real experience backing them up? And MOST of them are laughing a bit, then looking at ME for cues that they should keep laughing!

      That's not professionalism, that's just mindless consumerism. People like me use Linux day in and day out with Photoshop in a VM because we've decided that if our generation won't put things right as a group, we will do it as individuals. THUS your complaint about many different distros, THUS your complaint about no MSDN. You want your MSDN but you probably despise the virii that come with its core experience. >:-)

    8. Re:People just don't understand Linux by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Yeah - but guess what most webservers (LAMP) use? Ignorance can take many forms, but is mostly based at ignoring some part of the story.

      MySQL use is bigger than you try to make us believe. That's the problem with those windows fanboy's. They seem to hate all other OS. Why should you hate something so deep that is given you for free? There seems to be no rationalism behind it other than hating to see things developping for free.

      All windows consumers should embrace Linux, because it keeps Microsoft on his toes. Microsoft HAVE to develop better stuff, otherwise alternatives start growing. Linux is the best thing that could happened to MS-Windows owners. Do you really think Windows 7 (or IE 7/8 etc.) would exist if there was not something like OSS? The only people complaining about it would not be the consumers, but the people making money with MS-Windows.

      Think about that!!!

    9. Re:People just don't understand Linux by man_of_mr_e · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Yeah, right. What are you smoking? Windows does not even have a package manager!

      Yes, it does. It's called Windows Installer and has come with Windows since Windows 2000. Even the so called "Installer software" is just a pretty front-end to Windows Installer and a script generator.

      The end user either selects the driver in the package manager, like any other software, or it is already autodetected by the kernel, which is the case >90% of time.

      Except of course for the hundreds of drivers out there that do not come with the kernel and aren't part of the package repository. That's really beside the point. The original author was talking about driver development. There is no common driver binary interface, which makes it very difficult to create a single binary that can be used on all versions of the kernel (or even all versions of a major version).

      On Windows, there is no way a freshly installed OS can already use all hardware and hardware features.

      This is patently untrue. It's called slipstreaming, and corporate IT departments do it all the time. Home users, not so much, but your "there is no way" comment shows ignorance on your part.

      If Microsoft did not have a monopoly, there would be many many more variants of OSes.

      Has it ever occured to you that maybe Microsoft has a monopoly because users don't want more variants of OS's?

      By that, I mean, the market tends to a monopoly because end users don't want confusion.

      I'm sure the very concept that users don't want 500 choices of something is hard for you to comprehend.

    10. Re:People just don't understand Linux by jedrek · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I love how you managed to talk about other people's ignorance, then wrote something like "Linux is the best thing that could happened to MS-Windows owners.", all in one post.

      Love Linux all you want, but as a desktop OS it's place is pretty much in the statistical margin of error. Vista's competitor on the desktop (servers are something else) isn't Linux, it's first and foremost Windows XP. If anybody is switching away from MS, they're going to Apple.

    11. Re:People just don't understand Linux by Bert64 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I'm not sure of the history behind blender, but i seem to remember it was an in-house tool at a company that does graphics work and that a bounty was paid to open source it.

      When it comes to gimp and postgres (and mysql)... Oracle and photoshop occupy relatively small niches, for the average user the free apps are more than adequate and save them a significant amount of money. As an example, for most people photoshop isn't worth the money, piracy rates of photoshop are extremely high and those who don't want to risk it typically buy something cheaper (and inferior) like paint shop pro.

      There are common ways to install and remove software, but these methods are *per distribution* and not global... Once you stop lumping linux together and start thinking of each distribution as a system in it's own right (which they are really, albeit with a lot of shared components) it makes a lot more sense. The installation system on ubuntu for example, is far more consistent and usable than windows or osx.

      Stable base to write drivers - Linux drivers are very stable and included within the kernel, no stable way to write closed source drivers perhaps but open drivers are better, and not having to provide binary compatibility allows the linux kernel to innovate in ways it couldn't otherwise... Conversely, the need for binary compatibility has been a thorn in microsoft's side for years, and whenever they do break compatibility big problems occur, for example:
      Vista - new driver model, drivers need to be rewritten, hardware makers won't write drivers for old hardware thus rendering it useless..
      64bit - 64bit XP was useless in terms of driver support, compare that to 64bit linux which supports 99% of the hardware it's 32bit counterpart did by virtue of being able to recompile the existing drivers with little or no modification.
      Alternative architectures - most of the linux drivers will work on other architectures, if i install linux on a ps3 i can connect virtually any usb device to it that linux supports and use it, if those usb drivers were supplied as binaries for x86 i wouldn't be able to do that... Similarly i could get a PPC, IA64, Alpha or even Sparc based system and use random PCI cards that linux supports.
      No, open source drivers are better, binary drivers have never given me anything but grief.. The current model seems to be working just fine, and the only real holdout is nvidia.

      Too many distros is an issue, and more specifically in the netbook case - too many lousy distros being put on the netbooks.. the few i've seen were using unheard of distros where important things like the package manager were broken or crippled... Ubuntu works really well for the people i've shown it to, but not being able to (easily) install any extra apps on the netbook distros didn't do them any favors.

      --
      http://spamdecoy.net - free throwaway anonymous email - avoid spam!
    12. Re:People just don't understand Linux by man_of_mr_e · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Linux distros are typically consistent and the installer has the capability to locate and download the software too

      You mean for sufficiently popular applications. If the app you want, or the version of the app you want isn't in the repository, it's a *LOT* harder than in Windows to get that app working on your system.

      Typically it is only new, beta grade drivers that don't come with the kernel

      Not true at all. There are tons of wireless cards that don't have drivers in the kernel. Even on the server, there are lots of drivers that don't come stock with the kernel, but Distro's like RHEL add those drivers. If you've ever tried to upgrade your RHEL kernel to a newer kernel than currently supported, you have to deal with getting those drivers into the kernel.. i know, i've had to do it.

      I did say that slipstreaming wasn't for the average user. I was simply countering the claim that there was "no way" to do it. "no way" means, "no way".. not "no simple way".

    13. Re:People just don't understand Linux by DuncanE · · Score: 5, Insightful

      What the hell has photoshop got to do with Windows vs linux on netbooks?

      I dont want to run photoshop on my netbook regardless if the OS is Windows or Linux. I want email, a web browser, a simple photo tool and an office suite.

    14. Re:People just don't understand Linux by init100 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      You've clearly never used Hypercard or you'd know where that name comes from too.

      You obviously fail to see the point. For someone who never used the software, such a name is not descriptive. Non-descriptive names is something that many people bring up against the names of certain free software applications, but as you can see, it certainly applies to many proprietary applications (including Microsoft applications) as well.

    15. Re:People just don't understand Linux by SerpentMage · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I wish you were modded higher... The last sentence is oh so true...

      >If anybody is switching away from MS, they're going to Apple.

      And I know many Linux users on the desktop are switching to Apple.

      While I would be willing to lay my hand in the fire for Linux on the server, I would not touch a fire with a ten foot pole for Linux on the desktop.

      Three years ago I completely gave up on Linux on the Desktop. I decided to focus on Apple, and Microsoft. I have to be frank in that I have not looked back AT ALL...

      Again on the server not the same story...

      --

      "You can't make a race horse of a pig"
      "No," said Samuel, "but you can make very fast pig"
    16. Re:People just don't understand Linux by turbidostato · · Score: 4, Insightful

      "To be honest, I haven't played with it [postgres] enough to tell you"

      So, in the end, you haven't played with Postgres and tried blender "for about 30 seconds before giving up" but still you feel entitled to give them harsh and hard reports. You are part of the problem.

  2. I am not sure you should blame monopoly by microbee · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I am no fan of Microsoft, but it's not like they are doing anything illegal or unethical here. Even Redhat's CEO commented he didn't believe in Linux's desktop future.

    Frankly, netbook looked like worth a shot for Linux. If it fails, then maybe desktop market is just too hard for Linux to win.

    1. Re:I am not sure you should blame monopoly by Bill+Currie · · Score: 5, Insightful

      No, it's just that in the long run new hardware won't help Linux exactly because of that comfort zone issue. And these that's, that's really the only problem that Linux has: it's outside of people's comfort zone. The article is right: the combination of new hardware and new software is just too much for people to cope with.

      I can vouch for this, but from the other direction.

      I bought a netbook late last year to replace my dying laptop (I'd dropped once, and put it in its case without putting it to sleep a couple of times: not good). Because I couldn't be bothered fighting to get one with Linux installed (language barriers don't help). With the combination of having been using Linux for 11 years, the cramped conditions, etc, my 10 minute Windows experience (just enough to get hardware information) was a nightmare. Once I got Linux on there with a fairly familiar environment (Gnome, though I usually use blackbox), I could cope with handling the smaller screen and (Japanese) keyboard. I can very easily imagine someone who's never used Linux freaking out trying to use a Linux installed netbook.

      The reason new hardware that locks out Microsoft won't help Linux is that it doesn't exist, and never will (for any meaningful period of time). Look at servers: while Linux isn't yet beating Microsoft, it's doing well enough, and that's on PC based servers.

      It's not hardware that will help Linux, but rather governments and businesses adopting Linux for policy reasons (currently insignificant) and people gaining exposure to Linux through work. The same way Windows became popular.

      The problem comes down to whether enough governments and businesses adopt Linux. Of course, games being produced for Linux will help, but that's a bit of a chicken and egg problem.

      Linux's desktop is pretty good. The problem is, it's unfamiliar. Windows wins not because its desktop is any better, but because people know it. "Better the devil you know."

      --

      Bill - aka taniwha
      --
      Leave others their otherness. -- Aratak

    2. Re:I am not sure you should blame monopoly by perryizgr8 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Linux can't win on the desktop until it starts realizing that there's more to Microsoft's monopoly than Evil Tactics.

      that is the biggest hurdle in linux's way. people who think linux is great do not realize that maybe, just maybe, their os is inferior.
      i work on linux too, but lately i've realized that windows is much more stable*, has a much more consistent ui. also, linux has been avoiding/postponing the inevitable transition to complete gui. microsoft have already implemented it. linux geeks keep rambling about the power of cli and that gui is overrated, but the fact is, gui is the most important thing in software.
      users have other things to do than learn to use a computer. they want a button which clearly states its purpose, not a bunch of (almost comically) cryptic commands.
      we recently saw how this approach of blaming others for your problems kicks you back. netbooks were a playing field where both windows and linux had to compete from start, without any external forces. inspite of an early start, linux has now failed. so, instead of accepting its inferiority, linux proponents blame microsoft for a monopoly that was created due to linux's apathy towards end users.

      * vista has never hung up on me. individual apps have but their processes can be easily killed. ubuntu 8.04 (lts?), with its default settings freezes up atleast once a month when changing virtual desktops. and since compiz has crashed, and your mouse pointer is frozen, the keyboard is not recognizing shortcuts, the only way is to pull the plug.

      --
      Wealth is the gift that keeps on giving.
    3. Re:I am not sure you should blame monopoly by nlawalker · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Been saying this for ages. Windows' value is network externality.

      If you want Linux to gain marketshare, stop worrying about how things got to where they are and start thinking about how to compete.

    4. Re:I am not sure you should blame monopoly by Insanity+Defense · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I am no fan of Microsoft, but it's not like they are doing anything illegal or unethical here.

      You do know that Microsoft has been convicted of breaking the law many times in many countries? Everything from copyright violations and false advertising to being an abusive monopoly.

      I myself would say that their "Get the facts" campaign was unethical and deceitful. Just my opinion of course.

      Famous phrases from within Microsoft's top ranks. "Knife the baby". "Cut off their air supply". "Whack Dell".

  3. Early adopters. Duh. by 75th+Trombone · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Of course the actual reason Linux's share of netbooks has dropped is simply because netbooks have changed from a nerds' thing into a mainstream thing.

    UNIX's marketshare of all computers did the exact same percentage decline over time as netbooks are having now. It's the early adopters, stupid!

    --
    The United States of America: We do what we must because we can.
  4. Re:It's a matter of availability by Blakey+Rat · · Score: 5, Insightful

    That's "effect", not "cause." 9 months ago, there were tons of Linux netbooks in stores. They've gone away because they're unpopular, and get returned a lot. (Well, I can't speak for Germany, but that's the case in the US.)

  5. Big warning stickers needed by Zerth · · Score: 4, Insightful

    A large percentage of Windows users do not understand what an operating system is and assume if they can buy it in a store, it'll work. Manufacturers need to put giant stickers saying:

    Not a Windows system, does not run Microsoft anything, none of your programs will work on this, Apple* made it.
    *that is a lie, but Mac users won't be on the cheap end of the aisle.

    Not that I think it will help much. I've had too many acquaintances think "ooh, cheap computer", buy one, and then ask me if Microsoft Ubuntu is newer or older than Office 07, and if it will run Vista Excel.

    They usually end up returning it and I buy another bottle of aspirin.

  6. Thank Linux by xzvf · · Score: 5, Insightful

    One thing you should do is thank Linux for forcing MS to keep XP available for you at $15 instead of the normal OEM of $70. It is better for customers and hardware manufacturers that Linux is available as a viable alternative.

    1. Re:Thank Linux by RanCossack · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I am amazed how many people don't get that. I've seen Microsoft fans cheerfully bash Linux on netbooks and say Linux lost its chance and so on... and I just don't get it. Even if they can't stand Linux, I don't think anyone disputes the fact that the Linux option is why XP is so cheap and Windows 7 was focused on performance.

      Does the thought that someone, somewhere, might be happy without paying the Microsoft tax annoy them that much? Or did they just not... think?

  7. Blaming "monopoly" is a cop-out by code65536 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    One of the problems that I see in the Linux world is that many of us are quick to cry "monopoly" and blame it on unfair practices.

    So if it's because of Microsoft's dominant market share, why does Apple do so well in the markets that it is in (at least in terms of return rates)?

    Blaming it on Microsoft is a cop-out because it lets people avoid the harsh reality that the fault really lies with Linux. Linux is far, far from passing the Aunt Tillie test. Ubuntu is nice in that it's trying to be more consumer-oriented, but so far, most of its changes are superficial.

    And finally, one person's "superior" is another person's design flaw. Apple is "superior" and "innovative" (that's debatable) mostly because Apple doesn't give a damn about its ecosystem. Microsoft does. It bends over backwards and even consciously duplicates buggy behavior, all in the name of backwards compatibility (given the HUGE diversity of software and hardware in the Windows ecosystem, the (relatively small) amount of breakage between each version of Windows is actually a testament to Microsoft's ecosystem cultivation). Is this technically superior? Probably not from an orthodox perspective. Does it make sense? I think so. THIS is why Microsoft has its monopoly. Until Linux can start cultivating such an ecosystem (no, telling someone that they can just download the source and compile it for their system does not cut it), it will always remain on the sidelines. Period.

  8. Re:Critical Mass by im_thatoneguy · · Score: 5, Insightful

    What is critical mass? All of my programs working and not having to pick and choose compatibility like iPhone vs. Android vs. Simian vs WinMo.

    If you switch phones you have to buy all your applications all over again. Some applications are only available on one phone. Some applications run better on one phone than another.

    Hardware and OS shouldn't be a deciding factor in a system. Software should be. Microsoft DOMINATES the software compatibility. That's why I bought Windows 95 over MacOS. All of the programs and games I wanted to play ran on DOS/Windows not Macintosh. Linux application compatibility at the time? HA! I installed linux around when I upgraded to Window 2000. I found it incredibly useful as a boot from floppy router (Coyote Linux). That was it. There were no applications I wanted or open source apps that were similar.

    Fast forward to today and Apple has seen some improvement on the app front. Still no where near PC but if you're willing to spend an extra $100 for Vista you can also run your Windows programs. There isn't a single application which tempts me over to the apple side. Avid/Premiere > FCP. Nuke > Shake. Everything else is cross platform.

    My Windows installation runs pretty much every single application on the planet that I want. I use applications, not operating systems. And Windows is more than good enough as an operating system while offering millions of more programs for me to run. Millions of programs, billions of features and tools. That beats the socks off of a supposedly improved kernel.

  9. Re:There may actually be other reasons for that by Erikderzweite · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Bad thing about eees with Xandros is that it sucks. And people who'll see it would think that Linux generally sucks. MSI had a more acceptable pre-installed Linux offering; that's why return rates are about the same with Windows and Linux MSI Winds.

  10. I'd have taken it more seriously by billcopc · · Score: 4, Insightful

    ... if it weren't riddled with fanboyism and aggressive language.

    In contrast, although far from superior, Windows provides [...] Once again Microsoft's monopoly means Windows is swallowing up another market.

    Wrong. Fail. Abort. Windows is swallowing up another market because Linux doesn't belong on the average user's netbook, for the same reasons it doesn't belong on the average user's desktop. It is a usability nightmare, you need to be a network engineer AND programmer to fix it when it breaks, and perhaps most importantly the Linux community is hostile and unhelpful toward non-techies.

    I am a network geek and programmer, and I still get pissed off at Linux on a daily basis because things that should just work, do not. Usability issues never get addressed, no one wants to touch them. "My app is fine, go fuck yourself" is the general attitude I see among app developers/maintainers. Maybe they're sick of replying "RTFM" to every single question, but to me that is a symptom of bad code. Joe Random doesn't read the README, nor should he need to. If you can spend the time to write a long, complicated README, you could spend that same time writing a small script that does all those contrived pre-installation steps for the user.

    The problem is that we programmers are terrible users, because we don't use computers the way non-programmers do. The goofy little apps and utilities I make for myself, they have the most spartan, militaristic interfaces because I write the code first, then wrap buttons and knobs around it. I know how to use my stuff, because I'm the guy who built it. I know which bits of code fire when I click this or type that. Joe Random does not. We need to fix our apps to be so intuitive, even Joe Random's retarded stepchild can use them.

    The netbook does not matter. Other than the size factor, it is hardly different from 3-4 year old laptops, and like any laptop, usability is top priority. If we want Linux to rock netbooks, we need to make it usable.

    --
    -Billco, Fnarg.com
  11. Re:People just don't understand PROGRAM NAMES by Just+Some+Guy · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I think people would like Linux more if they were familiar with program names. Notepad, Paint, Wordpad, Calc... whatever. When I boot Linux on occasion, I'm more confused with what program does what than how to use them.

    Excel, Visio, Quicken, Outlook and Visual Studio aren't exactly self-explanatory.

    While I applaud the work of thousands to build such robust amazing programs and give them each their own special name, I'm of the opinion that if you give someone KDE with a few programs labeled generically "email" "internet browser" "calculator" "text editor" "Office Text/Spreadsheet/Presentation" "Network - Wireless" "Printers" and so on and so forth instead of each programs' real name, you'd be a lot closer to the #1 goal of usability: making an intuitive interface.

    In the Applications -> Internet menu from Ubuntu on my EeePC, I have "Firefox Web Browser", "Mozilla Thunderbird Mail/News", "Pidgin Instant Messenger", "Transmission BitTorrent Client", and several others. Compare with the Windows debacle of Start -> Publisher -> Weird Program Name.

    I agree with your point, and apparently so did the distro maintainers a few years ago that made Linux much better on this count than Windows.

    --
    Dewey, what part of this looks like authorities should be involved?
  12. Re:while I don't know about non-ASUS netbook Linux by CAIMLAS · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The likes of the big box stores - Best Buy in particular - are not selling the Eee with Linux for a couple of major reasons:

    1) They can't sell support for it because
    a) they don't have anyone who can offer support for Linux
    b) there's precious little to support which can be charged ... and ...

    2) They can't sell software for them, because there isn't any.

    3) Being a lower-priced item, I'd guess there's a lower profit margin.

    So, basically, there's business case impetus to "stick with Windows". I mean, seriously: for the kind of person who shops at Best Buy, which would sell better: that it has XP, so it's familiar, or it has Linux, which is free and secure?

    --
    ~/ssh slashdot.org ssh: connect to host slashdot.org port 22: too many beers
  13. Something else that seems to get forgotten by Sycraft-fu · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Is usability/training/help for non-technical users. Technical issues aside, one of the ways Photoshop kills GIMP is in usability. This doesn't just mean the UI itself, it also means the materials available to help you learn about it. Adobe has some first rate stuff. Their help files are quite helpful and include things like pictures of what to do, they have online video training docs, and their books are awesome. That goes a long way to making it usable for the non-tech type. My mom is an art teacher by profession and while she's not scared of computers, she's not good with them. She needs things spelled out step by step. Well she tells me that Adobe does a good job of doing just that. She's found it easy to use. She knows the art aspect of what she wants to do, and their docs help her figure out how to make the software do it.

    That is something major that much OSS seems to lack. The software itself might be badass, but if it is hard to use, it'll be a geek tool only. Normal users aren't going to read text man pages, Google through newsgroup posts, and try stuff on their own to make things work. They need an easy experience. To them the computer is a tool, not a toy, thus it'd better be easy to use because learning how to use it isn't fun for them.

    So if Linux ever wants a big share on the desktop, that is something that is going to have to happen. All the common tools that people use will have to be nice and easy to use, and nice and easy to learn about.

    However, none of that is going to happen until, as you say, they start taking a more realistic look at their products.

  14. It's because it doesn't "Just Work". by j741 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I had a friend who won an EEE netbook, which came with Linux. He liked it until he tried to use it on a website that contained Flash content. This netbook did not have Flash pre-installed, and he was unable to install it himself by following the links on the website, so he asked me for help. I am not very familiar with Linux (I try a distro each year to see if it is up to my standards yet). I was unable to determine what type of package the Linux distro on this machine supported, and was unable (through trial and error) to get any of Adobe's Flash for Linux packages to install. I ended up having to do it manually from the command line with an APT GET command that I found after a Google search. That is not an acceptable user experience for customers who expect to use this computer the same as they would use any other computer. And that is why you can expect high return rates for Linux Netbooks.

    --
    - James
  15. Re:People just don't understand PROGRAM NAMES by kklein · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Excel, Visio, Quicken, Outlook and Visual Studio aren't exactly self-explanatory.

    They don't need to be; everyone already knows what they are.

    And here we are already, back to the problem pointed to in TFA.

  16. Linux just doesn't cut it as a desktop by DougReed · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I am a software developer, and the guy all my friends bring their PCs to. I LOVE the UNIX environment, and HATE the Windoze environment, and I have an 8 port KVM on my desk with Linux, Mac, Solaris, and Windows at my fingertips.

    I always use Linux or Solaris for server stuff if possible. To me putting a database application or a WEB server on a Windows box is just silly.

    But I am typing on a Windoze XP machine. (Vista does not exist in my world) I seldom use the Linux machine because I always need to switch to the Windows machine for something the Linux one cannot do, and there is nothing the Windows one can't do, so I just end up on the Windows machine. The MAC is nice, and I use it occasionally, but it too just cannot do everything I need, or is more frustrating to get it done. When I first got the MAC, I thought it was so cool and used the hell out of it for a while, but simple things can be quite hard to do sometimes because it tries to be so "easy" that it can become hard to do anything the MAC guys did not think of an easy way to handle. So back to the Windows machine... again because I need to do something the MAC has difficulty with. As a desktop, Solaris is useless for most stuff.

    It is like a trap in a way. Once I go to the Windows machine for one application I cannot do easily or at all on whatever other machine I was on, I just start doing stuff on that machine, and soon forget about the others. Cygwin and PuTTY do not help either because with that working, grep, find, and ssh is there, and I'm just done. (The Cygterm hack is my console, cmd.exe is dreadful.)

    I really wish this were not true, but ...

  17. Crazy idea by heffrey · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Has anyone entertained the thought that people might actually choose windows because it's the best available option?

  18. Bad distros by renrutal · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Part of the blame are the bug-ridden cheap distros that come with the computer.

    I've seen a whole community trying to help a guy to get his notebook, mainly the wi-fi, to work.

    Days later he gave up and installed Ubuntu. It just worked.

  19. score five trolling .. by viralMeme · · Score: 3, Insightful

    "Linux .. is a usability nightmare, you need to be a network engineer AND programmer to fix it when it breaks, and perhaps most importantly the Linux community is hostile and unhelpful toward non-techies"

    You're talking total nonsense. Any modern Linux distro is perfectly usable. And to fix it when it breaks, which is a rarety - is just as easy as the Install-Program option in Windows.

    As for the hostile Linux, you are equally inaccurate in that statement. Join a forum, politely ask a question and get a response else pay for a support contract.

    "I am a network geek and programmer, and I still get pissed off at Linux on a daily basis because things that should just work, do not"

    Maybe you should try an other occupation?