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.'"
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.
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.
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.
The problem for me is performance. XP runs significantly faster and has significantly better battery life than Ubuntu. Assuming your hardware is compatible Linux isn't_terribly_difficult to get running. It's hard to justify open source when propriety software just runs better though.
I am holding out hope that 9.04 will work to improve battery life and speed, and not just give me more features I don't need. Like what Windows 7 has done after Vista.
A Magic the Gathering Article and Forum Aggregator
It was impossible to buy a Linux netboox in my city.
I bought an eee pc 901, linux (for the larger SSD on that model) with the intent of installing an nlited copy of WinXp on it instead of the stock asus linux. Instead I ended up installing eeebuntu and love it... although I still have the nlited XP as a second boot option in case I need it.
This space available.
I had an Asus netbook with Linux demonstrated to me, wanted to see how webpages looked on the tiny screen. In the end, the guy at the store had to pull out a cable and plug it in, because he couldn't get WiFi to run. He suggested, I should just pay extra for Windows. To that sales guy, getting Linux wasn't "buying the alternative", it was just "being cheap".
And frankly, since that was probably his first contact with Linux, that's actually quite understandable. A machine, that comes with Linux preinstalled, and it won't even run the devices that are built in? That's ridiculous, not to mention unneccessary. It's not as if building a Linux with working WiFi was rocket science.
I myself am at my second factory-preinstalled linux-based netbook (first Asus, now Dell), and my experiences are nothing but positive, The specially created interface on the asus was practical, the one on the Dell is fantastic and even stylish. I wouldn't want to have to navigate the miniature start menu of XP on my netbook. But then again I was already ready for Linux anyway. Let's see if Android will get new Linux users into the mobile devices market.
molmod.com - computing tips from a molecular modeling
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.
... or maybe Red Hat is.
To clarify: At work we recently ordered a Dell Precision Mobile Workstation (forget which exact model it is) with Red Hat Linux preinstalled. When we got it we found that it did not have the necessary drivers for the Ethernet port (wireless worked fine) or the audio output device. Going to Dell's and Red Hat's web site resulted in nothing. We scrounged around the internet, but find some partly working solutions. In the end we just ended up installing Ubuntu which worked out of the box.
For me this is the sort of thing that makes Linux look bad and PCs in general look bad. It is if they don't care. For me it unacceptable for a computer to be supplied with an operating system that does not support completely the hardware it is bundled with, whether it is due to missing drivers or something else.
I blame Dell here for being to lazy to ensure quality of product. Techies may be the primary market for the product, but techies don't want to spend time fixing someone else's fuck-ups either.
Jumpstart the tartan drive.
Just the same old story, bad hardware driver.
There is a significal different between 'work out of the box'(barely working), 'work with all the feature enabled' and 'work best'.
Most Linux distros now can do 'work out of the box', but with several crippled functions, and you will need several small tweaks to solve them. But it is not over yet, if you want to take the best of your hardware then you will have to do serious tweaking. Only after that you will have a fully functional system that is better than windows.
So in short, Linux is better than windows, but you will have tinker a lot with it. After 2 months of googling/fixing, now I have a laptop that can run on battery longer than it does on windows, cooler, faster, and I can use my GPU to decode video (with VDPAU) that I can't do the same on windows. Yes, I still have some problems, but generally, Linux runs better than windows on my laptop.
(my problems is that the monitor won't turn off if I close the lid, and some stupid IO problem, Firefox take 2 mins to start if I do some heavy file transfering in the background, and ionice doesn't help)
Windows has something Microsoft once identified as critical mass in the market. It was no accident that they arrived at that point. The choked, cheated and killed IBM's OS/2 making it the only desktop operating system for PCs. Had Linux begun to mature during that era, we would be telling a very different story as Microsoft would never have achieved critical mass.
What is critical mass? I am probably wrong or incomplete in my understanding of what that means, but to me it means they control enough market share that every software and hardware vendor must heed what Microsoft says and does or face the consequences. It also means that all users have come to expect only one user experience and is cursed to be unaware of other options and what they mean. When they don't get what they expect, they believe something is wrong.
People are okay when that "something else" is Mac OS X. They know it is different and usually comes on an Apple branded PC. It is a conscious decision that users make and are aware that "It's not Windows."
Just keep chipping away... keep chipping away. Eventually Linux will begin to mean something to users. It may mean the equivalent to the pictures that come in wallets, purses and picture frames. It may mean something that works, serves its purposes and doesn't get viruses. It may mean something that kinda works, but everything they want isn't quite available yet.
One thing that changes user perception is "standards compliance." Users don't have a clue what that means, but if it works fine in Windows and not in Mac OS X or Linux, the PERCEPTION is that there is something wrong with Linux and Mac OS X. The more pressure put on Microsoft to comply with standards on the web, the greater the possibility that alternatives could be perceived as viable.
"Critical Mass" means that people think it's the standard. "Critical Mass" means it is the defacto standard. Toppling a standard is no easy task.
the Linux desktop on the Asus Eee PC 900 out of the box is an abomination for anyone who qualifies as a power user on ANY OS. It's a dumbed down older version of Xandros modified for a tab-based UI.
/path-to/nxclient . Note that nxclient has a perfectly good desktop icon and is happy to install itself to a menu if given the chance, i.e. on any normal Linux OS.
Basically, it's a locked down net appliance UI... the only programs you can install without drastically modifying or replacing the OS that will show up on any desktop tab are the handful of programs available on the Asus repository site. Running nxclient required me opening a terminal window and using the CLI to manually enter
I turned myself from a pissed off Eee PC Linux user to a happy one by replacing the OEM desktop with a standard Ubuntu desktop plus hardware drivers from the Ubuntu-eee project, you can find out how I did it here.
However, I also have some serious doubts about the accuracy of the original "analyst" report. If Linux sucks so badly on netbooks, why are any netbook vendors still selling it to anybody? Note that by and large, computer retail stores have not exactly put any great effort into selling Linux netbooks, the only place it's easy to get them is via online ordering, so it can be assumed that people who buy the Linux netbooks thought they knew what they were getting in advance.
Tech Public Policy stuff
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.
...because MS will use its desktop monopoly and control of protocols to limit the penetration of Linux servers.
Believe it. And it's not just squeezing Linux out but eviscerating the web as we know it. Already I have to deal with web apps at work that are just a pile of obscured javascript (often plus activex). Something like this can't be programmed, it can't be interacted with, can't be reasoned with, and it will absolutely not stop until you have learned to be absolutely helpless at Microsoft's feet...
(hat tip to The Terminator :-)
"Not an actor, but he plays one on TV."
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.
and I have to say in my view if I was anyone else in my family I would have returned it.
I have some friends that could have probably dealt with it.
but while everything i want / need it to do is working great getting there was a bit of a hassle. Openvpn was in the default OS (Linpus) install but the tun kernel module was not?? for that matter to open up the advance mode you have to hack (trivial hack but hack none the less)
several updates from acer wiped out my tun module and joystick module and I had to re add them...Nice one one of the updates screwed up all the quick launch icons / apps (which unless you've unlocked the advance mode is the only way for people to launch the apps..nice)
I love my little aspire one and it goes many places with me that my old thinkpad didn't (cause it was too much bother to lug it out and around). but the linpus has been far from a cakewalk. I thought about putting windows on it but the SSD on my 110 is really not well suited for running XP and I do like the 10sec or so boot time so after a bit of head banging getting some stuff working it looks like I'll just stick w/ linpus now.
actually I am happy to see you, however that is in fact a banana in my pocket.
[Linux tutorials are] often deliberately [complicated], because some of the people who write them like to express their machismo by creating inordinately complicated tutorials. Recently I read a tutorial describing how to get a Wi-Fi card working on a notebook that recommended compiling new driver modules.
Woah, Linux documentation is sometimes complicated, but no need to make accusations. But never fear, the author of the article has ALSO written a Linux book, designed to help with this very machismo problem. Conflict of interest here?
Hardware problems were much more pronounced with the first wave of netbooks. I had one of the very first Asus Eee netbooks shortly after its release and it's hardware design meant it was borderline unusable. My hands ached if I typed for more than five minutes. In the end I sold it--I too rejected a Linux netbook.
Oh, so it wasn't Linux, it was the hardware that was giving you problems. That makes sense, but what is the point of your article?
What happens is that the software problems presented by Linux, combined with the hardware problems presented by smaller computers, push users over the edge.
I see. Do you actually know any of these users, or were they just like you, annoyed by the hardware?
What's the solution? To be honest, I don't think there is one.
So your a 'glass all empty' type of guy? I mean, Linux has problems, sure, but the falling price of hardware is going to make it increasingly attractive as an option. To say there is absolutely no solution never is a bit extreme.
And finally, this quote made me laugh
[On linux], when the user starts the browser, things change. Nothing looks right. The fonts will probably look wrong, maybe causing the page layout to be skewed a little.
Right. The only thing they will notice different about the fonts is that they aren't as ugly, especially if they are used to having clear type turned off, as is the default on Windows, and makes every font look like a harsh cactus in the eyes. Now Linux fonts aren't awesome, but they don't stoop to the default windows level of horribleness (note: I have no idea if cleartype is on by default in Vista).
So what is this guy's point? I think that he needs to fill his page with words, since he is a columnist. And he does it with some rather inane and uninspiring words.
Qxe4
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.
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.
My favourite computer still is my 1024x768 screen 12inch iBook.
It is ONLY acceptable because of the UI feature that quickly shows miniaturized versions of the windows of all my running applications, and lets me pick one and get back into it in one click. That gets rid of most of the need for a large screen.
And the iphone ui is optimized for its screen size, etc.
Linux might do better on netbooks if a similar gui optimized for the screen size was available and worked well. I understand a few of these may be available but haven't tried any.
Have to say I'm holding out for an Apple netbook. UI of MacOSX is too much better.
I am an extreme comp-sci geek, but I have way better things to do than configure the low-level settings of my laptop.
Where are we going and why are we in a handbasket?
Is it any wonder why so many people are used to the rules and non-regulations of a Windows machine?
That being said, every flavor of Linux I've tried has some different scheme to it, making basic operations unnecessarily complex.
Standardizing basic ops like install/uninstall, media player/ect. would be a good start, but probably terribly unrealistic among mainstream distros.
Maybe there is a misunderstanding by you of what your companies' needs are. Most of the time more is involved in running a corporate network than hooking computer to router with NAT like at home. Many companies utilize Active Directory to administer their network and switching workstations to Linux makes that somewhere between extremely difficult and impossible.
Second, companies are averse to changing anything that currently works adequately because there are (usually significant) costs involved in moving to a new platform in the form of testing, rollout, training, and support time.
Finally, even outside of corporate environments you need to provide a compelling reason to switch to something else from what's been in use for a long period of time. Debatable feature parity simply does not qualify.
Linux is for Geeks and it always will be. When I built my own mini computer with a micro atx mb some time ago I was curious about how linux would perform on it vs Windows 2000 and Windows XP. XP was a total dog. The processor just couldn't handle it. Win2k ran nicely. But when I tried to install Fedora I quickly realized it was impossible. The Fedora install didn't recognize the hardware and wouldn't even boot. Of course any geek will tell you just reconfigure the discombobulator and invert the thingamajig and then recompile the root and then burn new install discs and then boot from Alt-Shift-Tilde. Which to a non-Geek is the equivalent of performing brain surgery on yourself. What the hell are you talking about? I have to do what?!? I had to hunt around on the web for several hours just to find out what the problem was, then after reading all the various explanations of how to do it and telling myself I am a software engineer and I have no idea what I just read, I finally found someone who wrote a hack to boot the system, then allow the install disk to run. And after all that I found that it ran worse than Windows becuase it wasn't optimized for the cpu. So I went back to win2k and was happy ever since. Which is why Linux will NEVER be ready for laptops or desktops or anything else besides servers. Because only Geeks have the patience to hack around and kludge it up so that it works. I just want to turn it on and have it work so I can get on to more important things like doing my job or searching for pr0n ;) Oh, and I just bought a Dell mini 9 and I didn't hesitate for 1 second between choosing Windows over Linux. It was worth the difference in price. And if want to install another OS it will be OS X and NOT Linux.
I'm surprised I haven't seen this mentioned yet, but one of the main reasons netbooks with Windows XP are doing so well is becuase Microsoft started offering netbook manufacturers lower prices on XP Home. I can't seem to find the article right now but XP Home may be offered to large ODMs for around $20-$30, with some claiming it's around the $20 mark. I think the cheapest it ever got before these new netbook-only prices was around $40.
The very clear-headed Carla Schroeder has a write-up at Linux Today. Steven J. Vaughan-Nichols also noticed the figures were bogus.
Nah. Your standard end user doesn't even understand the concept of software, really. I know people who think Windows is Office, and so on. These aren't people who are totally ignorant—they work with computers every day—they're just not very good at reading. Their excuse is usually "I don't want to think about that stuff, I want to get my work done," never realizing that thirty minutes of thinking about "that stuff" could save them hours of frustration. When I heard someone who's worked in a white-collar environment for fifteen years refer to Office 2007 as "Windows Word 2007," I nearly lost it.
...and make it ubuntu.
I've stopped recommending people try linux. Rather, I recommend ubuntu, 'a type of linux'. Trying to explain how each distro is built on the linux kernel and uses a specific desktop environment tends to send people running so instead, I rave about ubuntu - which they can then go and test right away from a live CD.
On netbooks, the problem of different distributions is amplified by all the custom distros. As much as this is open source in action, it splintered the 'linux' option, especially when XP always comes as the same recognisable package. Hardware manufacturers could have put the effort into ensuring upstream hardware support and supporting key software development (ooo.org, ffox, rhythmbox? mplayer?) rather than developing their own "OS".
I think we would be seeing a different story if customers were offered ubuntu as the option to XP across the board.
netbooks have changed from a nerds' thing into a mainstream thing.
I mean that as an open question. Why the hell, as a linux user, should i care if my neighbor is using windows or Linux? While more geeks defiantly help improve things and report bugs, how does it help if there are more ex-windows newbs on ubuntu?
There is the hardware support, but even there I'm gradually seeing even supported hardware (atheros and flgrx) get nudged out by community drivers.
All i can think of are games, is that the main advantage of having more users?
IranAir Flight 655 never forget!
Just got a 10.5 inch Acer Aspire one D150. The sales guy said they were no longer shipping a Linux version. I have a strong educational as well as political commitment to Linux. The custom 3rd party Linux4one Ubuntu distro had terrible wifi throughput (and en0 just wasn't even there) when I installed it, so I tried again with openSUSE 11.1. This time the networking was ok, but the webcam and sound were non functional. No driver support from Acer so it's all word of mouth. Very disappointing. I'll keep trying though.
First time using this thing extensively, and when I get home after this trip, I'll be putting easypeasy or eeebuntu on it. Asus's Xandros, while having some nice ideas, just isn't well implemented. It feels cheap. I know other distro's do better, but joe blow won't. I *would not* put windows on here. Navigating a tiny menu is not what will work on this thing. I haven't seen a better use case for Opera's speedial (and the firefox plugin's that emulate it). Whatever I do, I'm gonna try to lighten it up, this little thing doesn't have a lot horses under the hood!
... 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
no.
Wealth is the gift that keeps on giving.
As long as linux advocates curse the foolish choices of the enduser they will never succeed in increasing market share. One can ask, well is market share the goal? If not then don't begrudge windows for providing an end user experience that is preferred. Sure in your view it's a lesser ecperience, but people want comfort. More people like cheeseburgers than tofu even if tofu is better for them. Does that make cheesburger's bad or good?
Some drink at the fountain of knowledge. Others just gargle.
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?
So in short, Linux is better than windows, but you will have tinker a lot with it.
that is a contradiction. if you have to tinker with linux to make it better than windows, its not better.
also, i've noticed that ubuntu 8.10 runs faster on my laptop than xp. this is the first time i've seen someone complain about linux's speed.
Wealth is the gift that keeps on giving.
Blaming the person using the computer is the reason we still have 12 step processes for codec installs on many distros. Often, these things don't become more intuitive, we just blame a gov't conspiracy or call the end user a lazy moron and tell him to RTFM.
Blame it on the end user or blame it on MS, it doesn't change the fact that the people that are receiving these netbooks with linux don't want them. If people want linux to be accepted, they need to make it more appealing to the target market.
Personally, I could care less if it gains in popularity. I use it for what I need it to do. I'm not concerned with what Joe Enduser has on his netbook.
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 ... and ...
a) they don't have anyone who can offer support for Linux
b) there's precious little to support which can be charged
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
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.
Exactly! The industry will need to settle on maybe 3 desktop distros (light, medium, pro) before there will be enough de-facto standardization for driver writers etc. to bother with.
Table-ized A.I.
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
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.
One of the untold stories here is that there is a small but growing contingent of people loading OS X onto their netbooks. Apple doesn't like it much but the legality is uncharted territory. OS X is built on BSD which is open source, and it may be difficult for Apple to pursue users for modifying it to use anywhere they want. OS X Leopard runs very nicely on my Acer Aspire One. Better than on my older (2006) Mac Mini...
I'd rather have a free bottle in front of me than a prefrontal lobotomy.
... even though I fully intend to wipe Windows off (after making 3 backups of it) and replace it with Ubuntu Linux. The reason is this gives me the ability to cheaply run Windows in case I might ever need to do so (happens about every 2 or 3 years). If I were to buy a netbook with just Linux on it, most likely I've be replacing that Linux with Ubuntu Linux, anyway. But that other Linux wouldn't really be giving me something extra. With these netbooks in the $250 price range with XP or Linux, it's really like getting one Windows usage license nearly for free (for that machine).
now we need to go OSS in diesel cars
It was cheaper than one with Linux preloaded on it. Never booted XP. Installed Fedora XFCE. The tweaking wasn't a big deal and everything works. Webcam and wireless. My Verizon AirCard recognized and works. Maybe MS should take a look at how many of the XP netbooks sold phone home for an update.
I bought my Eee at a Best Buy.
~ C.
Linux is linux because it is linux. CHange it and it won't be linux anymore.
What is Linux anyway? Is it Linux from scratch or Ubuntu or Linpus (the Linux Acer used to put on its netbooks).
They are all linux but radically different products. Some distro's go for cutting edge, compiling straight from Linus keyboard, others present a product as unchangebale as your VCR "OS".
The linux that most geeks use is probably the cutting edge stuff, we can deal with the problems it gives because, well we grew up on it and we accept that it is the price to pay for having the features we require. I KNOW my linux desktop is not as smooth as Vista's is (firefox especially is a bitch) but I have become so accustomed to the X way of presenting a desktop I would quit any job that told me to use windows.
This however makes it hard for linux to ever kill windows which is what some seem to desire. Linux but its nature is a niche market. How can you sell a product that is free and where the users have no need of tech support or even worse, give said tech support for free? Oh and are also high resistant to adds being displayed. So, you can't sell a boxed product, can't sell support and can't run it add supported.
That is why there is no linux desktop startup.
As for mass market, support is expensive. Sell a $50 profit product, get one support call and watch your profit fly away. How does MS do it? Simple, they don't. MS does NOT give consumer support, that they leave up to dell.
Since linux is not yet capable of being 100% windows (and its current niche market audience has no desire for it to be windows) you can count on any boxed product customer generating at least one support call to find out why their windows software don't run on it.
Simple put, linux is linux because it is a product by nerds for nerds. It can't go mainstream in a similar way that kit-planes can't. Not everyone has the knowledge to build their own plane and if it became so easy any idiot could, one of the kit-plane fans would buy it and the idiots don't have the pilot license needed anyway.
Some things are just meant to be niche.
What would help Linux far more if the world came to accept that windows is not the only OS. I therefor like Apple (despite hating almost everything about them) as any Mac sold means 1 more PC that ain't windows, doesn't do windows and won't do windows. 1 more user wanting opensource or at least portable apps. 1 more user against windows only "standards". 1 more twit railing against wind-mills.
MMO Quests are like orgasms:
You may solo them, I prefer them in a group.
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 ...
I bought two netbooks with Linux preinstalled, an HP2133 and an Asus Eee PC. The pre-installed versions of Linux (SuSE and Xandros) had serious problems: bad fonts, bad desktop setup, misconfigured update sources, bad drivers, etc.
But the problem wasn't a problem with Linux--with stock Ubuntu installed, both of them are great machines. The problem was incompetent and overly zealous customization and installation by the vendors.
If MS's "monopoly" is really the cause of every "Linux on the desktop" setback then you might as well give up because MS's market share isn't going to go down if Linux can't grow.
Rather than use the monopoly excuse, Linux fans should figure out the specific reason for the setback and try to address it.
Or you could just sit on your hands for another 10 years and say it's all MS's fault.
Has anyone entertained the thought that people might actually choose windows because it's the best available option?
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.
'Once again Microsoft's monopoly means Windows is swallowing up another market.'"
Which is why, if the rumours of Microsoft giving XP to netbook manufacturers is true, they are guilty of predatory pricing which is basically summarised as discounting heavily with the intention of forcing a competitor out of the market.
Open and shut case really although it'll probably take the EU stepping in to do something about it.
Hmmmmmm..... Deep fried and look like Squirrel.
I'm going to call you an idiot because the setup procedure on a EeePC to restore factory settings is so brain dead (just choosing the recovery option on boot), it's not even funny. This gets a broken system working within seconds.
Taking the EeePC as a example again... Why would you need to do that? Infact, any netbook that comes with Linux won't require you to do that to get Wi-Fi working, what are you talking about?
To my knowledge, there is no netbook out there that doesn't have WPA support and I have seen quite a few. Even the earliest Linux netbooks have WPA support.
Change is certain; progress is not obligatory.
I bought a Samsung NC10 that came with windows XP. I installed Ubuntu really easily and have never looked back.
It was easy to do and the software you get "out of the can" is all I need for my daily tasks as a very busy student.
The entire process was simple and easy and worked. I do not think too many Windows users would have too many problems if they went through the same process.
In short, installing and using, seems simple enough! (to me?)
User: This is different and wierd... ... ya there?
Linux Dude: To bad.... just relearn everything,
Linux Dude:
Linux Dude: hmm guess he went to google it.
Linux Dude: Yep this the is year of linux....
Second, the Linux UI on the Eee PC is a dumbed down, locked down older version of Xandros modified to provide a tabbed interface designed as a Net appliance whose program selection for ordinary installation is limited to a handful of programs), and a response to another post of mine downthread says that Acer's Linux UI is similar. If you install anything that is not in the Asus repository (presumably via binaries) it will not show up in any of the UI tabs. To run that installed program, one will have to open a terminal and invoke it via CLI.
So your whines about the differences between Linux software and XP are completely irrelevant to any recognizable netbook reality. The current and last generations of netbooks are too underpowered to run large-scale Linux apps with large datasets, and the screen size is really too small to make that class of work comfortable. I deal with the CPU power problem when need be by running a remote control connection to my far more powerful desktop from anywhere around a wireless AP.
The real problems with Linux sales on netbooks are:
Any problem with Linux on netbooks comes down to the manufacturers using Linux to deliver a net appliance experience. Remember the companies that used to sell net appliances? The ones that still exist don't sell them anymore. Not to say that for the few people left who are still unfamiliar with computers, a net appliance is necessarily a bad idea, I think I could hand a Linux netbook to the proverbial computer-illiterate grandmother and get her websurfing in a few minutes. But these people are increasingly rare, everyone else expects a computer to have a recognizable desktop with icons that do things and a bottom panel with a start menu and some apps that can be selected from it.
Manufacturers can do different things with a smartphone UI because we don't have fixed expectations of what a phone UI is going to look like other than we expect some way to enter phone numbers and a button to push to accept a call when the phone rings.
Tech Public Policy stuff
Why are you all rambling here? Start writing code, slackers! :)
It is always better to be a first grade version of yourself than a second grade version of someone else.
I think we have the wrong perspective here. The term "Linux" (and "GNU/Linux", for that matter), as commonly used isn't a single OS, it refers to hundreds, or even thousands of operating systems that share a common codebase. If I buy a netbook loaded with Windows XP Home, it's the same operating system, whether I buy an Acer, Asus, Dell, HP, or other netbook. If I buy a netbook with "Linux" on it, it may be Xandros, Linpus Lite, or Ubuntu; and when I install "Linux" on my netbook, it may be any of the three Linux distros mentioned here or Fedora, Crunchbang, Moblin, Puppy, Kuki, Suse, Mandriva, etc... Each of these is a different operating system; they have their own unique way of doing things. The principal failing of netbook manufacturers has been pre-installing versions of "Linux" that don't allow their customers to do what those customers expect to be able to do with their netbooks. If the expectation is that a netbook should be able to browse the web, play videos, do email and video chat, read and store data on a variety of flash media using built-in card readers, etc..., then it's up to the manufacturers to ensure that they install the software required to do this. Given the current situation, where no two netbook manufacturers offer the same version of "Linux" (whereas they offer identical versions of WinXP) just tells me that there is no one Linux distribution that clearly meets the needs of the manufacturers.
Geology - it's not rocket science; it's rock science
This was hashed out in the recent thread on 96% windows penetration. The fact of the matter is that:
1) Some vendors actually had the gall to sell netbooks that didn't have working wifi under linux, then claim they were netbooks. They saw higher return rates but others (dell and was it acer?) didn't. Chalk one up against the basic premise of the article.
2) After Microsoft decided to really enter the netbook market netbooks with linux on them suddenly became impossible to get. Whether this has anything to do with Microsoft or more with the stores choosing brand awareness I don't know. The fact remains, people that went into a store somewhere in the last few months were extremely unlikely to even be offered the option.
I've recently broken down and ordered an MSI Wind. I'll probably not bother to try and get a refund on the Windows (it's a huge hassle, and I might never see the money) but it's gonna run Ubuntu either way.
What we really need is someone to come in and make the major suppliers give us the option of getting a laptop without an OS pre-installed. Why the hell in 2009 are we still dealing with this shit where you simply cannot buy anything in a laptop form factor or below without paying the Microsoft tax. (disregarding macbooks for a minute)
"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?
Linux won't take off on the desktop until there until more familiar commercial software is available on that platform and better drivers support for gadgets like printers, cameras and scanners. What good is a free OS if I can't buy software for it or install the software that came with my new camera?
The big difference between the Mac OS and Linux on the desktop is the availability (and choice) of purchasing commercial packages like Microsoft Office, iTunes, etc. Yes, Adobe Flash and Java are available for Linux distros, but many of these nice, free, plug ins like Flash aren't bundled with the netbooks sold these days. What precisely is the problem with vendors such as Dell or HP bundling commercial drivers or packages on Linux? Why can't these netbooks give users the full experience out of the box without the pain?
I, for one, don't mind paying for and running commercial software on a free OS if this software was available (yes, I know I can purchase Oracle or DB2 for Linux, but what desktop users need them?). I don't have a problem with it it all. It certainly beats waiting for someone in the community to do it themselves.
http://www.eeebuntu.org/
It supports all the eee HW functions and hotkeys out of the box.
Microsoft doesn't have a monopoly on the netbook arena. They're just the only mainstream OS option available without resorting to breaking some EULAs and/or piracy. It's been quite clearly shown that there is a huge desire for Apple's Mac OS X to be made available to the netbook market. As it is, some people have gone to great lengths to install Mac OS X on the machines due to the underwhelming performance of Windows XP and the lack of commercial software support from the linux end.
Getting Mac OS X into the netbook arena resolves both issues, you get a stable, responsive OS with support for commercial produced software, while still having access to most of the open source market as well.
While the MacBook Air is arguably a "netbook", it lacks the size and form factor that has made actual "netbooks" like the Acer Aspire One, such a runaway success.
If Apple ever plans to penetrate the PC market with Mac OS X world-wide, the netbook market would be the best place to start. Netbooks generally aren't modified by end users in the same way desktop computers are, so Apple could easily develop a standard for officially supporting Mac OS X on them.
Once users have experienced Mac OS X on their netbook, they might even consider buying an actual Mac for their desktop machine.
The netbook market is something Apple really should consider embracing while users are still up in the air over which OS they want.
8==8 Bones 8==8
The REAL reasons M$ is gaining ground in this is due to a combination of vendor ignorance, marketing pressure, and manufacturers with no clue how to prepare a Linux machine.
If companies like Best Buy, etc. will not take the Linux versions, then the sales of Linux based netbooks is going to be weak.
With no financial incentive, it is even worse.
How do machines with a "free" OS happen to cost the same as ones with Windows?
Let's see, if we make the Linux ones with smaller, but more expensive SSDs, and sell them at the same price as machine with a HDD that is 4 to 8 times the size?
Hmm, what will the chains and consumers choose?
Add to this distis and manufacturers offering less and less Linux models.
Case in point:
eeePC 1002.
Specs show it comes in both Linux and M$ versions.
In fact, in N. America,ASUS are not shipping the Linux version.
Finally, calling Xandros "Linux" is a pretty sad situation.
Ever try using it?
Contrast this to eeeBuntu on the same hardware and the difference is astounding.
In the end it boils down to 2 things:
1) Vendor and manufacturer ignorance of how to prepare a Linux machine.
2) Sales channel fear of anything "unusual"
3) M$ marketing pressure and incentives.
Maurice W. Hilarius Voice: (778) 347-9907
If it's more familiar, it's more usable, and therefore superior for users.
It's as if linux advocates measure "superiority" as an intrinsic quality, whereas users see superiority in terms of usefulness to them.
Photoshop is a professional tool with a professional price tag.
Professional tools in general are not meant for idiots too lazy to learn them.
They are also largely irrelevant for that vast majority of users and
pretty irrelevant in "platform wars". Anyone whining about them are
bound to be total posers.
Now, if it turns out that such "pro apps" are in common use because
there aren't more appropriate tools out there then THAT is a problem.
The home user should not have to worry about owning any "professional"
app. This includes Microsoft Office.
Data formats should be open enough that artificial need is not created
for apps that were considered gross overkill 20 years ago.
A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
You will fail to use Linux optimally on laptops for these reasons:
1. hardware is too new, and uses all proprietary hardware that is designed to be "made for vista". Vista was designed with DRM in mind, the hardware is going to be bent in favor of closed source.
2. hardware sold with linux is designed to be "cheap" or "low power", which is not really the best market for linux, although it can do that. Linux users are no dummies, and the dummies are the ones returning the laptops (or netbooks).
3. Linux is best at driver minimization and unification. If you can get linux to run on hardware, that means the hardware is popular, is going to be well supported, and is non-proprietary meaning you should be able to find people that are familiar with it enough to fix it. Linux should be the watermark by which to determine if hardware is reliable. If it is "wintel" designed, it is going to make use of memory-sharing hardware that sucks down the CPU to add more features.
4. Linux is best on used/older laptops, people who pay for new hardware are the fools who pay for the bugs, every linux nerd knows this.. The market analysis data is flawed considering how it determines market adoption, by new laptop sales.
Just say no to license servers!!
This has been bothering me for along time, I have begun to see people covering up their sheer, unforgivable incompetence by claiming that it is the Linux way. Hard to use? Makes no sense even to Linux users? Stupid little two bit bullshit fuckups (I mean, that's what pisses me off, it's a bunch of little things that do matter, but are not rocket science damnit) left and right? just plain sloppiness and neglect?
"Oh, you should learn how to use it!"
"it's the Linux way!"
Makes me want to projectile vomit!
I swear, if my stuff were as shoddy as some of the bs I have seen on this ubuntu install (just STUPID SHIT!!!) I would shoot myself, some people have no dignity, no pride, no BALLS to do shit RIGHT goddamnit! If you are going to build something and release it, be responsible and get your shit together!!!!!!
The FLOSS/GNU/Linux way does NOT EQUAL INCOMPETENCE!!!! How come *BSD is fucking clean and tight and slick and stable and highly usable and beautiful!?!?!?!?!!?
I find sloppiness and half-assness to be unnaceptable! I have seen worse fuckups in some FOSS GNU/Linux than I have seen in M$FT stuff! That is disgraceful! Dishonorable. A travesty.
Someone, please enlighten me.
SARAVA!
Unfamiliar software and hardware are just one reason.
2. The main reason is there is no economic reason to install Linux. The cost of the OS and software are only a small fraction of the price and it's not worth the cost of having different models with another OS. Linux users will just install their favourite version anyway.
3. There is no Linux desktop, there are hundreds of them.
4. There is no performance gain. By the time you run Linux, X, KDE and GNOME and Open Office etc., XP with Chrome is faster.
Note there is an advantage over Vista, which is why Microsoft kept and discounted XP for netbooks. You can't claim Microsoft are dumping and old OS when the competition is free.
When Linux is useful is running a cut down system on low power devices, especially once XP is gone.
I've learned that many people will move to Linux if the have the right help. In the past year I have helped over a dozen people with their Windows addiction, and now they are happily running Ubuntu 8.10. In the end it really comes down to users having a friend they can goto with their questions.
I think the real problem is the distribution the netbook manufacturers deliver with their netbooks. Like the ASUS EEE for example. It has a complete custom interface that people aren't familiar with on notebooks or PCs. Also every manufacturer delivers another distribution. Why don't they all deliver Ubuntu on their netbook? It is the most standard distro at the moment and it has a more familiar look and feel for most people.