Linked by Thom Holwerda on Thu 2nd Aug 2007 23:01 UTC
Hardware, Embedded Systems Acer is planning to sell Linux-based PCs to the UK market, the company told ZDNet.co.uk. On Thursday Acer contacted ZDNet.co.uk with the following statement: "At this moment in time Acer UK does not have a PC available with Linux pre-loaded, but we are looking at introducing one in the future." This appears to represent a reversal of Acer's previous statements on the matter, which suggested that the manufacturer had no plans to sell PCs here with a pre-installed open-source operating system.
Order by: Score:
Slowly, but surely.....
by leech on Thu 2nd Aug 2007 23:30 UTC
leech
Member since:
2006-01-10

Ok, I may as well say it.... "Year of Desktop Linux?" Well, I've never been one to tout that, but then again, with Dell selling them first nationally in the USA, then soon to be internationally, and then Acer starting to sell on the other side of the Atlantic, I think perhaps this (probably next) will be the Year of Desktop Linux.

This is good stuff. First comes the OEMs, then comes the developers, then perhaps we'll actually have some fair competition.

The only downfall I see to Linux becoming more popular, is that all those businesses that thrive on the pain of others, like anti-virus and spyware removal companies will be crying all the way because there won't be as many customers.

Reply Score: 4

RE: Slowly, but surely.....
by flanque on Thu 2nd Aug 2007 23:47 UTC in reply to "Slowly, but surely....."
flanque Member since:
2005-12-15

It's been the year of desktop Linux since, hmm, 1990? Having one possibly two major vendors supplying a line of Linux based desktops, to me, doesn't signal that there's be any rush to get them.

First and foremost, the average consumer frankly doesn't know what Linux is, why they would want to use it and why they should choose it above Windows. Lets assume the operating system is "ready" (which is debated at great length), there needs to be a massive marketing campaign to inform consumers sufficiently to make any 12 month period the "year of desktop linux". Who pays for this? No single vendor will pay for this alone only to allow their competitors to feed off it.

IF Linux gets any significant numbers over Windows at the desktop level, it'll in my view take at least 5-10 years.

You have to remember people wont just drop their recently purchased Windows based desktop for Linux "just because". People want value from their purchases so they can feel good about the decisions they've made to buy something. In my experience, most will suck every last ounce of use out of their existing machines until they get fed up with the speed of the computer to eventually bite the bullet and buy a new one.

If you're talking about vendors pre-installing Linux, the numbers will increase as people upgrade. This is a very slow process, assuming even 100% take up from the very beginning.

Add to this that Linux is now very clearly on Microsoft's radar as a threat and you've yet another challenge for Linux to overcome through almost endless amounts of money to pour into development, marketing and promotions.

Clearly Linux is a good desktop operating system, but the challenges it has in front of it, in my view, are far too significant to mark any year that of Linux desktop.

I'd suggest it'd be wiser to say this is the "Decade of the Linux Desktop".

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: Slowly, but surely.....
by butters on Fri 3rd Aug 2007 03:42 UTC in reply to "RE: Slowly, but surely....."
butters Member since:
2005-07-08

I like the "Decade of the Linux Desktop" characterization. Google says you're the fourth person to say that.

Most software discovery happens through word of mouth. Microsoft spent untold millions on the Vista launch, but most people don't realize that there's a new Windows until they see it on someone's computer. A significant chunk of the Windows userbase still doesn't know there's a new Windows.

People don't know about Linux because they never see it on anyone's computer, and advertising can't really change that. It would take nothing short of Mark Shuttleworth buying all the ad time in the next Superbowl to make a dent in Linux awareness.

Linux will gradually gain converts, increasing the probability of any given person discovering Linux, and creating a positive feedback loop. Many aspects of free software are based on network effects, and marketshare is certainly no exception.

Reply Score: 3

RE[2]: Slowly, but surely.....
by kozo on Fri 3rd Aug 2007 10:06 UTC in reply to "RE: Slowly, but surely....."
kozo Member since:
2006-02-02

And if Decade is not enough, let's call it "Score of Linux Desktop"

Reply Score: 0

RE[2]: Slowly, but surely.....
by abraxas on Sun 5th Aug 2007 12:37 UTC in reply to "RE: Slowly, but surely....."
abraxas Member since:
2005-07-07

It's been the year of desktop Linux since, hmm, 1990? Having one possibly two major vendors supplying a line of Linux based desktops, to me, doesn't signal that there's be any rush to get them.

Only a time traveler would even know what Linux was in 1990.

Lets assume the operating system is "ready" (which is debated at great length), there needs to be a massive marketing campaign to inform consumers sufficiently to make any 12 month period the "year of desktop linux". Who pays for this? No single vendor will pay for this alone only to allow their competitors to feed off it.

Not really. This won't help consumer sales at all. Linux and associated companies do not have enough money to market Linux like Microsoft does. Linux will make it the same way that Microsoft did originally, in the business place. People have no idea what an OS is and there is little marketing can do to change that.

I'd suggest it'd be wiser to say this is the "Decade of the Linux Desktop".

I think that is more correct and depending on who you ask this is the culmination of a decade of desktop linux or it is the beginning of decade of desktop linux.

Reply Score: 2

RE[3]: Slowly, but surely.....
by flanque on Sun 5th Aug 2007 22:26 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Slowly, but surely....."
flanque Member since:
2005-12-15

Only a time traveler would even know what Linux was in 1990.


Uh, no. I was there.

Reply Score: 2

RE[4]: Slowly, but surely.....
by abraxas on Mon 6th Aug 2007 11:22 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Slowly, but surely....."
abraxas Member since:
2005-07-07

Uh, no. I was there.

Are you on something or are you just joking? Linux wasn't even released until 1991.

Reply Score: 2

RE[5]: Slowly, but surely.....
by flanque on Mon 6th Aug 2007 11:36 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: Slowly, but surely....."
flanque Member since:
2005-12-15

*sigh*

of coarse

Reply Score: 2

v RE: Slowly, but surely.....
by funny_irony on Fri 3rd Aug 2007 04:47 UTC in reply to "Slowly, but surely....."
RE[2]: Slowly, but surely.....
by Soulbender on Fri 3rd Aug 2007 04:58 UTC in reply to "RE: Slowly, but surely....."
Soulbender Member since:
2005-08-18

"Many users in Asia bought the Acer Laptop with Linux pre-install. Then they reformat it and install Windows. "

Or so you say. Provide some evidence.

"If the user use superuser id and password for normal operation. It is possible for virus, worm and spyware to spread in Linux."

Noooo, really? Thanks Professor Obvious.
Btw, neither spyware, viruses or worms need root privs to function and spread.

Reply Score: 6

RE[2]: Slowly, but surely.....
by archiesteel on Fri 3rd Aug 2007 06:01 UTC in reply to "RE: Slowly, but surely....."
archiesteel Member since:
2005-07-02

Many users in Asia bought the Acer Laptop with Linux pre-install. Then they reformat it and install Windows.


I hear that a lot, but I never see any figures. I suspect *some* Linux PCs get Windows installed over them, but in the end the thing that matters is that Linux gets more exposition. Even if only some of the PCs keep Linux, it's a positive thing.

If the user use superuser id and password for normal operation. It is possible for virus, worm and spyware to spread in Linux.


It is theoretically possible, yes. Most distros (including the most popular, Ubuntu) do not require the user to use superuser status. However, the point is rendered moot by the fact that there are currently *no* Linux viruses on the wild (with the possible exception of a worm targetting Web servers). There is, as far as I know, no spyware for Linux. When there is, maybe we can talk about this again.

Reply Score: 3

RE[3]: Slowly, but surely.....
by Hands on Fri 3rd Aug 2007 13:44 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Slowly, but surely....."
Hands Member since:
2005-06-30

I hear that a lot, but I never see any figures. I suspect *some* Linux PCs get Windows installed over them, but in the end the thing that matters is that Linux gets more exposition. Even if only some of the PCs keep Linux, it's a positive thing.


One point that I haven't noticed among these comments is that *some* Windows PCs get Linux installed over them. I realize that the raw numbers may not be comparable, and I really doubt many people could hazard an accurate guess about the numbers. Proportionality may not even be comparable. The point is well made though that exposure is a positive thing in generally.

-OT I have to commend you for your correct usage of the word "moot" in your post. I can't remember the last time I didn't see "mute" instead. It's always sad to see how the English language seems to be deteriorating because people don't know the difference between very similar words. Another word that is often used incorrectly is "weary" (in place of "wary" or "leery").

Reply Score: 3

wannabe geek Member since:
2006-09-27

"It is theoretically possible, yes. Most distros (including the most popular, Ubuntu) do not require the user to use superuser status."

But this doesn't mean that programs you run as a regular user have root privilege. Ubuntu and others use 'sudo' which asks you for your user password to do administrative tasks. The programs you run as a regular user don't know your password, that's why 'sudo' is about as safe as 'su'. Only Linspire does or did for some time encourage users to run everything with superuser privileges. Most distros, including Ubuntu, are reasonably secure by default.

Reply Score: 2

RE[3]: Slowly, but surely.....
by kaiwai on Fri 3rd Aug 2007 14:46 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Slowly, but surely....."
kaiwai Member since:
2005-07-06

I hear that a lot, but I never see any figures. I suspect *some* Linux PCs get Windows installed over them, but in the end the thing that matters is that Linux gets more exposition. Even if only some of the PCs keep Linux, it's a positive thing.


True - lets also remember one thing - how many end users know how to install Windows? sure, there will be those who will try to take advantage of changing but for the vast majority, it'll load, there will be an office suite, browser, chat application etc. etc.

Its all about marketing - also, for the vast majority, a computer is for work - its a big thing bought, especially in regards to the third world (and developed world), and not something that should be wasted with games (I've heard that many times from parents) - so in regards to games, its a non-issue.

If for every time I saw a PC the parents bought their kids a games machine I was given a dollar, I would be the richest man on earth.

Reply Score: 2

RE: Slowly, but surely.....
by kaiwai on Fri 3rd Aug 2007 14:37 UTC in reply to "Slowly, but surely....."
kaiwai Member since:
2005-07-06

The only downfall I see to Linux becoming more popular, is that all those businesses that thrive on the pain of others, like anti-virus and spyware removal companies will be crying all the way because there won't be as many customers.


The question is - will Linux become popular or will Linux provide enough push for hardware companies to work with vendors willing to properly support alternative operating systems.

If Linux makes vendor start using hardware which uses opensource drivers or from vendors who properly supported hardware - it should also help at the same time *BSD's and OpenSolaris/Indiana in the process.

For me, I don't want Linux to dominate; I want it to be a choice in one of many operating systems end users can choose from. I want the ability to go off, purchase a laptop or desktop - and be able to install any operating system I want on it without concern as to whether it is properly/completely supported.

Reply Score: 4

RE[2]: Slowly, but surely.....
by Moulinneuf on Sat 4th Aug 2007 05:57 UTC in reply to "RE: Slowly, but surely....."
Moulinneuf Member since:
2005-07-06

"If Linux makes vendor start using hardware which uses opensource drivers"

The push should be on Free Driver not Open Source , we already have tons of open Source driver that serve as basis for closed source driver , that are not in use or funded or maintained properly , they push out usage and maintaining of the driver at the very base of witch the where built on.

it should also help at the same time *BSD's and OpenSolaris/Indiana in the process.

Witch is a really bad thing , being able to run is not the same thing as officially supported , you don't get any developer , no support , no official documentation and no one to certify and make sure the hardware fully work and fully support it or patch what's missing and needed.

For me, I don't want Linux to dominate

You prefer BSD's way of having no hardware strategy that led them to have no hardware support at all or Solaris making it's own hardware instead of being made to run on everything that's available.

The Reality , today , is GNU/Linux dominate , you just refuse to accept it.

"I want it to be a choice in one of many operating systems end users can choose from."

Gnu/Linux is already giving and supporting that idea and strategy.

The real problem is that other's OS developer , user and solution maker don't , they don't know what they are doing and they don't care if there OS run on any platform or if the platform allow for everyone OS to work. It's kinda funny to put the burden of having other's OS run on all hardware on GNU/Linux.

BSD also need to fix its illegality problem's and it's own community support and hardware problem. Because the reality is that if BSD's is not supported it's because the developer are incompetent , the community made no push to be officially supported and no one as decided to fund a long term project to support the OS running on some hardware.

Apple is proof that BSD' don't care and don't mater. The #2 OS on Apple hardware is GNU/Linux , followed by Windows on the Intel models. The OS is BSD's based ...

"Acer Clarifies Position on Linux PCs"

Again BSD's invade a GNU/Linux thread , instead of having it's own leader's open public discussion with acer and get it's own article about BSD's on Acer hardware. Asking why Acer don't offer BSD Worldwide is a really good question.

Reply Score: 1

Let's see...
by gothicknight on Thu 2nd Aug 2007 23:47 UTC
gothicknight
Member since:
2005-07-06

...what microsoft move will be on this.

Reply Score: 1

RE: Let's see...
by brostenen on Thu 2nd Aug 2007 23:59 UTC in reply to "Let's see..."
brostenen Member since:
2007-01-16

Well...

Personally I would hope for Microsoft releasing technology and programs for linux...
That would be Direct-x or Office, IF linux gains a stronghold on the desktop-market.

Why?
Think of this case; Windows 45% OsX 30% Linux 20%...
The last 5 would be new types of operatingsystems.

If this would be the case, would Microsoft bet on Linux or OsX? The old rival, say apple, would be a lesser "companion" than the devellopers of Linux.
Bitterness within bussiness I would say..

Yet again... It's only a case!!

Reply Score: 1

RE[2]: Let's see...
by ThawkTH on Fri 3rd Aug 2007 01:21 UTC in reply to "RE: Let's see..."
ThawkTH Member since:
2005-07-06

Apple and Microsoft are far friendlier than you seem to realize...

Microsoft benefits by not crushing apple. After all, they can claim competition that way...And say they support multiple platforms with office (though they have gradually cut the number of products supported...)

Yeah, there's OSX vs Vista, Zune vs Ipod (if you can even call that competition), and even on some level iPhone vs Windows Mobile...

Most of the products, you'll find, aren't even in direct competition...

Reply Score: 3

Ahhh.... Linux.
by brostenen on Fri 3rd Aug 2007 00:04 UTC
brostenen
Member since:
2007-01-16

I wouuld soooo hope for microsoft to ditch the os market.
I feel that they could do way better programs, if they did not focus on operating systems for the desktop.

The operating system is only for running programs as I see it. We so need Microsoft to focus on what they are best at.. Programs and hardware.

Reply Score: 3

last touch...
by Kishe on Fri 3rd Aug 2007 06:15 UTC
Kishe
Member since:
2006-02-16

Would it be hard to code a translator that would make opengl compatible with Directx api commands?

That would make it super easy for windows programmers to port their software to linux and would end last reason for people to use windows.

I personally know many institutions and private people who'd change to linux in heartbeat if linux would have native support for directx.

Reply Score: 1

RE: last touch...
by ichi on Fri 3rd Aug 2007 08:51 UTC in reply to "last touch..."
ichi Member since:
2007-03-06

It would be far easier if game devs just used OpenGL instead of Direct3D... which is what the rest of the software industry is doing anyway.

Edited 2007-08-03 08:51

Reply Score: 3

RE: last touch...
by Soulbender on Fri 3rd Aug 2007 10:19 UTC in reply to "last touch..."
Soulbender Member since:
2005-08-18

"I personally know many institutions"..."who'd change to linux in heartbeat if linux would have native support for directx."

What does institutions want with DirectX?

Reply Score: 3

Linpus, not Ubuntu
by kirios66 on Sun 5th Aug 2007 06:37 UTC
kirios66
Member since:
2007-06-26