OSNews

Did anybody expect anything else? It's not like Asus is some small company that can ignore licenses and be mostly ignored. I doubt this was more than a simple mistake on Asus side.

It wasn't even that, it was just a matter of time. But some people are rather fast at burning someone then actually thinking.

Its been awhile since I've seen you post around here Moulinneuf, I'm sure everyone has missed thoughtful and insightful dialog like

"Your a **BSD** , you have no credibility at all"

"2) **You** are fast at burning someone. Other's like me just reply in kind , to your intelligence lacking insulting and unrealistic and fabricated reality that is completely unrealistic."

"3) Your a liar , traitor , coward and incompetent. "

"I apparently , also need to actually point to you and take you by your childish hands , that Opening and freeing the source code will enable BSD and other OS to be run properly and correctly on this device and the hardware it's made of."

In a single post, you managed to break rules 1-4 and rule 6 of the OSNews forum rules (http://www4.osnews.com/docs/rules). I have to admit, I do love reading your posts though, especially the wild, barely comprehensible meltdowns about BSD.

Edited 2007-11-28 17:17 UTC

haha. Oops.
Great news.

... right along with their "it would have been easier to just use XP"s.

Yep. And that's good.

now everybody who was bashing them, can crawl back into their holes.

Well, actually - their website still sucks as I mentioned in the previous article comments. It's still difficult to find recent drivers and BIOS updates for some products.

I'm also dreading a call to ASUS to resolve my recent hardware problem on a barebones box that just died. I suspect it will be more productive for me to simply buy a new PSU and/or motherboard and hope that it resolves my "dead machine"... because last time I contacted their support I got the runaround, finally got an RMA # to send them my motherboard, they proceeded to send it back without fixing it, and then asked me if I wanted to pay to ship it to them again to fix it.

So, I feel entitled (as a dissatisfied customer) to continue bashing ASUS for their crappy website and lackluster support - thank you very much.

edit: added a missing word.

Edited 2007-11-27 23:09

Great! So I can get one and install a superior OS! ;D

If u wait a bit longer, u should be able to buy one with XP already installed.

Why should you wait at all when you can get one right now (no waiting), for $99 less cost, with the more secure and malware-resistant Linux installed, along with a complete set of desktop applications that won't come with XP?

Where exactly is the upside for crippling the machine with XP and thereby and making it more expensive, more vulnerable and less capable?

Not much of an upside, but some people do, believe it or not, prefer and LIKE windows xp.

If I had one, I'd probably leave the *nix on it for a bit then install windows just so some of my more oft used apps would run without any hackery.

Fair enough.



You miss the point. Most (but by no means all) of the apps for XP require you to pay for another copy if you want to use it on another new machine.

However, most of the apps for XP where you don't have to pay for another copy for your EeePC (eg Firefox, OpenOffice) are apps that are available natively under Linux anyway.

I can't see a case for forking out more than the cost of the machine itself just to run an application that already has a functional equivalent already installed on the machine.

Of course, YMMV. If money was no object, and you wanted an XP machine of similar size and functionality of the EeePC, then why didnn't you just get one of the UMPCs that were on offer a year or so ago?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Umpc

Paying for and then installing XP on the ASUS EeePC and then paying for and installing an equivalent set of applications seems to be nixing the whole point of the machine.

Edited 2007-11-28 04:48

Um, do you really think most people would buy another copy of a program? Very few people do that. You buy a copy, you install it on whatever pc you have and keep installing it on any pcs you get after that.

The eeePC is a LOT cheaper than any UMPCs (I've been eying them for awhile) and it's shaped like a normal laptop, which I like. For basic use, yeah, the built in apps are fine for 90% of the users. For some people, they aren't. It's obviously not aimed at people like *me*. But that won't stop us from buying one and doing with it as we please.

I'd also have to see how well the installed linux distro, Windows XP, and whatever OS/distro I'd want to try out on it ran before I made my choice. Been several instances of me wanting to run something besides windows on a laptop but not really being able to. Simply because the alternative OSes video drivers sucked ass. I'd have have "flaky" windows than sucky 2D performance

*I'd Rather have ...


I need to proof read.

...possibly breaking the law in the process.

I don't know what it's like in other countries, but here in Sweden, I find that it's very rare that people buy their software (this applies to software for personal use).

The vast majority of my friends have never ever paid for a piece of software - except for Windows licenses, which is pretty much mandatory when you buy a computer. I've bought a handful of programs myself, perhaps 5 games and 3 applications for the last 15 years.

So I'm not convinced that the cost of software is much of a factor when people choose an operating system. Being able to use the applications that you like and not having to learn new stuff is.

That said, I'd never dream of using anything but Linux on a device like this. But I do know what most of my acquaintances would choose - Windows.

It is likely those people haven't tried the eeePC's Linux-based OS. Who knows, they might actually prefer it to XP.

Seriously, I fail to see what you'd get more out of XP on such a machine. It's not as if someone would buy the eeePC to play games...

Seriously, I fail to see what you'd get more out of XP on such a machine. It's not as if someone would buy the eeePC to play games...

There is much that can be done with a 900Mhz proc and a notebook of such size that would still require XP on it to be useful, as I posted an example of earlier.

People need to realize (though it seems they never do) Linux equivalent != Windows equivalent in all cases when comparing available software.

Ardour is not as good as Pro Tools or Cubase. GIMP is not as good as Photoshop, OOo is not as good as MS Office. etc. Sure it's subjective, but I think I'd have a few people agree.

I wouldn't know (though I hear that Ardour is continually improving - I've certainly heard excellent demos that were done on it), however that is a *very* small niche market. The eeePC wasn't made for that market.



Are you telling me you'd want to do print-quality graphics on the eeePC and its tiny screen? That is *not* what it was designed for.

Meanwhile, if you're *not* doing print-quality stuff (i.e. if you don't need color separation), then Gimp *is* just as good as Photoshop. I use both on a regular basis.



Actually, it is as far as Word Processing and Spreadsheet are concerned. I doubt many people would use Access on the eeePC...



Well, I'm all for choice, so if someone wants to put Windows on the eeePC, good for them. I do believe that, unless you're a sound designer who is sold to CuBase, there is no real rational reason to do so.

True but you would not be running Cubase on a eeePC. Nor would you run full Photoshop unless you are massochistic. GIMP, for the kind of work you can do on a eeePC, is fine as long as you know your way around GIMP. OOo is not as good as MS Office perhaps, but it is more than adequate for normal document editing and such.

XP will run on an eeePC sure, Asus even provide instructions on how to do do the install and optimize in the manual. However I think that Linux is a better fit for the platform, both in memory use and in applications available at a low cost. The eeePC is not a desktop replacement. Outside of a few corner cases I can not see most people making an eeePC their primary computer. It does provide a low cost solution for an ultraportable compliment to your primary system however.

I think you might be a little bit out-of-date with those views.

Remember, with the ASUS EeePC, we are not talking high-end expensive software ... it just doesn't have the specs for that. Putting an expensive high-end Windows application on an EeePC is just a complete and utter waste of time & money.

If we are talking about software other than the expensive high-end, then Linux software has Windows-only software beat pointless in terms of capability and value-for-money.

PS: A better resource for finding Linux audio tools:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linux_audio_software

Better explanation of capabilities and weaknesses:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rosegarden
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hydrogen_%28software%29
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ardour_%28audio_processor%29
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MusE

Edited 2007-11-28 23:45

For people that use applications that are only available on Windows, Linux is less capable. Part of the attraction of this particular product for me is being able to edit and mix audio and program drums and soft synths. I can't do that in Linux with the (superior) applications I use.

A 900Mhz Pentium M-based Celeron is fast enough to handle light duties for audio while on a train ride.

Sadly, Linux audio tools are still far behind what's available for XP and OSX.

Just one example. I could go on......

Point being is there is a time and place for Windows, at least for now.

So are these programs capable:
http://www.rosegardenmusic.com/
http://ardour.org/
http://wired2007.info/wired-dev/index.php?option=com_content&task=b...

You mentioned drums specifically:
http://linux-sound.org/drum.html
http://www.hydrogen-music.org/

Additional utilities described here:
http://linux-sound.org/
http://www.linuxaudio.org/

Try out some Linux audio software with a specialist liveCD:
http://dynebolic.org/
http://ubuntustudio.org/
http://64studio.com/
http://www.musix.org.ar/en/index.html

Linux is not less capable ... it is more a case of people being unaware of what Linux is capable of.

These will cost you nothing, and they are far more suited to the ASUS EeePC than trying to force XP plus expensive applications on to it.



Very debatable. I'm not an expert in audio, but there are some very capable audio applications becoming available for Linux now as far as I can see. I'd say that you would have a hard time finding some function that is not supported on Linux, and as far as "lite duties" goes, I'd venture to suggest you are flat-out wrong in your claim of linux being "far behind".



Sure there is. However, the ASUS EeePC with its capabilities and software available and its pricepoint is just not that place.

Edited 2007-11-28 23:10

I'm not an expert in audio

key phrase. You say this, then go on about how my opinion is wrong, when really you know little about this particular area.

I've been doing audio on PCs for nearly 10 years, and toying with it on Linux for nearly 4. I've tried all the apps you mentioned, and have used pretty much every audio-centric distro from FC2-based Planet CCRMA up to Ubuntu Studio 7.04.

Yes, I think Linux is still far behind in this area.

At the expensive high-end for audio software, I can see that and I would agree.

That however is clearly not what the ASUS EeePC is meant for, and you yourself said that your use would be for "lite duties". I just cannot see that you have in any way established that the Linux audio software that is available (especially recent versions of it) is not capable of those "lite duties" that you have in mind, and that Linux audio software is not actually a better fit on the EeePC for "lite duties" than anything on Windows (especially anything they expect you to pay for to the extent that it costs you more than the machine itself).

jeez, modded to 0 already. Someone can't take a joke.

You all did notice the smiley right? It was SARCASM.

Or I'm modded down for being offtopic... In which case, mod away.

I thought XP was sort of on the way out of being sold to distributers because vista was out?

Well, that would make it imposssssible to run windows on the Eeee then, for sure.

I thought XP was sort of on the way out of being sold to distributers because vista was out?

Well, that would make it imposssssible to run windows on the Eeee then, for sure.

Not yet. It was previously Jan. '08 for the cut off to OEMs, but that has since been extended to June '08. Thank God for that!

yeah, people put up a huge fuss over it because they all hate Vista So MS decided to extend support.

The prices these things are bringing on eBay and the like is ridiculous. I want my $200 laptop dammit!

Exactly. I was all hyped up and ready to go out and buy two of these things, until they doubled the price. At the current price of these things, it's a bit ridiculous.

The default window manager is IceWM, customised to fit the screen with a tabbed interface.

The full set of KDE libs are installed, though, as most of the apps are KDE apps. All you have to do is install kcmserver and kicker via apt-get and modify the X startup scripts to get a full KDE desktop, though.

Thanks for the info

The madwifi project is dual-licensed under GPL/BSD, so Asus is not obligated to provide corresponding source code for their modified ath_pci driver. For the time being, the binary driver that ships with the eeePC is the only way to get the wireless chipset to function under other Linux distributions.

Maybe if a lot of eeePC users ask nicely, Asus will release the source. But under the BSD, the distributor ultimately has the legal power.

if its under the bsd license... how are they able to link it with the kernel legally?

Because the 2-clause BSD licence (also known as the modified BSD licence) is compatible with GPL?

Because the 2-clause BSD licence (also known as the modified BSD licence) is compatible with GPL?

That only means you can put BSD code in the kernel or in Linux drivers. But once the code is there only the GPL applies. You can't ship a binary driver and refuse to publish the source because it's dual GPL/BSD licensed.

The atheros sources they use are probably available in the zip-file on their site or from xandros though.

Edited 2007-11-28 08:55

There are two links: the proprietary HAL to GPL/BSD driver and the resulting object to the kernel. How the licensing works depends on whether the distributor or the user performs each of these link steps. The only way the driver can be distributed under the GPL is if the user does both links. If the distributor does the first link, then the result may only be distributed under the BSD, and the user must perform the second link. The distributor cannot ship a completely linked kernel module as this is a violation of the GPL.

I'm not familiar with how Asus handles this situation. It could be as simple as automatically running a script on first boot. But they could be violating the GPL if they aren't doing something to cause the linking to become the action of the user rather than of the distributor.

Well, not the *only* way, the XP drivers work under ndiswrapper too...

yeah but if they build it and distribute its not exactly a separate work, as it "links" with the kernel, which btw, is GPL.

also, if they havent released the source for modified madwifi driver, this just goes to show how asus are complete moron mongers, as they simply do the bare minimum, even though its completely a disservice to the customer, and wouldnt hurt them in any way to do.

Didnt they just in this answer to community mentioned that if customers feel that something is missing, they should email Asus and ask for it?


Asus isn't trying to rip anybody off, it's just that they dont have a clue about the software side as they have outsourced it to Xandros.