Linked by Thom Holwerda on Tue 7th Oct 2008 10:27 UTC
Ubuntu, Kubuntu, Xubuntu Sunday we reported on an interview with an MSI manager, who stated that internal research had shown that the return rate for the Linux version of MSI's Wind netbook was four times as high as that of the Windows XP version. He claimed that the unfamiliarity of people with Linux was the culprit. This claim sparked some serious discussion around the net, but now MSI's statement is being repeated by Canonical, the company behind Ubuntu.
Order by: Score:
Comment by risbac
by risbac on Tue 7th Oct 2008 10:44 UTC
risbac
Member since:
2007-03-29

People going for OSX know EXACTLY where they are going. They know they are NOT purchasing a PC, but a Mac, you can't really give this argument.

Here we are talking about people buying a very cheap computer, not really reading all the explanations, and thinking just like 99% of people "PC=Windows".

It will take time to make mentalities change... A change is painfull, always. No matter if the OS you are coming from is pure crap and the new one is pure gold, it's still a pain, and it takes time. Some people just can't put this effort and adapt. That's true for anything, not only for Linux or OS.

So is there anything really surprising in this news? To me, no. It's still good for Linux, as it's gaining new users. If someone thought that suddenly the adopt rate of Linux would explode, it's naive. Especially when a product has such a big market share that it's considered as a standard.

Let me give a very good example: how you install softwares. People used to the "Windows way" think it's the right way. Go on a website, download the file. Run it. The Linux way, with repositories is easier as long as the soft is in the repo, it's hard to deny this. Faster, safer, easier. Still, most Linux new users don't like it. It takes time to take this habit. Are they stupid to think like this? I don't think so. You can't clear 10 years of habits with an OS that easily.

Edited 2008-10-07 10:49 UTC

Reply Score: 10

RE: Comment by risbac
by evangs on Tue 7th Oct 2008 11:30 UTC in reply to "Comment by risbac"
evangs Member since:
2005-07-07

People going for OSX know EXACTLY where they are going. They know they are NOT purchasing a PC, but a Mac, you can't really give this argument.


Why do you think Apple spends millions on those I'm a PC, I'm a Mac ad campaigns? While technical people may find those ads annoying, they are very effective in conveying the message that Macs are not PCs to the average consumer.

If you want Linux to succeed on netbooks, manufacturers need to get their act together and boldly advertise that Linux is NOT Windows and that it's better because of x, y, z, etc. Otherwise, you'll just end up with the situation we're currently in.

Reply Score: 8

RE[2]: Comment by risbac
by fejack on Tue 7th Oct 2008 12:04 UTC in reply to "RE: Comment by risbac"
fejack Member since:
2006-06-12

Sad to say but it would suffice to put on Windows-like themes and icons and those people would'nt have a clue they are running another OS.

That's the problem I find with computer training in general: rather than teaching users about concepts, they are taught to work with a specific interface. Change the interface while keeping the same concept and everyone is lost. That would be like learning to drive a specific car make, and then be completely clueless about using any other type of car.

I agree that there should be much more communication about GNU/Linux. I remember some interactive apps HP had on its computers a decade ago, it was supposed to help new users get familiar with their OS. It might make sense to produce a DVD user manual, teaching people how to get familiar with Linux. But the problem might be having them open the DVD player app in the first place.

Reply Score: 3

RE[3]: Comment by risbac
by darknexus on Tue 7th Oct 2008 12:20 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Comment by risbac"
darknexus Member since:
2008-07-15

Sad to say but it would suffice to put on Windows-like themes and icons and those people would'nt have a clue they are running another OS.

Sure, right up until they download the latest version of Windows Live Messenger, or any other Windows app and are unable to run it--and no, Wine is not sufficient. Or how about trying to install a printer driver, for instance, that Linux doesn't support? Then they call tech support and ask why and find out they don't actually have Windows. Now, I don't care how perfect Linux may be for netbooks, if it looks like Windows, the average customer is going to expect Windows. And further, they're not going to settle for anything else. So in this situation, a frustrated customer is now mad at the Netbook manufacturer and at Linux in general, and anyone else who may have spewed the freedom rhetoric at them--they could care less about freedom if it means they can't do what _they_ want their computer to do.

Reply Score: 2

RE[3]: Comment by risbac
by aldeck on Tue 7th Oct 2008 12:33 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Comment by risbac"
aldeck Member since:
2006-12-07

Sad to say but it would suffice to put on Windows-like themes and icons and those people would'nt have a clue they are running another OS.


Or maybe those people are not dumb? Maybe they just tried to do something a bit advanced and had real problems? Why is it so hard to say that linux is not the best OS ever and might need some enhancements here and there?

Honestly, thinking that people don't like linux (desktop) because they don't recognize the theme is just ignoring the problems (if not insulting).

Reply Score: 4

RE[4]: Comment by risbac
by r_a_trip on Tue 7th Oct 2008 14:23 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Comment by risbac"
r_a_trip Member since:
2005-07-06


Or maybe those people are not dumb? Maybe they just tried to do something a bit advanced and had real problems? Why is it so hard to say that linux is not the best OS ever and might need some enhancements here and there?

Honestly, thinking that people don't like linux (desktop) because they don't recognize the theme is just ignoring the problems (if not insulting).


Linux as a general purpose OS has no more problems than other general purpose OSes. The biggest problem with Netbook Linux is that it is Linux, thus unfamiliar, and the distributions Netbook manufacturers provide seem to be crippled beyond use.

> Anecdotal < Linpus on my Acer One was a P.O.S. > / Anecdotal <

If they could just provide a good solid distribution with working, mainstream repositories and a prominent button for INSTALL SOFTWARE on the "Desktop", Netbook Linux would not be a big issue.

Reply Score: 3

RE[5]: Comment by risbac
by hobgoblin on Tue 7th Oct 2008 15:04 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: Comment by risbac"
hobgoblin Member since:
2005-07-06

and the distributions Netbook manufacturers provide seem to be crippled beyond use.


power user (someone that can even open cmd in windows without breaking out into a cold sweat) or aunt tillie use?

i suspect your aiming for the former, not the latter...

Reply Score: 2

RE[4]: Comment by risbac
by fejack on Wed 8th Oct 2008 11:07 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Comment by risbac"
fejack Member since:
2006-06-12

Well, by putting on "Windows-like themes and icons" I meant "replicating the Windows interface experience": most users are taught and learn how to use interfaces rather than mastering concepts.

Reply Score: 1

RE[3]: Comment by risbac
by wannabe geek on Tue 7th Oct 2008 14:15 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Comment by risbac"
wannabe geek Member since:
2006-09-27

That would be like learning to drive a specific car make, and then be completely clueless about using any other type of car.


Notice that this is exactly how people learn to drive. I mean, the instructor can make some remarks about how something is done in other types of car, but when it comes to it you drive one specific car, and when you change cars it always takes some getting used to.

I don't think there's a way out of that. That's how the human brain works: from specific to general, not the other way around. First you learn how to do something with a specific tool, then you try a similar but slightly different tool and so on, until you slowly start to learn the basic similarities and differences, the big picture.

What I'm getting at is, if you want people to feel comfortable with Linux and other FOSS tools, you have to increase their direct contact with such tools, there's no way around that.

Reply Score: 4

RE[2]: Comment by risbac
by polaris20 on Tue 7th Oct 2008 20:29 UTC in reply to "RE: Comment by risbac"
polaris20 Member since:
2005-07-06



If you want Linux to succeed on netbooks, manufacturers need to get their act together and boldly advertise that Linux is NOT Windows and that it's better because of x, y, z, etc. Otherwise, you'll just end up with the situation we're currently in.


But but but......surely you can't be suggesting that they MARKET Linux, are you?

I mean, that might differentiate the OS from Windows and OSX to the general public at large, causing people to be interested in it. ;)

Reply Score: 5

RE: Comment by risbac
by rockwell on Fri 10th Oct 2008 21:18 UTC in reply to "Comment by risbac"
rockwell Member since:
2005-09-13

//No matter if the OS you are coming from is pure crap and the new one is pure gold, it's still a pain, and it takes time. //

But that's not the case of going from XP to Linux. It's more like usable, well-supported OS to a geek toy that nobody understands.

XP is only "pure crap" if you're a complete dipshit.

Reply Score: 2

Comment by liamdawe
by liamdawe on Tue 7th Oct 2008 11:32 UTC
liamdawe
Member since:
2006-07-04

Like we didn't know this would happen...

Reply Score: 3

netbook user thoughts
by buff on Tue 7th Oct 2008 11:49 UTC
buff
Member since:
2005-11-12

I have the eee 1000 with XP. I put Ubuntu Nebook Remix on it. It really is a shame that people return the Linux netbooks more. Linux works great on these devices. People are expecting that a PC netbook will come with Windows and probably don't think too much about it until they try and seach for Office and run into OpenOffice.

It reminds me of the time I worked briefly as a computer salesperson. A woman asked me if the computer had "Windows." We were a Mac only store and I showed her a Mac runnings OSX. She said, "Oh that runs Windows nicely." I gave up trying to explain the difference and said, "Yes, it does run a kind of Windows nicely." The irony of course is that the Mac with its windowed UI came first before Windows. I can only imagine how difficult it would be to describe how the system is running Gnome desktop on Ubuntu.

Reply Score: 5

Simple fact
by SlackerJack on Tue 7th Oct 2008 11:50 UTC
SlackerJack
Member since:
2005-11-12

It's growing pains of products like Linux distros making them self known in the market, if it had even 10% of the market then it would be easier.

People can like Linux distros that come with their laptop, but if they are so used to working their way(no matter how bad) then thats it, people will actually put up with the bad than change.

What doesn't help is the fact that Linux preloaded distros dont get marketed nothing like Windows or OSX (Apple laptops) so people have no clue what to expect. Good marketing warms people to the idea of your product no matter how different even before they buy it or test it, this is not happening with Linux preloaded/OEM's

Edited 2008-10-07 11:53 UTC

Reply Score: 3

Distros
by Adurbe on Tue 7th Oct 2008 12:00 UTC
Adurbe
Member since:
2005-07-06

Windows is Windows
OSX is OSX
Linux is Ubuntu, SUSE, Mandrivia, Redhat, Slackware etc

People arnt givent the chance to 'learn linux' as each kind is different. Different to the point of being incompatible with one another but, even worse, they look and act differently! (kde, gnome fluxbox etc)

Now, before I get the inevitable 'its all about freedom and choice' argument;

most people dont care...

Blunt, but true. I have worked in support for windows systems. This is the OS they everyone has grown up with, yet still its a struggle to setup email! 'Linux' is just to different and you cant just turn to the person sitting next to you for help like you can with windows and to a lesser extent, macs

Reply Score: 7

RE: Distros
by darknexus on Tue 7th Oct 2008 12:12 UTC in reply to "Distros"
darknexus Member since:
2008-07-15

Couldn't have put it better. Well stated.

Reply Score: 1

RE: Distros
by l3v1 on Tue 7th Oct 2008 12:15 UTC in reply to "Distros"
l3v1 Member since:
2005-07-06

yet still its a struggle to setup email


Thing is, they don't see that as a "problem", but they see it as a problem when it happens on i.e. Linux. Even the people who've "grown up" on Windows don't know a lot of things about Windows and its apps, they still oppose learning Linux. I've seen it happen. And it doesn't help that Linux is presented and/or perceived as being different, since they have a prejudice fully built up when they see one and they're not willing to even try anything.

Most average people are conservative in their learning habits - less bluntly: they don't want to spend time learning anything - but the computing landscape is an ever changing field. Look at how people still treat Vista (I'm speaking mostly of the UI part, that's what still confuses most average users).

I don't believe in a one size fits all OS. And I'm happy I can choose Linux. Most people don't give a damn. Thus, convincing them to use Linux is a very hard task. It's like convincing a gardener to buy your brand of shovel when he already had one for years. If it's free, that's even worse, since he'll suspect some scam. If it's better, that's no good either, since he'll say how come he's never heard of it before then. It's all just a game.

Reply Score: 5

RE[2]: Distros
by Thom_Holwerda on Tue 7th Oct 2008 12:33 UTC in reply to "RE: Distros"
Thom_Holwerda Member since:
2005-06-29

Even the people who've "grown up" on Windows don't know a lot of things about Windows and its apps, they still oppose learning Linux. I've seen it happen. And it doesn't help that Linux is presented and/or perceived as being different, since they have a prejudice fully built up when they see one and they're not willing to even try anything.


Thank you for illustrating the attitude problem concerning Linux so beautifully.

Linux people are quick to blame prospective users for not being willing to learn, for being stupid, for being anything whatever. Wrong attitude.

I work in a store, and when I'm assisting a customer who's trying to buy a piece of equipment from brand Xyz, but we don't stock that brand, or we're simply out of stock, I'll try my best to make this customer buy one of the other brands we have. This is a very delicate process.

I shouldn't make him feel stupid for clinging to brand Xyz. I shouldn't belittle brand Xyz. I should be honest about the alternatives we have, mention their shortcomings, and all the while, be understanding when it comes to his desire for his favourite brand Xyz. I only have to make one mistake, one wrong remark, and he'll walk out.

Linux people do none of the above. They ridicule Windows, its users, and put off prospective Linux users. THAT's the attitude problem.

And as long as Linux folk continue to display their moral superiority in such blatant ways (it happens here on OSNews all the time too) Linux will remain a fringe operating system on the desktop - no matter how ready or free it is.

Reply Score: 6

RE[3]: Distros
by Adurbe on Tue 7th Oct 2008 14:05 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Distros"
Adurbe Member since:
2005-07-06

I agree

I have recently changed my mothers system from a very old G3 mac to an ubuntu PC and she is now very happy with it, all in all

Banking, email, browsing and IM <-- her needs

In reality the only thing she uses is firefox and pidgin. I sat down with her for an hour explaining what was different and how to do the basics. I get the odd call of 'how do I do such and such' but no more than when she had her mac!

Why linux and not windows? because to her, windows = antivirus and antispam which make the system slow

Reply Score: 2

RE[3]: Distros
by hobgoblin on Tue 7th Oct 2008 15:08 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Distros"
hobgoblin Member since:
2005-07-06

sorry to say, geeks are not sales people, or the priests of the linux religion.

and they are not the only ones calling people stupid for not "getting it". it pops up all over the place from sports to mac (damn fun getting a frothing mac fanatic going at times).

Reply Score: 4

RE[3]: Distros
by Liquidator on Tue 7th Oct 2008 16:02 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Distros"
Liquidator Member since:
2007-03-04

I second that. The Linux attitude of "superiority" isn't gonna change any time soon, sadly.

Reply Score: 4

RE[4]: Distros
by mmu_man on Tue 7th Oct 2008 16:07 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Distros"
mmu_man Member since:
2006-09-30

Right, and they still think they are ready for the Desktop.

We really need to release Haiku R1/alpha ASAP ;)

Reply Score: 3

RE[5]: Distros
by theine on Tue 7th Oct 2008 23:12 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: Distros"
theine Member since:
2005-09-29

We really need to release Haiku R1/alpha ASAP ;)


Who's we?

Reply Score: 2

RE[4]: Distros
by theine on Tue 7th Oct 2008 23:11 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Distros"
theine Member since:
2005-09-29

I second that. The Linux attitude of "superiority" isn't gonna change any time soon, sadly.


To be fair, This attitude is very common among users of any OS that isn't Windows.

Reply Score: 4

RE[3]: Distros
by Soulbender on Tue 7th Oct 2008 16:21 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Distros"
Soulbender Member since:
2005-08-18

Linux people are quick to blame prospective users for not being willing to learn, for being stupid, for being anything whatever. Wrong attitude.


True enough BUT...

I shouldn't make him feel stupid for clinging to brand Xyz.


...we're not in a store here, we're on an internet forum. We're not selling anything to a customer. We're discussing attitudes and the fact of the matter is that people dont like to change and that a great many people knows much less about computers than they think.
What you tell people is not necessarily the same as what you think.
By the way, not all sales persons are as sensible as you when it comes to not belittling customers.

Linux people do none of the above. They ridicule Windows, its users, and put off prospective Linux users. THAT's the attitude problem.


You can not seriously tell me that sales people do not talk about their customers in less than flattering manner when the customers aren't there?

Reply Score: 2

RE[3]: Distros
by ralph on Tue 7th Oct 2008 18:51 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Distros"
ralph Member since:
2005-07-10

Who are those linux people you speak about? People that matter or just a bunch of geeks, kiddies, trolls, etc. hanging out on osnews?

Reply Score: 1

RE: Distros
by mabhatter on Wed 8th Oct 2008 02:44 UTC in reply to "Distros"
mabhatter Member since:
2005-07-17

"Windows is Windows
OSX is OSX
Linux is Ubuntu, SUSE, Mandrivia, Redhat, Slackware etc

People arnt givent the chance to 'learn linux' as each kind is different. Different to the point of being incompatible with one another but, even worse, they look and act differently! (kde, gnome fluxbox etc)"

I agree with that. Most of the Linux variants on netbooks are bad imitations of commercial distros. In the case of Eee, they use something that Xandros doesn't actually support, same with evernex and their gOS. Only Dell is going with an actual supported product from a mainstream distro.

"linux" was thrown on these because it was cheap, no other reason. Once Microsoft responded by dropping XP prices most manufacturers just don't care. I think Cannonical has the right idea, using a derivative of their main line but none of the OEMS seem to give a darn about it. Without a consistent environment, consumers won't get the help, support, or community they need. Most are expecting a "small Wintel PC" for their money... like people in my family willing to put up with sucky performance but run "full size" apps and rip DVDs on these.

I think this is why Apple was so strict about locking down iPhone for so long to curb customer's misunderstandings of what it was. It built a market of iPhone doing one thing.. being a phone first. Now the apps are really cool. At this point, Dell would be the netbook to go for, simply because they want to see a community form. If they can bring more stuff into the fold it might be good.

Reply Score: 3

RE: Distros
by Alleister on Wed 8th Oct 2008 06:18 UTC in reply to "Distros"
Alleister Member since:
2006-05-29

Linux distros are similar enough and with the widespread distros that don't specialize in certain hardware segments like low end notebooks, it is exactly kde or gnome.

There is no point in having Linux turned so crappy that it would be identical to Windows. Users that are so incapable that they can't configure settings with virtually identical config tools because one of them has a blue color scheme and another a green can't possibly be the measure. So what if that makes Linux a "professionals" choice... doesn't the rest of us deserve something aimed at our needs as well?

Reply Score: 3

Comment by aldeck
by aldeck on Tue 7th Oct 2008 12:02 UTC
aldeck
Member since:
2006-12-07

"[...] it doesn't really matter how good or bad desktop Linux is; the fact that it's different is in and of itself reason enough for its adoption rate to be slow."

Or maybe it matters, and people didn't like it because linux is still too hard and/or unintuitive, even for experienced people?
Keep in mind that a regular customer only need to be frustrated once or twice too give up on a supposedly better product, especially if he didn't ask for it.

Reply Score: 0

RE: Comment by aldeck
by FooBarWidget on Tue 7th Oct 2008 12:26 UTC in reply to "Comment by aldeck"
FooBarWidget Member since:
2005-11-11

Or maybe it matters, and people didn't like it because linux is still too hard and/or unintuitive, even for experienced people?


And what do you base your claim on? How is pre-installed Linux hard or unintuitive? If Linux is preinstalled then you can bet that all your network cards/webcams/video card/suspend/sound works out of the box without a single line of configuration or any need to even know that there is a terminal.

Reply Score: 5

RE[2]: Comment by aldeck
by aldeck on Tue 7th Oct 2008 12:53 UTC in reply to "RE: Comment by aldeck"
aldeck Member since:
2006-12-07

And what do you base your claim on?

A sincere experience maybe?
How is pre-installed Linux hard or unintuitive? If Linux is preinstalled then you can bet that all your network cards/webcams/video card/suspend/sound works out of the box without a single line of configuration or any need to even know that there is a terminal.

Why do you talk about installation? I didn't

Reply Score: 1

RE[3]: Comment by aldeck
by FooBarWidget on Tue 7th Oct 2008 13:06 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Comment by aldeck"
FooBarWidget Member since:
2005-11-11

A sincere experience maybe?


A sincere experience from how many years ago? Was it an experience with the Linux installed on MSI wind or some random generic distro that you happened not to like? What makes you think your past experience is still valid today, on MSI's version?

Reply Score: 4

RE[4]: Comment by aldeck
by aldeck on Tue 7th Oct 2008 13:50 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Comment by aldeck"
aldeck Member since:
2006-12-07

A sincere experience from how many years ago? Was it an experience with the Linux installed on MSI wind or some random generic distro that you happened not to like? What makes you think your past experience is still valid today, on MSI's version?


Dude, do you really need to know my resumé to know how to answer my simple statement? Or you assumed i was a stupid moron that don't want to learn, like the majority that have problems with a linux desktop anyway, right?

How do you know i'm not a Gnome or KDE developer? Because such a dev would never criticize linux?

Reply Score: 1

RE[5]: Comment by aldeck
by FooBarWidget on Tue 7th Oct 2008 14:04 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: Comment by aldeck"
FooBarWidget Member since:
2005-11-11

Dude, do you really need to know my resumé to know how to answer my simple statement? Or you assumed i was a stupid moron that don't want to learn, like the majority that have problems with a linux desktop anyway, right?

How do you know i'm not a Gnome or KDE developer? Because such a dev would never criticize linux?


I don't know. And frankly, I don't care. The thing is, you've spent all this time posting 2 more comments, but you still haven't even said what it is that makes Linux hard or unintuitive.

Your entire post seems to be geared towards creating the feeling that Linux, for some magical and mysterious reason, is and always will be inherently hard to use, mystic, unintuitive and a usability disaster, no matter on what platform or what the vendor does. The kind of feeling that would raise images of black terminals, obscure config files and hardware that wouldn't work even after days of Googling, like people back in 2003 would complain about.

I find this a wee bit suspicious at best, as if it's deliberately said to give Linux a bad name, no matter what the state of the Linux user interfaces are actually in, today. As if there is some kind of hidden agenda. If you don't like being suspected then come up with some specifics.

Reply Score: 3

RE[2]: Comment by aldeck
by kadymae on Tue 7th Oct 2008 16:07 UTC in reply to "RE: Comment by aldeck"
kadymae Member since:
2005-08-02

"Or maybe it matters, and people didn't like it because linux is still too hard and/or unintuitive, even for experienced people?


And what do you base your claim on? How is pre-installed Linux hard or unintuitive? If Linux is preinstalled then you can bet that all your network cards/webcams/video card/suspend/sound works out of the box without a single line of configuration or any need to even know that there is a terminal.
"

No, speaking from experience, I can state that there are Linux lap/desktops where all they did was take a distro, slap it on, and made sure it POSTed.

Wrong screen resolution, unsupported wireless cards, no drivers for the webcam, no graphics card acceleration, spotty sleep/suspend/hibernate, no speed step, coupled with tech support that has no knowledge of Linux.

Reply Score: 3

Doh! moment later on
by lemur2 on Tue 7th Oct 2008 12:13 UTC
lemur2
Member since:
2007-02-17

Later on, when these machines have been selling for a while, and the Linux variants are common enough that those who are returning them now will see someone else using one ... then will come the Doh! moment.

"You mean it has all that software already installed ... nothing more to pay ... and you click on menus and toolbars exactly the same as for Windows ... except that it doesn't get viruses ... and it lets you browse and download heaps of extra software?

... Oh my.

I had one and I gave it back!

And now my Windows XP Home replacement machine doesn't log on to the company network, my machine is full of rubbish, spam and malware, and I have to pay once again for my anti-virus subscription.

Doh!"

Reply Score: 7

RE: Doh! moment later on
by darknexus on Tue 7th Oct 2008 12:37 UTC in reply to "Doh! moment later on"
darknexus Member since:
2008-07-15

Oh come on, hasn't that argument been run into the ground already? Stop flogging the dead horse, especially with the malware part. No one denies that Windows is full of malware and viruses. Know why? Because it's got 99% of the PC market. You really think Linux would escape a similar fate if someone really wanted to target it? Or OS X, for that matter? Yes, its architecture makes it harder and it would probably not be as easy to corrupt the system--this applies to all variants of UNIX and UNIX-like systems.. But is the customer going to give a damn when their data is all messed up? Oh crap, I was almost finished with that paper and now some Virus messed it up. Oh well at least my computer still runs so I can type it all up again. Never, ever, ever assume that you're immune to something just because it hasn't happened yet, that applies in all walks of life including computers. What is it with the Linux zealots running with this argument all the time? You're not immune, you're just not a big enough target yet, and they'd rather pick off the easy targets. Hell, even OS X isn't a big enough target yet.
As far as anti-virus solutions go, the free ones are good enough for most people honestly. They don't keep everything out but they keep the worst out, and that's all most people care about. So that kills another argument of the Linux fanboy, that you need an expensive anti-virus solution.
To make things clear, I'm not defending Windows or criticizing Linux here, merely trying to point out the flaw in this argument that many Linux lovers use as if it were a talisman. Linux is an operating system people, not a religion. Step back a bit.

Reply Score: 4

RE[2]: Doh! moment later on
by lemur2 on Tue 7th Oct 2008 13:54 UTC in reply to "RE: Doh! moment later on"
lemur2 Member since:
2007-02-17

But is the customer going to give a damn when their data is all messed up? Oh crap, I was almost finished with that paper and now some Virus messed it up. Oh well at least my computer still runs so I can type it all up again.


It is interesting that you say this.

I have just got through (in the last 20 minutes or so) going through the exercise of rescuing my son's University assignment. It had taken him all week to prepare, and he was just printing it out (and was playing a game on the Internet while he was waiting for the print to finish), and had printed 5 out of the 11 pages when ... the printer stopped in mid page. The virus scanner popped up a message about a trojan being detected. It was impossible to cancel the rest of the printout. The word processor could not be closed.

He decided to try for a re-boot. Windows failed to re-boot, complaining about some corrupted or missing system files.

Oh what a sinking feeling, as they say.

I put a Knoppix CD in the drive, booted that, copied his files from his desktop onto a pen drive, opened them in OpenOffice, finished the printout and gave him his rescued project saved on the pen drive.

Ta da!

Lets see one of your fancy attack viruses (changed somehow to work on Linux instead of Windows) come up with a way to beat that rescue method. Even a virus beefed up to work on Linux won't be able to do much with a bootable rescue CDROM, will it?

We have yet to re-install the Windows partition on the machine.

I said to him it would be better to save your work on the NAS drive, because that way we could have just printed them from another machine. He told me he was thinking that he wouldn't be working in Windows again after that near-disaster experience. He'd had enough.

Edited 2008-10-07 14:01 UTC

Reply Score: 5

RE[3]: Doh! moment later on
by darknexus on Tue 7th Oct 2008 14:39 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Doh! moment later on"
darknexus Member since:
2008-07-15

You missed my point... deliberately, I suspect, if past comments of yours are any indication. My point is not that Linux has viruses now, my point was that one of the main reasons for that is it not being a big enough target. naturally you could pop in a Knoppix CD and rescue your system, and you could do that even if Linux was targeted for a Virus. And why would that be? Because a Windows virus couldn't target Linux, and a Linux virus wouldn't affect Windows. The only exception would be if it was a software exploit of a service that is running on both systems.
/* WARNING: Rant Follows */
But why am I bothering to explain this to you? If your reading comprehension level is low enough that you missed the point of my last comment, or your so locked into your one viewpoint that you deliberately misread it, clearly I can talk until I'm blue in the face and write until my fingers fall off... and it will make no difference at all. I am sick of the zealotry that I see towards Linux. It is not the end-all-be-all, and believe it or not, some users may not want it. It does have faults, and is not immune to malware by some act of the supernatural.
/* End Rant */
I'd love to see Linux succeed commercially, as competition is only a good thing and never a bad one. But the more people hype Linux up to be what it currently is not, the further away it is pushed from being widely accepted.

Reply Score: 0

RE[4]: Doh! moment later on
by lemur2 on Tue 7th Oct 2008 22:32 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Doh! moment later on"
lemur2 Member since:
2007-02-17

You missed my point... deliberately, I suspect, if past comments of yours are any indication. My point is not that Linux has viruses now, my point was that one of the main reasons for that is it not being a big enough target. naturally you could pop in a Knoppix CD and rescue your system, and you could do that even if Linux was targeted for a Virus. And why would that be? Because a Windows virus couldn't target Linux, and a Linux virus wouldn't affect Windows.


Err, no. Any virus won't affect an OS on a bootable CDROM because ... the machine cannot write to the CDROM. This has nothing to do with Windows or Linux.

The thing about this that DOES have to do with Windows vs Linux is that you can download (or purchase via snail mail for a very nominal amount $10 or so) a Linux liveCD ... but you can't do that for Windows.

Face it ... Linux rescued the situation for my son and saved his assignment which was in dire peril of being lost due to Windows vulnerabilities. That is the real world situation. This is what people actually have to deal with.

This (or similar) is what will happen to the netbooks with XP Home that is being foisted on to people. In my country, it is difficult to find the Linux versions, retail stores will stock only Windows, and Dell Australia has even refused to offer the Linux version that is available from Dell elsewhere.

If my son had been running Linux in the first place, he would have been able to do everything that he was doing (including playing the game on the Internet) and he wouldn't have suffered the crash and near disaster that he did suffer.

That is the real world. Not some fantasy that you imagine, but real, everyday occurrences. This is what the people who purchase a netbook with XP Home right now actually face, as opposed to the far better experience they would have if they had opted for the Linux version.

(BTW: the reason my son normally runs Windows is one PC game that he likes to play. It won't install under Wine on Linux, because the game's installer deliberately tries to make sure that it is Windows it is running under. The game's manufacturer? ... Microsoft).

People are better off if they run Linux. They would have free software, more capable software, made in their bests interests, and be free of nearly all of the endemic problems, costs, artificial limitations and outright frustrations in software they currently endure. That is the plain, simple truth.

There are parties out there with vested interests who are desperately trying to hide that truth.

Edited 2008-10-07 22:35 UTC

Reply Score: 6

RE[5]: Doh! moment later on
by PlatformAgnostic on Wed 8th Oct 2008 07:35 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: Doh! moment later on"
PlatformAgnostic Member since:
2006-01-02

You can make a Windows "LiveCD." It's called WinPE. There's also an unofficial version of the same thing called BartPE.

People probably aren't doing this extensively now, but it is possible to infect the firmware of a machine so that even a CD environment is not enough to remove the malware. Fortunately that didn't happen to you or your son. I'm frankly surprised that you even allowed your kids to use a non-Linux OS.

Reply Score: 2

RE[6]: Doh! moment later on
by Soulbender on Wed 8th Oct 2008 08:03 UTC in reply to "RE[5]: Doh! moment later on"
Soulbender Member since:
2005-08-18

Perhaps you can give some examples of firmware viruses that exist in the wild.

Reply Score: 2

RE: Doh! moment later on
by rockwell on Fri 10th Oct 2008 21:22 UTC in reply to "Doh! moment later on"
rockwell Member since:
2005-09-13

//Later on,//

Like, in 20-30 years. Freetard dipshit.

Reply Score: 1

Canonical
by collinm on Tue 7th Oct 2008 12:21 UTC
collinm
Member since:
2005-07-15

Canonical the company who write a lot of code for linux?

Reply Score: 2

RE: Canonical
by FooBarWidget on Tue 7th Oct 2008 12:24 UTC in reply to "Canonical"
FooBarWidget Member since:
2005-11-11

Canonical, the company who spends a lot of time in improving Linux's desktop viability. You know, to fix the things that cause people to make statements like "linux is still too hard and/or unintuitive". Software isn't only about code, it's also about presentation, marketing, aesthetics, community, support, etc.

Reply Score: 7

RE[2]: Canonical
by optevo on Tue 7th Oct 2008 12:34 UTC in reply to "RE: Canonical"
optevo Member since:
2007-06-04

Canonical, the company who spends a lot of time in improving Linux's desktop viability. You know, to fix the things that cause people to make statements like "linux is still too hard and/or unintuitive". Software isn't only about code, it's also about presentation, marketing, aesthetics, community, support, etc.


aesthetics? as in like making everything poo-y brown ;)

(BTW, I know what you're saying and in general I do agree - but the default theme... hmmm)

Reply Score: 1

RE[2]: Canonical
by collinm on Tue 7th Oct 2008 13:06 UTC in reply to "RE: Canonical"
collinm Member since:
2005-07-15

you mean theses thing then mandriva, suse, xandros.... done before this compagny started?

Reply Score: 1

RE[3]: Canonical
by FooBarWidget on Tue 7th Oct 2008 13:47 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Canonical"
FooBarWidget Member since:
2005-11-11

you mean theses thing then mandriva, suse, xandros.... done before this compagny started?


And how popular are these distros again compared to Ubuntu? The importance of desktop work is only measured by its effect; if it's not effective then it's worthless. You can be delusional all you want, but it's still a fact that Canonical managed to gain much more market share. And for a good reason. As long as there are people like you around who keep denying things like this, Linux will never succeed on the desktop. Stop being emotionally attached to Mandriva/SuSE/Xandros and start seeing that Canonical managed to do things none of them have succeeded in, namely greater desktop acceptance of Linux.

Edited 2008-10-07 14:06 UTC

Reply Score: 5

RE[4]: Canonical
by collinm on Tue 7th Oct 2008 14:21 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Canonical"
collinm Member since:
2005-07-15

how do you evaluate distros popularity?

dell on desktop push ubuntu, on server suse, red hat

hp push suse on desktop and suse and red hat on server
msi push suse

asus push xandros
acer push linpus

latina america push mandriva...

stop being in love with ubuntu and open your eye

Reply Score: 3

RE[5]: Canonical
by FooBarWidget on Tue 7th Oct 2008 15:03 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: Canonical"
FooBarWidget Member since:
2005-11-11

how do you evaluate distros popularity?

dell on desktop push ubuntu, on server suse, red hat

hp push suse on desktop and suse and red hat on server
msi push suse

asus push xandros
acer push linpus

latina america push mandriva...

stop being in love with ubuntu and open your eye


With statistics and evidence of course:
http://www.google.com/trends?q=ubuntu%2Credhat%2Csuse
http://distrowatch.com/ -> "Page Hit Ranking"

You can spin it any way you want, but the numbers are against you. You may not prefer Ubuntu as distribution, and that's fine. But trying to paint Canonical as a freeloader who has done nothing compared to SuSE/RedHat/Xandros/Mandriva/etc in spite of overwhelming evidence, shows that you are too emotionally attached to those distros. The fact that you try to spin my comment as being "love for Ubuntu" in spite of all the evidence, makes your statements questionable at best.

And I'm only talking about desktop, not server. This entire story is about Linux on the desktop, server has got nothing to do with it.

But frankly, that isn't even the problem. It isn't even about whether Ubuntu is better/worse than $DISTRO or who's the zealot here. Look at what you're doing: you're fighting fellow Linux supporters, namely Canonical and people who like Ubuntu. How can you ever expect Linux to succeed on the desktop, as long as there's so much in-fighting? Stop fighting fellow Linux supporters and start fighting some *real* enemies.

Edited 2008-10-07 15:06 UTC

Reply Score: 4

RE[6]: Canonical
by collinm on Tue 7th Oct 2008 19:15 UTC in reply to "RE[5]: Canonical"
collinm Member since:
2005-07-15

your link you post only show most searched on the web...

if for you most searched = most popular...

does it's mean most used? don't think so

like the news on this site about canotical who done nothing for linux, i don't think i'm alone who fighting it

you forget Mark Shuttleworth speach at EuroOSCON....
not me...

i have a lot more respect company like mandriva who have very few money but invest a lot in new product, new marked, improve linux usability...

Reply Score: 3

RE[7]: Canonical
by FooBarWidget on Tue 7th Oct 2008 20:33 UTC in reply to "RE[6]: Canonical"
FooBarWidget Member since:
2005-11-11

does it's mean most used? don't think so


Of course not, but it sure is a good indication. With searches, I at least have *some indication* of its popularity. What do you have? Do you have any counter proof or proof that your favorite distro is more popular?

Do you even know what you're talking about? You admit liking Canonical-fighting news yet so far you, or anybody else for that matter, have only been able to criticize Canonical for contributing little to the *kernel*, while totally ignoring Canonical's contributions to the desktop area.

you forget Mark Shuttleworth speach at EuroOSCON....


So what about his "speach"?

Reply Score: 4

RE[2]: Canonical
by jakesdad on Tue 7th Oct 2008 23:10 UTC in reply to "RE: Canonical"
jakesdad Member since:
2005-12-28

Canonical. The company that uses everyones stuff and tweaks it but tends to not release fixes back upstream.

Reply Score: 1

RE[3]: Canonical
by collinm on Wed 8th Oct 2008 05:18 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Canonical"
collinm Member since:
2005-07-15

exactely

you should read its interview at the euroconn....

Reply Score: 1

Disappointing experience (d'oh)
by dwave on Tue 7th Oct 2008 12:34 UTC
dwave
Member since:
2006-09-19

Linux tatally sucks. I had to open an extremely important EXE-file that I got in a mail attachment from the Paypal service team.
It just wouldn't work! Returned the netbook on the same day and got XP Home instead.

Reply Score: 11

collinm Member since:
2005-07-15

lol

Reply Score: 2

Try this...
by optevo on Tue 7th Oct 2008 12:44 UTC
optevo
Member since:
2007-06-04

Install two versions of whatever distribution. Make one as Windows-like as possible and the other leave as the default. Test them on the general public. See if there's any difference in number of issues raised.

I'm fairly sure there will be. If so, it makes *economic* sense to make the default install pretty Windows-like. Not because its *better* in some intrisic way but because people's familiarity with Windows counts for something.

One other point - for those who don't like the default Windows L&F it won't be an issue for them to change it as they Would likely be dyed-in-the-wool linux users. To make it easier for everyone, why not look at another Windows feature - In Vista you can easily switch back to an XP L&F. A nice feature to add to your favourite Linux distro? (but expanding it in true Linux style to give you a Vista, XP, NT or Linux L&F)

Reply Score: 1

RE: Try this...
by dagw on Tue 7th Oct 2008 14:34 UTC in reply to "Try this..."
dagw Member since:
2005-07-06

I know it's only one datapoint, but my girlfriends uncle was talking with me about getting a netbook just a couple of days ago. He's an academic and spends a lot of times in various libraries and archives, and wanted a small light laptop for note taking. Anyway he said he wanted to get one running Linux, because he'd seen one in a store and thought the interface looked easier to use.

Now as to whether he'll actually like it after he buys one is a different question. But at least it shows that some people are interested in new and easier to use interfaces, and are willing to give Linux a shot in hopes of getting that.

Reply Score: 3

RE[2]: Try this...
by hobgoblin on Tue 7th Oct 2008 15:11 UTC in reply to "RE: Try this..."
hobgoblin Member since:
2005-07-06

academic huh? explains why he even knew linux existed...

Reply Score: 2

RE[3]: Try this...
by dagw on Tue 7th Oct 2008 15:21 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Try this..."
dagw Member since:
2005-07-06

academic huh? explains why he even knew linux existed...

How does being an cultural anthropologist help you become aware of Linux? He was aware linux existed because he'd seen a laptop running it in a shop and asked the person working there what it was. Trust me, him being an academic does not in any way make him a computer expert.

Reply Score: 2

RE[4]: Try this...
by hobgoblin on Wed 8th Oct 2008 02:00 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Try this..."
hobgoblin Member since:
2005-07-06

never claimed he was either. just that academic environments seems to get a higher percentage of linux users then average (if there is such a thing).

but then the same can be said of osx to so...

Reply Score: 2

Orange, meet sausage.
by B. Janssen on Tue 7th Oct 2008 13:27 UTC
B. Janssen
Member since:
2006-10-11

Now, that's another marketing guy talking, so let's see what's to read there:
a) We don't know the return rates of netbooks preinstalled with MS Windows.
b) The return rates of netbooks preinstalled with Ubuntu are higher than those with other open source OS.
c) Online retailers are not explicit enough in advertising that the netbook does not run MS Windows.
d) People get something different then they thought they ordered and return it.

Big deal. Note, however, that Carr is not making any claim with regards to the ratio of returns MS Windows:Ubuntu.

Reply Score: 3

Fair enough
by lindkvis on Tue 7th Oct 2008 13:58 UTC
lindkvis
Member since:
2006-11-21

Some people don't know what they are buying and they return it when they find out it isn't what they expected. Fair enough. For many people they would rather get what they are used to, or they simply like Windows better. No matter the reason, why blame them?

But this is kind of missing the point. While more than the usual amount is returning them, many other people are buying these machines and are NOT returning them. Quite of few of the purchasers are happy with their purchase even if they never had used Linux before.

This is a net win for Linux use as long as some people now use Linux when they have never done so before. Score!

Canonical seems to be approaching this from the right angle. They don't try to misrepresent the facts, they don't try to blame the users, they simply take the facts on board and try to do better in the future.

Reply Score: 4

v MSI should use ReactOS
by Nicram on Tue 7th Oct 2008 15:03 UTC
RE: MSI should use ReactOS
by FooBarWidget on Tue 7th Oct 2008 15:07 UTC in reply to "MSI should use ReactOS"
FooBarWidget Member since:
2005-11-11

Yes. Why Linux? We all know how linux community treat ordinary windows users...


Please do tell, how does the Linux community treat ordinary Windows users? Like www.ubuntuforums.org perhaps?

Reply Score: 2

Does the MSI have
by mmu_man on Tue 7th Oct 2008 16:00 UTC
mmu_man
Member since:
2006-09-30

this same ugly Luna-grey decoration on the window manager the Linux eeePC has ?
This doesn't help differentiating them... OTH maybe it's all it needs to make ppl think it's really windows and be happy with it ;)

Reply Score: 2

GJ apologists
by google_ninja on Tue 7th Oct 2008 17:43 UTC
google_ninja
Member since:
2006-02-05

Its nice to see the apologists out in full force. There are two ideas floating around, that if people just try linux they will like it, and that linux is perfectly fine for normal day to day tasks for the average joe.

Now we have a ton of above average techie people going out and buying these pre configured, pre installed machines that are meant as appliance machines for a small subset of tasks, and the linux machines are coming back in droves.

Personally, I am of the opinion that linux belongs on geeks machines and certain classes of servers and nowhere else, that windows belongs in the workplace, and that OSX belongs in the home. It is easy to illustrate the epic failure of each OS outside of those zones, and easy to talk about the strengths of each inside of them.

Reply Score: 5

RE: GJ apologists
by jimbofluffy on Tue 7th Oct 2008 18:52 UTC in reply to "GJ apologists"
jimbofluffy Member since:
2008-07-15

Personally, I am of the opinion that linux belongs on geeks machines and certain classes of servers and nowhere else, that windows belongs in the workplace, and that OSX belongs in the home. It is easy to illustrate the epic failure of each OS outside of those zones, and easy to talk about the strengths of each inside of them.


I use OSX on my work laptop, Windows on my home game machine...

...alright, I admit, you got me, and Linux on my geek machines.

Reply Score: 1

RE: GJ apologists
by irbis on Tue 7th Oct 2008 20:07 UTC in reply to "GJ apologists"
irbis Member since:
2005-07-08

windows belongs in the workplace, and that OSX belongs in the home. It is easy to illustrate the epic failure of each OS outside of those zone

In multimedia and publishing industry Apple Mac OS X has always been very popular. Many other companies and work places could prefer Apple Macs too if only they were a bit cheaper. Besides, many PC gamers could disagree too if they were said that they'd better run Macs instead of Windows PCs.

As to Linux belonging on geeks' machines only, that may be quite true still, especially among home users. Maybe Unix and Linux will stay as suitable desktop operating systems only for relatively advanced users? (Not necessarily a bad thing, by the way.) But that doesn't rule out the possibility that they couldn't - gradually and slowly though - become more popular in work and office environments too, where competent IT support is available, and when there is no need for some software not (yet) available for Linux or Unix.

Reply Score: 3

RE[2]: GJ apologists
by google_ninja on Tue 7th Oct 2008 20:44 UTC in reply to "RE: GJ apologists"
google_ninja Member since:
2006-02-05

In multimedia and publishing industry Apple Mac OS X has always been very popular. Many other companies and work places could prefer Apple Macs too if only they were a bit cheaper. Besides, many PC gamers could disagree too if they were said that they'd better run Macs instead of Windows PCs.


Publishers only release for windows because it is ubiquitous, and while directX is pretty good now, it has walked a long and thorny road to get to where it now is. If apple ended up dominating the home space, I'm sure it would not take long for publishers to start releases stuff for ogl.

As for multimedia and publishing, I would say that is more of an exception to my previous statement. Sort of like how alot of super high end CG work is done on SGI machines, but I don't think anyone would say that means UNIX is the OS of choice for creative professionals.

As to Linux belonging on geeks' machines only, that may be quite true still, especially among home users. Maybe Unix and Linux will stay as suitable desktop operating systems only for relatively advanced users? (Not necessarily a bad thing, by the way.) But that doesn't rule out the possibility that they couldn't - gradually and slowly though - become more popular in work and office environments too, where competent IT support is available, and when there is no need for some software not (yet) available for Linux or Unix.


Honestly, it takes a significant higher level of IT competence to deliver the same level of service when it comes to office networks. The MS stack is really unparalelled for about 90% of the kind of apps that businesses run on

Reply Score: 2

RE[3]: GJ apologists
by lemur2 on Tue 7th Oct 2008 22:47 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: GJ apologists"
lemur2 Member since:
2007-02-17

"In multimedia and publishing industry Apple Mac OS X has always been very popular. Many other companies and work places could prefer Apple Macs too if only they were a bit cheaper. Besides, many PC gamers could disagree too if they were said that they'd better run Macs instead of Windows PCs.
Publishers only release for windows because it is ubiquitous, and while directX is pretty good now, it has walked a long and thorny road to get to where it now is. If apple ended up dominating the home space, I'm sure it would not take long for publishers to start releases stuff for ogl. "

Actually ... walk in to any retail store that specialises in games. The majority of the stock in the store will be written for games systems that do NOT use directx.

Honestly, it takes a significant higher level of IT competence to deliver the same level of service when it comes to office networks. The MS stack is really unparalelled for about 90% of the kind of apps that businesses run on


Honestly ... the MS stack is the only one that is hopelessly obscured and high maintenance, to the extent that it does take a higher level of IT competence to try to deliver it.

Replace it all with open systems and open servers ... IT nirvana.

Reply Score: 4

RE[4]: GJ apologists
by google_ninja on Tue 7th Oct 2008 23:06 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: GJ apologists"
google_ninja Member since:
2006-02-05

the MS stack is the only one that is hopelessly obscured and high maintenance, to the extent that it does take a higher level of IT competence to try to deliver it.


That is just nuts. A bad programmer can bang out an app that meets the requirements a hell of alot easier with vb then any other platform out there. A good programmer can deliver it in a fraction of the time then any other platform.

Reply Score: 2

RE[5]: GJ apologists
by lemur2 on Tue 7th Oct 2008 23:35 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: GJ apologists"
lemur2 Member since:
2007-02-17

"the MS stack is the only one that is hopelessly obscured and high maintenance, to the extent that it does take a higher level of IT competence to try to deliver it.
That is just nuts. A bad programmer can bang out an app that meets the requirements a hell of alot easier with vb then any other platform out there. A good programmer can deliver it in a fraction of the time then any other platform. "

http://librenix.com/?inode=4033

(Purebasic, Realbasic, HBasic, Gambas, XBasic, KBasic, and Phoenix Object Basic)

http://www.linuxdevices.com/news/NS9725385854.html

(Visual Basic for Linux - in Mono).

http://www.python.org/

(Better than basic ... and far more portable).

Enjoy.

Reply Score: 3

RE[6]: GJ apologists
by google_ninja on Wed 8th Oct 2008 00:57 UTC in reply to "RE[5]: GJ apologists"
google_ninja Member since:
2006-02-05

It is not the language, it is the environment. You open a new project, connect to a database, and drag the tables you want to work with on to a design service. You now have a moderately good datalayer. You make a new form, and drag some fields and wire them up to the data source. You now have a create/update/read/delete screen without writing any code, and having spent 5-10 minutes.

Not saying code generation will take you all the way there for anything but the most simple of apps, but as i said, most of these apps are pretty damn simple. When depoyment time rolls around, you set up a clickonce site up in IIS, and publish to it. The users go to the site over the intranet, one click and it is on the machine. At every launch of the app, it will check itself against the server and update any bits that are different.

Now, VB blows, and people who do that kind of work are barely programmers (anyone with any sort of drive and ability would want something more to sink their teeth into), but these kind of drones come very cheap, and are able to bang out lots of "good enough" applications very quickly.

Complex apps are another story, and the situation is not as cut and dried. But for simple things nothing else I have tried or read about comes close.

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: GJ apologists
by hobgoblin on Wed 8th Oct 2008 02:06 UTC in reply to "RE: GJ apologists"
hobgoblin Member since:
2005-07-06

In multimedia and publishing industry Apple Mac OS X has always been very popular.


quick guess, adobe photoshop first showed up on a mac running a earlier os version.

so the old hats at computer aided graphics work gets to know both the program and the os intimately.

then they teach the next gen how to operate this.

and things go as they often do...

first time i spotted a mac in real life was a older one hooked up to a scsi scanner in the photo department of a local newspaper. i suspect the scanner was able to scan negatives.

i suspect its much the same that keeps ms office in use. that, and that ms office have become more of a RAD then a office suite the last years or so, thanks to integrated visual basic.

Reply Score: 2

RE: GJ apologists
by lemur2 on Tue 7th Oct 2008 23:42 UTC in reply to "GJ apologists"
lemur2 Member since:
2007-02-17

and the linux machines are coming back in droves.


Where did you get that from?

The return rate for the linux machines is higher than for Windows ... because some purchasers are unfamiliar with Linux and just assumed that their purchase was a Windows machine.

I believe the original quote from MSI was that the return rate for Linux was four times higher than it was for Windows.

OK then ... Linux machines are being returned because the purchaser expected Windows. Understandable.

Why are the Windows machines being returned?

Maybe because XP Home doesn't connect to business networks?

What other reason could there be?

(Warning for MS apologists ... any answer that indicates that the return rate for Windows is insignificant will also reveal that the return rate for Linux is also insignificant ... because of the context of the original quote from MSI. It was stated as a ratio, not as an absolute number).

Edited 2008-10-07 23:45 UTC

Reply Score: 3

RE[2]: GJ apologists
by lemur2 on Wed 8th Oct 2008 00:30 UTC in reply to "RE: GJ apologists"
lemur2 Member since:
2007-02-17

Why are the Windows machines being returned? Maybe because XP Home doesn't connect to business networks? What other reason could there be?


Maybe these particular netbook machines would get returned, also?

http://www.networkworld.com/news/2008/100708-asus-reports-virus-loa...

This report suffers from the common media misdirection in trying to conflate the virus problem with the machines, rather than with the OS that is installed on the machine ... but references to "D drive" and to "recycled.exe" rather give it away, don't they?

Reply Score: 4

RE[2]: GJ apologists
by google_ninja on Wed 8th Oct 2008 00:33 UTC in reply to "RE: GJ apologists"
google_ninja Member since:
2006-02-05

What does that have to do with anything? The origional quote was

We have done a lot of studies on the return rates and haven’t really talked about it much until now. Our internal research has shown that the return of netbooks is higher than regular notebooks, but the main cause of that is Linux. People would love to pay $299 or $399 but they don’t know what they get until they open the box. They start playing around with Linux and start realizing that it’s not what they are used to. They don’t want to spend time to learn it so they bring it back to the store. The return rate is at least four times higher for Linux netbooks than Windows XP netbooks.


I would take that to mean that if not for linux, people would return the winds for whatever reason people normally return notebooks.

The fact that people return xp loaded netbooks at the same rate as xp loaded notebooks doesn't address my point at all.

Reply Score: 2

RE[3]: GJ apologists
by lemur2 on Wed 8th Oct 2008 01:41 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: GJ apologists"
lemur2 Member since:
2007-02-17

What does that have to do with anything? ...

I would take that to mean that if not for linux, people would return the winds for whatever reason people normally return notebooks. The fact that people return xp loaded netbooks at the same rate as xp loaded notebooks doesn't address my point at all.


The point is this ... the original quote stated the return rate as a ratio. Not as an absolute number.

You have no basis for thinking that the return rate for Linux is "in droves".

You know only that the return rate for Linux is four times whatever it is for Windows. Hence, if the return rate for Windows is insignificant (due only to failed hardware) ... then the return rate for Linux is quite low. If the return rate for Linux is really "in droves" as you thought ... then the return rate for Windows is also high.

Another point ... returns of Windows machines due to failed hardware would be matched by the failed hardware rate for returns of Linux machines. The hardware itself is "agnostic" of the OS ... so some of the returns of Linux machines are also due to failed hardware.

You know also that the common reason for returning Linux is that some people who ended up with a Linux machine did not know what that actually meant ... and hence they returned the machine simply because it was not what they thought they were buying.

In other words, despite your dearest wishes to do so ... you actually can't actually make a case for a black mark against Linux out of this at all.

Edited 2008-10-08 01:45 UTC

Reply Score: 4

RE[4]: GJ apologists
by google_ninja on Wed 8th Oct 2008 02:18 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: GJ apologists"
google_ninja Member since:
2006-02-05


You know only that the return rate for Linux is four times whatever it is for Windows. Hence, if the return rate for Windows is insignificant (due only to failed hardware) ... then the return rate for Linux is quite low. If the return rate for Linux is really "in droves" as you thought ... then the return rate for Windows is also high


Return rates tend to be 0.7 - 0.8% for most electronics, if there is more getting returned there are QA issues, less and QA is too high. The article says "I can tell you that we sell about 150,000 to 250,000 MSI Winds a month". If we were to make a conservative educated guess on the actual numbers, 2.8% (0.7 * 4) of that is getting returned based on linux dissatisfaction, which works out to 42 000 - 70 000 per month, or 504 000 - 840 000 per year.

Those are very big numbers, even if they do make up a small percentage of the actual sales.

In other words, despite your dearest wishes to do so ... you actually can't actually make a case for a black mark against Linux out of this at all.


I love linux, and have been using it longer then i have used windows. I would think that it would be a good appliance os, i just dont think it is appropriate for home users. I don't think windows is appropriate either if that means anything.

Edited 2008-10-08 02:19 UTC

Reply Score: 2

Let's Fix this Issue
by jzuniga.akos on Tue 7th Oct 2008 22:45 UTC
jzuniga.akos
Member since:
2008-10-07

So for me the easiest way to address this issue is to actually use a page right out of the Microsoft bag of tricks. Knowledge ='s Adoption.

Open Source lacks a Mind Share, so how do we fix that issue. Take the approach of a "Load Fest" or "Roadshow". If we as a community put together the contents of a workshop that taught people for "No Cost" a one day course on loading and using the "core" applications and interfaces of Ubuntu, we could gain the mind share and adoption that is so desperately needed. Microsoft used to conduct load fest training sessions where people would bring their laptops and an instructor such as myself would instruct them on loading the software. We would then cover a hand out with basic instructions, we see this in the corporate world every day. If you are deploying a new software package and want to ensure adoption, train people over lunch and provide demos and hand outs.

So if anyone wants to read this and run with it, contact me at "jzuniga" dot "akos @ gmail" dot "com".

I'm in, let's fix this problem.
Cheers

Reply Score: 2

RE: Let's Fix this Issue
by hobgoblin on Wed 8th Oct 2008 02:08 UTC in reply to "Let's Fix this Issue"
hobgoblin Member since:
2005-07-06

iirc, the different lug's (linux user group) around the world already have install gatherings.

at least i have read about such happening taking place here in norway.

Reply Score: 2

Linux needs exposure!
by ruel24 on Wed 8th Oct 2008 00:33 UTC
ruel24
Member since:
2006-03-21

Look...let's face three facts here: First, people want familiarity. Gnome isn't familiar to Windows users. KDE might fair better, but not by much. They're used to Windows, and that's what the expect on any computer they buy that's not a Mac.

Second, people that switch to Mac switch for the cool factor. Linux simply isn't on the coolness radar screen. It's a great OS I use everyday, but to the mass public, Mac = iPod = iPhone = sheek. Linux = geek. It's public perception.

Last, the mass public knows little, if anything, about Linux. There are no ads with "I'm Linux" or anything. It lives in obscurity. Linux needs to be seen, heard, and touched by the public, while knowing what they're using. Sure, there are lots of users that use gadgets based upon Linux, but they don't realize they're using Linux. They really need to be educated on what it offers them, how cool Compiz is, and the choices there are. Ubuntu is not synonymous with Linux, despite the fanboys. There are lots of other choices and some of them are darn good. They need to be educated about this stuff. Maybe IBM, Novell, Red Hat, Mandriva, Canonnical, and Debian can pool some money together and get an ad campaign together?

Reply Score: 2

RE: Linux needs exposure!
by hobgoblin on Wed 8th Oct 2008 02:09 UTC in reply to "Linux needs exposure!"
hobgoblin Member since:
2005-07-06

yep, im starting to worry that even people that never plan on owning a ipod is using itunes as their main media player thanks to word of mouth or similar...

but then thats how i learned about napster and winamp back in the day...

Reply Score: 3

Comment by BSDfan
by BSDfan on Wed 8th Oct 2008 01:50 UTC
BSDfan
Member since:
2007-03-14

Welcome to earth, the inhabitants are mostly stupid... but the sex is good.

Reply Score: 3

Perhaps...perhaps....
by SarahKH on Wed 8th Oct 2008 02:37 UTC
SarahKH
Member since:
2008-10-08

Perhaps the problem is, quite simply, people want(ed) dirt cheap 'netbooks' running Windows? They saw the various prices, plunked for the bottom of the range unit and... "What the hell is this?"

It doesn't help that often the accompanying picture/text on a website doesn't show you the screen NOT displaying XP (I spotted one that did, despite it being a Linux machine) nor does the text description explicitly state the thing WON'T come with XP.

I, personally, don't think it reflects on Linux either way to be honest. People wanted X, they didn't want to flash the cash and ended up with Z instead... so they returned it. Or they got burned by not very descriptive descriptions on-line...

Of course, I brought a Asus 701 a while ago, it's running Ubuntu and I'm rather happy with it, but that's me.

Reply Score: 1

Remix vs eee Xandros
by chemical_scum on Wed 8th Oct 2008 04:32 UTC
chemical_scum
Member since:
2005-11-02

Apparently Ubuntu Remix netbooks are returned more than other open source netbooks.

I am not that surprised. I have been running Remix on my desktop as a trial (not for regular use) and my wife has an eeePC with Xandros Linux on it. The Remix interface is more complex and difficult to use compared to the Xandros netbook interface. An experienxed Ubuntu user can work our what is going on, but it would be more difficult for a newbie.

In addition the brown colour seems somewhat depressing, much more brown than in the regular desktop Human theme. I run pretty much a default Ubuntu desktop on my home system. The only major theme variation is I have a somewhat lighter image as my desktop wallpaper. It is not at all depressing to work in and I am happy with the regular Human theme but not the Remix Human one - much too dark.

So all in all the Remix interface needs some improvement.

Reply Score: 5

RE: Remix vs eee Xandros
by collinm on Wed 8th Oct 2008 10:18 UTC in reply to "Remix vs eee Xandros"
collinm Member since:
2005-07-15

witch netbook use Remix?

Reply Score: 2

Maybe a different problem?
by Jokel on Wed 8th Oct 2008 06:35 UTC
Jokel
Member since:
2006-06-01

Anyone had read this comment on Linux Today?

http://www.linuxtoday.com/news_story.php3?ltsn=2008-10-07-028-35-NW...

Now - that makes you think hmm?

I am not saying people won't return Linux machines for another reason (knowing a lot of people are MS-Brainwashed), but this is another reason...

Reply Score: 4

*retun*
by jharrell on Wed 8th Oct 2008 20:33 UTC
jharrell
Member since:
2007-07-30

"Gerry Carr, confirms in an interview that retun rates for netbooks"

er Return.

Reply Score: 1

Linux and FreeBSD
by ejmarkow on Thu 9th Oct 2008 07:58 UTC
ejmarkow
Member since:
2008-10-09

I'm a strong advocate and user of Arch Linux and FreeBSD, both of which perform faster and are more stable and secure than their Microsoft competitor.

From my desktop user experience, FreeBSD is the fastest performer out there, however, Linux offers more familiar bells and whistles like Flash and Virtualization as host.

The primary culprit preventing both Linux and FreeBSD from eclipsing Microsoft is simply the availability of the most popular software and games that are already readily available for Microsoft. When most people turn on their PC these days, they really would like to see:

Photoshop
Xara Xtreme Pro
AutoCAD
Mathlab
Nero
Corel
Alcohol 120%
Daemon Tools
plus many more apps
and games - games - games...

"Wine" doesn't really cut it. We at the Linux and FreeBSD communities would like to see native running applications and games (or very good open source clones), plain and simple. Give us some of those apps and games, and you will see both Linux and FreeBSD take off.

Edited 2008-10-09 08:06 UTC

Reply Score: 1

Asking the wrong questions
by Howie S on Sat 11th Oct 2008 02:43 UTC
Howie S
Member since:
2005-07-14

The question we should be asking is 'Why did the linux on the EeePC succeed while linux on Wind failed?"

My answer would be that Xandros developed a custom linux version tailored for the EeePC, such that the EeePC was essentially a *device*. People aren't so intimidated learning a new device. Heck, people get used to their cellphones in no time at all.

Reply Score: 1