The netbook craze is currently in full swing, with these small laptops being advertised everywhere (at least here in The Netherlands); in fact, you can already get netbooks with 3G from the mobile phone carriers at severely reduced prices (but with a one or two year contract, of course). Netbooks are also welcomed by the Linux community as the break they've been waiting for: many netbooks are available with Linux pre-installed. One of the more successful (and powerful) netbooks out there is MSI's Wind, which is also sold under different brand and model names by other companies. In an interview with LaptopMag, MSI's Director of US Sales Andy Tung, however, has some bad news for those that believe the netbook will be the foot in the door that the Linux desktop has been waiting for.
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Member since:2008-09-18
Your comment was pure FUD. I used Windows for 6 years and find Linux much easier to use. My views are based on my experience. There are legitimate criticisms of Linux and the Mac, but yours were stated so as to start a flame war. If you are giving criticism, then be constructive. btw: I use a Mac as my main machine.
Member since:2008-03-10
No, they were stated because I've done research into why I have to put up with annoyances on Linux, and come to the conclusion that open source for desktops needs a new kernel in order to ever be successful and I tried to convince people of that. Of course the community will always start a flame war if you criticize Linux for weaknesses to competitors; but it was the truth, sorry it hurts. (and this comment goes full circle into more flame wars because it also encourages the people who can't ever admit to Linux's weaknesses to start shouting at the top of their lungs so no hears the them, and the weaknesses are never dealt with. It's a perfectly rational comment, but it will get irrational responses.)
Member since:2006-01-02
I spend my days working on a kernel and I don't necessarily buy your theory that replacing the kernel is what will boost Linux's acceptability on the desktop/laptop/netbook. Frankly, the end user could care less about the specifics of the kernel as long as it meets the minimum bar of reliability and performance, which Linux does. It's all the other things, like X, management functionality, simple (and functional) control panels, etc which have a dearth of deep contributors that would take them quickly to mass-market acceptability.
If people really wanted to make Linux displace OS X or Windows on the desktop, they probably should put kernel work on pause and fix up (or rearchitect) various aspects of the Linux User Experience so that a typical person who's trying to get work done will be able to perform basic tasks (like setting up a common wireless connection or a projector/alternate monitor) in a logical manner that works more than 95% of the time.
Member since:2005-07-24
Member since:2007-11-25
I'll have to disagree with you there. I don't think that Linux (the kernel) meets the requirements for a decent desktop operating system. Some of the issues that I see are:
Drivers: The real issue here is the license model, hardware companies don't want to release an Open Driver, or their specs, and no, you saying they should won't magically make them do it, and it'll never happen 95% of the time. What's the next alternative? Closed Drivers? Sorry, that's illegal to include in the kernel, and iffy in Distro's, and the fact that Closed Drivers brake so much between releases of Linux doesn't make that option any better.
Dev Model: They don't focus on the Desktop: This can be argued either way, and be won either way too, but the main concentration on the current Linux Kernel seems to be for servers and super computers.
Hiding itself: Remember when Linus went on TV and told us that a kernel that a user never has to see is one that works? What happens when you upgrade your kernel? You risk breaking your system, the chances are that your custom drivers have to be rebuilt for it to work, and why isn't this being fixed? How can you consider it to be doing its job when it contradicts its creator?
I think the license, general focus of the devs and the community will just end up killing any chances that it (a Linux Distro) has in the desktop market. I'll be willing to place my money on FreeBSD, because we've already seen parts of it put into a much more popular OS (Mac OSX), and I'll be willing to bet that in the future, it will have its feet in much more than it has now.
Member since:2006-03-20
Member since:2005-08-11
Member since:2007-09-06
Member since:
2008-03-10
Windows has been based on the NT kernel for 8 years, not DOS.
If you want open source operating systems to have a future, you as a community must be able to take an objective view of them and compare them to competitors. Until that happens, there is no chance of Linux ever gaining significant market share because of its shortcomings. The previous comment being buried is only proof that Linux is not ready because most of the community behind it cannot act rationally, or do things like admit weakness. If they had, the average user wouldn't have to put up with nearly as many annoyances because something would have been done about them.