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:2008-03-10
You can't solve every problem just by continually scaling up the equipment it's running on. Most of the problems I looked into can't ever be solved that way. And if You make a desktop OS it has to run well on the most common system of the day, a Pentiun 4 with 512 MB of RAM.
Member since:2006-01-10
I think you should be saying that to the developers of Vista.
It crawls on 1gb of ram and a 2ghz Dothan (which is about equivalent to a 3.2ghz Pentium4)
It took 14+ hours to run the Windows Update. I say + because I didn't wait longer than that and ended up putting XP back on it.
The reason the OEMs have been putting Linux on the netbooks is because you can cut down Linux and customize the crap out of it so that it'll fit well on any hardware. The problem is that the OEMs aren't customizing it as much as they could.
Member since:2006-01-14
I have been using Linux for sometime now. What I said about Fedora 9 holds true even on older systems. My old laptop running Fedora 8 was a P4 1.6 GHz with 1 Gig ram. You still haven't elaborated on what was wrong with the linux kernel. Linux scales well both down and up. Its used on many embedded devices and runs most of the top super computers. So why the need for a kernel switch?
Member since:2006-05-29
Well, could you then finally enlighten us with the results of your deep research on how the linux kernel prevents good video rendering? I find that quite unbelievable since video performance is actually a lot better on my ancient notebook running videos on linux.
I can view 720p without hickups on Ubuntu while the same videos have many framedrops/freezes on xp.
Member since:
2006-01-14
And why exactly do you think that Linux needs a new kernel to be successful on the desktop? Seriously? Most current desktops have more cores and memory than the most powerful workstations a few years ago. I have far from uber gear and I am running quad core with 8 gigs of memory. I run Fedora 9 and I can run multiple video clips simultaneously without skipping, with audio mixed at the hardware level, and I have full 3D support. What exactly am I missing from the desktop experience?