Linked by Thom Holwerda on Sun 1st Mar 2009 17:26 UTC, submitted by kaiwai
Hardware, Embedded Systems Long-time OSNews reader Kaiwai has written down his experiences with his Acer Aspire One, Linux, and Windows. He concludes: "After a hectic few weeks trying to get Linux to work, I am back to square one again - a netbook running Windows XP SP3 as it was provided by Acer when I purchased it. I gave three different distributions a chance to prove themselves. I expected all three distributions to wipe the floor with Windows XP - after all, these are the latest and greatest distributions the Linux world have to offer. There has been at least 7 years since the release of Windows XP for Linux to catch up to Windows XP and from my experience with Linux on this said device - it has failed to step up to the plate when it was needed."
Thread beginning with comment 351280
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE: Windows XP Retail
by lemur2 on Mon 2nd Mar 2009 10:31 UTC in reply to "Windows XP Retail"
Member since:

One thing i will say in self defence of Windows XP Retail installation which a lot of people are asking for to compare with linux, is that XP was released in 2001, it was taken off the shelves over a year ago, if you want to compare linux with a retail install of windows you will have to do so with Windows Vista or use a linux dating from 2006 or to be really fair compare it to one from 2001.

I suppose so.

Another way of looking at it might be to consider the pace of development.

As Windows has gone along, trying always to maintain binary compatibility (ABI) back to 1995, and causing itself all sorts of grief and security issues by so doing, and also holding back microprocessor development in the process by locking it to an even older binary instruction set compatibility, each Windows version is more and more hidebound, and more and more difficult to roll out.

Linux, on the other hand, retains source compatibility, and as time moves along it gains more and more users and developers who have read the code, and its pace of development actually accelerates.

Windows 7 on netbooks has been proven to work incredibly well, it's not a myth or just hearsay from Microsoft. The public beta of Windows 7, proved that you can run Windows 7 on lower spec'd machines with everyday apps like Email, Web Browser etc.. In fact i know users that use netbooks with Visual Studio so they can show their projects on the move.

... but even so, after you install Windows 7, you will have consumed about 9 GB of disk space and you will be able to run ... Paint, Notepad, Calc, IE and WMP. Now with ribbons. Whoopee.

BTW, I am running Kubuntu Jaunty as I type this on my EEEPC 1000H, it runs KDE 4.2 quite fast, connected to my home lan via the out-of-the-box wireless driver, it has a full suite of desktop applications installed out of the box at zero extra cost over the machine's hardware.

Having a universal driver model for Linux will push the platform no end, from a manufacturer's point of view why develop for linux as you have to do a lot of extra work, show source code etc, etc.

Actually, it is the Linux community that is doing the requisite work. The OEMs are mostly just sitting on their arses letting it happen.

I know if they open the spec's then someone else would write a driver, but what if they don't want to open their spec's, it's a free world and no one should be forced to do something they don't want to do both personally or commercially.

A rather strange conclusion. It used to be that chip makers would publish the specs in catalogues as "vapourware", in the hope that software authors would have written support for the chip by the time it was released into the market for sale ...

How times change, hey?

As said before a unified driver model api, which could be correlated to major kernel versions (i.e. .26 etc..) would be the big push linux needs.

Meanwhile, the accelerating pace of Linux development has taken it past Windows for a couple of years now, all because the source code is available and visible to many eyes, yet more and more eyes as each day passes.

I can't quite see how a "unified driver model api" quite fits in this picture, or why it is thought to be necessary. Clearly, with a Linux install taking say 2.5 GB, including userland applications, and Windows 7 taking 9 GB for slightly more than the bare functional OS, and with Linux supporting more hardware than Windows does, I wonder which of the two actually has the more "unified driver model"?

Edited 2009-03-02 10:44 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 3