Linked by Thom Holwerda on Thu 9th Apr 2009 14:28 UTC, submitted by Moulinneuf
Ubuntu, Kubuntu, Xubuntu Canonical, the company behind Ubuntu Linux, has struck back at claims made by Microsoft's Brandon LeBlanc about Windows' success in netbooks compared to Linux. Most of the claims made by LeBlanc are refuted quite accurately by Canonical's Chris Kenyon in a blog post titled "Microsoft, FUD and the netbook market".
Thread beginning with comment 357802
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[2]: Comment by jpobst
by jpobst on Thu 9th Apr 2009 15:16 UTC in reply to "RE: Comment by jpobst"
jpobst
Member since:
2006-09-26

It is most likely, given it is Microsoft, that they are counting pirated copies of Windows as part of their market share.

I doubt that, since the article says the data is from NPD Retail Tracking Service, which tracks sales data.

Also they are counting how many people buy those, not how many stayed with Windows

Given that netbooks are available in both Windows and Linux varieties, I find it hard to believe that a significant number of people would buy the Windows one over the Linux one so they could wipe it and put Linux on it.

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[3]: Comment by jpobst
by ChrisIrwin on Thu 9th Apr 2009 15:23 in reply to "RE[2]: Comment by jpobst"
ChrisIrwin Member since:
2008-12-09

Considering how sub-par many of the OEM linux implementations are, maybe interested Linux users buy whatever one is on sale at the time.

Reply Parent Score: 5

RE[4]: Comment by jpobst
by cyberpython on Thu 9th Apr 2009 15:36 in reply to "RE[3]: Comment by jpobst"
cyberpython Member since:
2009-02-02

Considering how sub-par many of the OEM linux implementations are, maybe interested Linux users buy whatever one is on sale at the time.

+ MAJOR differences in hardware setups (for a slightly different price or - in rare cases of "special offers" - even for a smaller amount of money).

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[3]: Comment by jpobst
by pxa270 on Thu 9th Apr 2009 15:23 in reply to "RE[2]: Comment by jpobst"
pxa270 Member since:
2006-01-08

Given that netbooks are available in both Windows and Linux varieties, I find it hard to believe that a significant number of people would buy the Windows one over the Linux one so they could wipe it and put Linux on it.

It is possible, since many recent models are sold with Windows only (often the Linux configurations, if any, are very hard to find, especially in retail stores).

That said, I've never been convinced by the argument that Linux could be undercounted due to people buying the Windows version to install Linux on their own(inevitably followed by some personal anecdotes). For all we know, there could be just as many people buying the Linux configs to install Windows on their own.

Edited 2009-04-09 15:25 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 6

RE[3]: Comment by jpobst
by Calipso on Thu 9th Apr 2009 15:39 in reply to "RE[2]: Comment by jpobst"
Calipso Member since:
2007-03-13

Given that netbooks are available in both Windows and Linux varieties, I find it hard to believe that a significant number of people would buy the Windows one over the Linux one so they could wipe it


I hear it's actually difficult for some to actually find the Linux versions of a particular netbook. Stores will only have the Windows version even though the manufacturer makes a Linux version as well. So the idea that people buy the Windows version and replace it with Linux, may not be so far fetched.

Reply Parent Score: 6

RE[3]: Comment by jpobst
by B12 Simon on Thu 9th Apr 2009 15:39 in reply to "RE[2]: Comment by jpobst"
B12 Simon Member since:
2006-11-08

It depends what's available. For many linux fans the lack of "Windows tax" is a bonus, rather than a necessity (i.e. they'll live with the "Windows tax" and install linux over XP if their chosen netbook only comes with Windows).

Of course many people will also install XP over linux, meaning these statistics are pretty meaningless.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[4]: Comment by jpobst
by falcon50 on Thu 9th Apr 2009 16:36 in reply to "RE[3]: Comment by jpobst"
falcon50 Member since:
2009-04-09

Count one more for the install Linux over Windows. I was in the market for a laptop and got one for $300 US with Vista pre-installed. The apparent reason for the deal was that the graphics chip was too slow for Vista. Since I don't really care about fancy graphics and just needed a new laptop. I immediately installed Ubuntu and it works very well. The "Windows tax" got paid but Vista was not even booted up on it much less activated.

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[3]: Comment by jpobst
by darknexus on Thu 9th Apr 2009 15:59 in reply to "RE[2]: Comment by jpobst"
darknexus Member since:
2008-07-15

Given that netbooks are available in both Windows and Linux varieties, I find it hard to believe that a significant number of people would buy the Windows one over the Linux one so they could wipe it and put Linux on it.

Uh, have you looked at the specs of most Linux netbooks versus their Windows counterparts lately? The Linux versions, when you can find them, typically have less built-in hardware and a small ssd rather than a standard hd, and typically these cheap ssds they use are dirt slow. Also, consider a netbook like the Asus EEE PC 1000HE. I'd dare to say that, right now, that's the best Atom-based netbook on the market and, of course, it only comes with Windows though it is as compatible with Linux as any other EEE model. Why would I settle for a lesser configuration when I could just buy the Windows one--at the same price, mind you--and install my preferred Linux on it? I'm not going to settle for lower quality hardware just so I can get a Linux netbook, especially seeing as I'll just end up replacing the supplied Linux in most cases anyway? If I'm going to reinstall, I might as well buy the model I really want and install the os I really want to use.

Reply Parent Score: 8

RE[3]: Comment by jpobst
by earlycj5 on Thu 9th Apr 2009 16:13 in reply to "RE[2]: Comment by jpobst"
earlycj5 Member since:
2007-04-12

I know I did. SLED 10 was available for my netbook but those models lacked Bluetooth, more RAM, and a bigger/faster HD that the Vista models came with.

It's not far fetched or not understandable. I want good hardware with Linux on it, unfortunately the OEMs seem to relegate Linux to the cheap stuff thinking that no one would possibly want the higher end hardware with Linux. It's a shame really.

Reply Parent Score: 4

RE[3]: Comment by jpobst
by r_a_trip on Thu 9th Apr 2009 16:25 in reply to "RE[2]: Comment by jpobst"
r_a_trip Member since:
2005-07-06

Most of the time the Windows variant is better specced than the Linux variant. So for a few dollars more (Windows Tax), you get a better Linux machine.

Not everybody is as crazy as me and buys a Linux Aspire One with a crappy 8GB SSD and replaces that SSD with a fairly expensive Seagate Lyrion 60 GB 1.8" hard disk. I wanted the Linux sale to count, so...

Reply Parent Score: 3

jabbotts Member since:
2007-09-06

Brand recognition pays a big part in it; two ntebooks side by side but one has a familiar desktop background image - sold. Better, worse or applicable to the need; doesn't matter, it's not different.

For those who consider the difference in OS, the Windows versions have generally had better hardware specs. People who know the benefits of better hardware but will replace the software with something that fits there needs also contribute to the Microsoft market share figures.

We'll have to see how the new crop of netbooks does using the same hardware specs for both software platforms.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[3]: Comment by jpobst
by tjolley on Thu 9th Apr 2009 17:55 in reply to "RE[2]: Comment by jpobst"
tjolley Member since:
2006-03-14

Given that netbooks are available in both Windows and Linux varieties, I find it hard to believe that a significant number of people would buy the Windows one over the Linux one so they could wipe it and put Linux on it.


If the same hardware configuration was available with both OS's on a given product, I'd agree, but that is not the case. If both the Linux and Windows version of a Netbook was available at retail outlets, side by side, I'd buy the argument. But it is not that way.

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[3]: Comment by jpobst
by r055co on Thu 9th Apr 2009 18:46 in reply to "RE[2]: Comment by jpobst"
r055co Member since:
2009-04-09

I have, due to the Netbook I wanted with the Nvidia graphics card only came XP.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[3]: Comment by jpobst
by mabhatter on Thu 9th Apr 2009 19:35 in reply to "RE[2]: Comment by jpobst"
mabhatter Member since:
2005-07-17

"It is most likely, given it is Microsoft, that they are counting pirated copies of Windows as part of their market share.

I doubt that, since the article says the data is from NPD Retail Tracking Service, which tracks sales data.

Also they are counting how many people buy those, not how many stayed with Windows

Given that netbooks are available in both Windows and Linux varieties, I find it hard to believe that a significant number of people would buy the Windows one over the Linux one so they could wipe it and put Linux on it.
"

Well it is RETAIL tracking, and most B&M stores gave up the Linux versions early-on because nobody knew what to do with. The major sellers of netbooks don't stock Linux version in RETAIL at all anymore.

Retail specifically excludes online sales.. it makes them look better.

Reply Parent Score: 2