Linux risks netbooks defeat to Microsoft

Where's the analysis?

Not a good picture, not the best article.

Microsoft have a monopoly on desktops and laptops primarily because of their business practices. For example, to get a Windows licence at a sensible price, manufacturers like Dell and HP have to commit to pay for a Windows licence on every unit they sell, even if it ships without a Microsoft OS.

Does the article tell us whether the same monopolistic business practice applies to PDAs, netbooks, appliances, set top boxes, etc? No it doesn't. Does it point out that it was Microsoft that ended "choice" in the world of the handheld PC/PDA market? Who remembers the HP Jornada 720? I do. Smaller than a subnote, and given today's technology a modern equivalent could have been an Asus-killer *and* a Nokia-killer. But MS killed the relevant variant of Windows CE, and now Windows Mobile is all they talk about (though Windows CE does still exist if you look hard enough, and are happy with the choice of ARM, ARM, ARM or ARM hardware, rather than ARM, MIPS, etc...).

Instead, the article covers in the depth the whinges of yet another distro supplier (one my 10+ years of Linux-fiddling, from set-top-box to datacentre, have never previously uncovered?). The People's Liberation Front in Life of Brian had nothing on the thousands of fools who argue among themselves for who's got the one true best-for-everyone Linux, without being able to see who the real enemy is.

If you want some Linux coverage with bite, how about digging into how companies like MontaVista and others can make money out of GPL software while not making their GPL-derived software freely available as legally required by the GPL? The "Busybox hall of shame" used to do something like this but eventually gave up (they had a product to ship, and they probably had lawyers calling them too).

Could do better. Fixed in the next major release?

He's right you know.

There are currently no linux based Small and Cheap PC's available on pcworld.co.uk they're all the windows versions.

Hot Dayaam !!

I didn't realize the ball cap wearing, mullet topped NASCAR lovin' boys (and gals) had such clout in the market.

All they gotta do to fix this broke thang is have Ubuntu associated with chewing tobacco, cheap beer, and pickup trucks and Linux will blow the wheels off the Windows tank as it flies by.

Re: Barrier of entry

Linux is pretty much "turnkey". Windows is much, MUCH further from turnkey. That line is a load of complete bollocks.

What's the problem is that MS sit on propriatory protocols and butt-widening EULA and license costs to make non-MS software unusable:

Exchange: Works with MS blessed closed source apps. And non-MS apps blessed are always late to the game because MS writes the server to fit their other programs and after all the work THEN tells others who pay mucho dinero for blessings how to rewrite their app.

AD: Works with the *correctly versioned* blessed OS.

MSOffice: Obscured format even MS don't understand (but get to take years developing the new version in secret so they can get something that "works" even if they don't understand why). Doesn't even work with other MS apps and barely consistent with the same MS Office version on a different machine.

Sharepoint: Another hook to tie beancounters who get OTHER PEOPLE to write their documents (and reformat again AND AGAIN) into MSOffice. Works with only The Blessed.

Server CAL: Pay for a windows license even if there's no windows. No financial advantage and you get "that configuration is not supported" so lose your "enterprise grade" support contract. Nice.

EULA: Squeal little piggie! May not even be allowed to connect heterogenic systems together.

So for businesses, non-linux is sabotaged from as many directions as MS can manage to make it hard to go non-Windows on *anything*.

For the home market, either your ISP only supports Windows/IE, your bank only supports ActiveX/IE or you have more than one computer so if you've invested in Windows, MS are going to make it hard for you wherever possible.

THESE are the reasons why Linux (and Apple) don't take off: not utility, usability, cost or power. MS already have their dick so far down your throat there's no room for anything and you can't talk loud enough to be heard.

When will OSS types finally realise the truth of this....

OSS in itself means Jack to end users outside the 0.05% of people to whom it's the be all and end all. And it's that 0.05% of people that are the public face of Linux.

As I type, I can feel the red mist starting to decend, but time and time again I see (and read) OSS "advocates" banging on about how preferable OSS is, for so many reasons, before completely missing the point that, to any market of any size it's completely unusable on the desktop - untidy, picky and, worst of all, inconsistent in operation. Reliable it may be, but if in practice that means that it'll confuse me every time in exactly the same way then reliability is a moot point.

These same types then sneer that those that don't understand why all that's far less important than the "danger" or using a closed source OS or App and finally to complete their unintentional self-parody pass some lamer than lame comment that emacs users are complete w@nkers, or such like...

It makes me so, so cross, because Microsoft have no right to own any market, their software isn't great, it isn't robust, but they focus on marketing it and delivering in as best they can. They get away with substandard delivery for two reasons:

1. Steve Jobs is quite happy where he is thanks very much

2. The OSS community is far happier comparing and categorising navel fluff than acutally delivering a consumer (and some would say enterprise too) desktop

Now that might just be a failure on the part of "the community" to engage with the market in the correct way, but for the most part I think it's just the lack of a critical mass of OSS fans that actually have the sense to understand the point.

Small factor machines won't be bought by hobbiest users who are moistening up at the thought of learning how to use a Shell. They'll be bought by people actually wanting to be productive, and the Linux Desktop currently (and probably never) doesn't come close to cutting it.

"But it's free as in beer" is just a hopeless message, a laudable one, but hopeless as a tool to win hearts and minds from the windows world.

So guys, a few requests...

Could we have a single standard desktop environment? One that people can develop to style for? So Apps work in a consistent manner?

How about say 3 or 4 key applications in each genre that compete with their Win/OSX counterparts rather than dozens of alpha stage packages?

How about targeting to reduce the instances of forced use of the Shell?

And there's the rub, OSS advocates will read my requests in horror - unthinkable, heracy!

Without those things Linux will remain in the Comms room. Which is a pity, because there, where it has all the tools it needs it excels.

And that of course it why Desktop Linux will still be "right around the corner" in another 10 years and why Linux devs will remain the very definition of busy fools.

Lintards never learn

Lintards and Unitards will never get it.

After 30 years of Unix/Linux failure they are undaunted in maintaining the same old brain damaged philosophy that perpetrated the initial failure.

If Linux can't make any headway when it's up against Vista then what does that say about it ever becoming something other than a 30 year long running gagg?

Ahahahahahahahah

My last experience with Linux was installing Ubuntu 6.whatever.

It pestered me for several days to update the OS. And finally when I gave it permission, the updates Cacked all over the OS.

F.L.U.S.H

Linux, the never ready for prime time OS.

Vendicar Decarian

Inaccurate statements

The statement:

"From a general operating system perspective - there's still a lot of packages to download"

Is flat wrong.

I have Fedora Core 5 installed on my Dell M60.

GIMP - free photoshop like image editor - included.

Firefox - Explorer equiv - included.

C++ compiler/debugger - included.

OpenOffice - included.

**This is not the complete list of what is included. Just do a custom install and select everything to find out.

With Windows, I would have had to buy and install the OS, followed by Photoshop, Visual Studio, MS Office. With FC5, it was all in one distro.

On a side note: The power management on FC5 seems to work better than the power management on Windows when running battery only. My notebook's battery lasted longer on a flight when I was running FC5 than windows.

I think the "Anonymous Coward" at the first posting slot, is correctly stating the real reason. It doesn't cost anything additional for the vendors to supply a notebook with Linux.. unless Microsoft is requiring all have Windows installed as part of their 'bargain'.

It's the Channel, stupid

Useability is not a barrier, it's a red herring. If useability was an issue, we'd all be using Macs.

How do you install MS Office on MS Windows? (The simplified version)

1. Search for an online vendor, choose one

2. Look at the licensing options.

3. Spend an hour or two figuring out the best and cheapest out of a dozen or so licensing options.

4. Get out your credit card.

5. Purchase from online store (a multi-step process in itself).

6. Wait for a couple of days.

7. Open box, insert disk.

8. Install software.

9. Enter 365-digit "license key" to "activate" the software (should Microsoft deign to allow it.)

10. Reboot

11. Go out and earn the $500+ that Visa is gonna bill you next month.

12. Use software

How to install OpenOffice on Linux? (In full)

1. Type "yum install openoffice"

2. Use software.

Windows: 12 steps (at least!), 2 days

Linux: 2 steps, half an hour.

Now tell me again how Linux suffers from poor useability.

The REAL barrier is the sales channel. Getting them to sell Linux devices

would involve CHANGE and they don't like that. Channel sales people are bottom feeders, they won't put any effort in. If they can't find the SKU inside a minute, they won't bother.

Stay on the path, follow the crowd, don't stand out, don't make waves.

Should they sell Windows and the standard add-ons at 10% margin?

Or should they sell Linux and make 100% margin on helpdesk and services?

Oh, no. That's too hard. They'll stick with the 10% they know. W*nkers.

Windows is NOT easier to use, it's just more familiar.

Now bugger aff and gie us peace.

Joke Alert? The channel is a joke.

@Charles

"For Linux, the only way you'll get an average end-user to accept your product is to make it "turnkey" simple: turnkey as in you turn it on and it goes with no intervention on the user's part"

From the perspective of someone who had to install Windows and Ubuntu OSs, Ubuntu is easier to install and maintain/upgrade... everything the average user needs is already there, and there's a centralized update that covers every one of your programs. As a bonus, I don't have to restart my PC every time I download an update, an XP "feature" which for some reason seriously bothers me. I don't see how it could get any simpler than that, barring the OS that can read users' minds.

Oh, and hey.

I wasn't even thinking here. See my last post. Here's the quote I'm replying to:

"From a general operating system perspective - there's still a lot of packages to download. That's not something you are going to see my mom use," Mann said bluntly. "Until it gets to the point where it's drop-dead simple or devices lock down functionality, you aren't going to see much uptake among consumers."

Pick, say, Dell, OK? Multi-million dollar company. You order a system with Windows, they send you a blank computer and a Windows install disc, right?

Uh-uh.

They probably have a special DEPARTMENT of people who spend all their time generating installed Windows images, generating recovery discs, checking to make sure all the drivers work, and so on. (Not saying they don't make mistakes, just suggesting that somebody is doing that as their job. Full-time. Probably several somebodies.)

OK, let's assume for a moment that some company (like Dell) gets serious about Linux. Are they going to hand you a blank computer and an install disc? No, they're going to pre-install Linux for you. All those packages that Mann bluntly said you have to download? Well, like what? Give me an example.

There's no reason Dell can't generate install images for Linux that includes all the functionality of a Windows machine, including a virus scanner and a firewall if you really want. (Oh, and, um, a free Office suite.)

Why assume that Dell MUST only ship the default install, and that it will require massive package downloads? Oh, patches, yeah. But Windows needs that too, so there's no difference there.

(I just installed ClamAV. I admit that it took an extra click and typing in my password more than I said in my last post. Mea culpa. But it took about 30 seconds to start the install. And that's on a REALLY slow old laptop.)

So: assuming Mom is your average user, she needs web, e-mail, maybe IM, maybe Office, maybe a printer, maybe a reader for PDF files. OK, the printers are tricky, though God knows why, but that's a rant for another time. So load it up with installed drivers for all the printers you're currently selling.

It's NOT THAT HARD, people. I really wish people would stop assuming that Microsoft somehow has a monopoly on usability.

Plenty of time

"too many packages to download" on a pre-installed Linux box? Amanfrommars is more coherent.

For years, manufacturers would not pre-install linux. Now that there reviews of Linux machines, distributors will not sell them. So what if it takes another few years for distributors to give Linux machines an equal place on their websites. The market will still be there and Microsoft will still be losing market capitalisation.

@Charles: End users do not want a giant product library. They may want a few specific things and get pushed into Windows because of one of them. If someone wanted a really enormous software library, they would use Linux. As the article says: there are too many packages to download. Even Microsoft have caught on to the fact that people are not making enough software for Vista for them to claim there is a giant product library - hence all the news that Microsoft are failing to get free software programmers to develop for Vista.

Half right...

Maybe not on pcworld.co.uk but I've just come home with a new Linux Acer Aspire One that I bought in the shop itself. :-)

(Having said that I'm about to spend a diverting afternoon putting Ubuntu on it anyway, which I suppose is partly the problem...)

Not enough money in it

Unlike Windows, Linux doesn't require £100 worth of add-on software to get up and running. Retailers rely on this to stay in business.

Also consumers don't mind paying for software. Being able to walk into a shop or order a piece of boxed software and a manual , something that you know will work (because you have Windows version 'X') is much better than using some obscure command (aptget) to install some piece of half-baked ammature software (let's face it, a lot of it is..!) that might or might not work, and may not be compatible with your work PC. Apart from Mozilla and Netbeans, I can't think of much open source that rivals proprietary alternatives. Open Office is certainly not as good as MS Office.

Despite it's flaws, Windows works and it's a defacto. This is better than 30% of people using Mac, 40% using Windows and the other 30% using various Linux distributions.

Companies don't mind paying either. Even £30 grand a year for all their software that they know will work. For them it's like an employee that works 365 days a year, and never phones in sick. Bargain.

Who cares?

I don't care if "Linux dominates the desktop" or "Linux dominates the PDA/subnotebook" as it certainly dominates my desktop and my Nokia N800.

I use Linux exclusively at work at home because I Need To Get Shit Done and Windows always craps out when I depend on it.

I honestly don't give a damn if anyone else uses Linux, or Windows, or Mac or whatever.

If I could lay my hands on a Linux Netbook ...

I'd buy it, but here they have only Windows equipped ones.

Billy because he's behind it

Very right

Have been selling Eee's ourselves, and ok...nice bits of kit and all that. And for the simple note taking and web use utterly brillient. But Joe public do have a tendancy to cringe away from what they do not know. Everyone slightly techy who plays with one, loves it, yet Joe public it's a big scary new world which most shy away from.

The second problem is one which the Linux community wouldn't want to solve though, and that is one of uniformity. Show Joe public two different netbooks and they get utterly lost as why aren't they both the same OS. For Joe public who gets utterly confused on something as simple as a USB flash drive, all the different distro's is yet another confusing factor. Until (if) the day the different distro's can come together to make one common uniform release (can't see it ever occur) the variety will be one of the factors which limits Joe publics take up.

I'm a litte confused

"From a general operating system perspective - there's still a lot of packages to download. That's not something you are going to see my mom use," Mann said bluntly. "Until it gets to the point where it's drop-dead simple or devices lock down functionality, you aren't going to see much uptake among consumers."

Let's see. Suppose I've gone completely insane and want to replace, say, Lookout Excess with an E-mail client that, say, doesn't go looking for ways to infect the machine. Simple, yes? Just Google for E-mail programs and sort through the crap until I find one that's a) free and b) does what I want. (Note: last time I did that, there was no such thing. I ended up buying a copy of Pocomail.)

Then I run around looking for their download page -- usually simple, but not always, depending -- download the thing. Then go through the install process.

OK, not that hard.

OK, let's check that function in Ubuntu. I pick Ubuntu because I'm reasonably familiar with it and it's probably the most popular at the moment. Well, let's see... first of all, it ships with an E-mail client already, but so does Windows. IIRC it's Evolution. But I don't like Evolution. So I click Applications, Add/Remove, type "mail client" into the search box, and a few seconds later I have a list. I have to read the descriptions and maybe do a little research if that's not enough, but I have a list of e-mail clients to work from. Now I happen to like Claws Mail, having already spent some time doing the research, so I tick the check box and click "Apply Changes". Voila, in a few minutes I have my mail client installed.

It's actually rather convenient to use the repository. But apparently his mom finds it easier to search on the 'web.

Of course, maybe I don't like any of the choices in the repository, in which case I need to -- dare I suggest it? -- search the 'web, so maybe I'm no better off. But Windows doesn't give you the choice.

And chances are Mom would rather stick with Outlook, and Sonny there isn't going to rock the boat by, say, installing something less vulnerable. But you see my point -- an awful lot of the programs you are likely to want or need are a few clicks away and can be installed automatically.

And Ubuntu comes with an E-mail client, web client, office suite, games, calendar, and so on by default. Does Windows come with all that? Well, mostly, except the office suite. You either have to pay for Microsoft Office or download OpenOffice (or StarOffice) and install them yourself.

But pay no attention to the man behind the curtain, he's not important.

For your average "Mom" user, once installed competently, a modern desktop Linux should be as easy to use as Windows. Admittedly if you want something not available via the repository you may have to do some work to install it, whereas Windows installers are usually pretty straightforward.

So it's going to depend a lot on a lot of factors. But I object to the assertion that a) if you run a new Linux install you automatically have to install a lot of packages (which ones?) and b) the implied assertion that it's easier to do in Windows, all the time.

Updates and patches? Nearly automatic in Ubuntu. It tells you when there are updates ready. One click to start the updater, another to apply changes, a third time to shut it down when it's finished, and the only time you have to reboot is if it's something like a kernel patch. Windows? I don't know about Vista, but I always have to spend several minutes of my first XP install setting up the Automatic Updates, Firewall, and Virus scanner settings, along with setting the thing up not to keep pestering me if I don't have them set the way Microsoft thinks I should. Fortunately I've done it enough times to be able to go through it quickly, but will Mom know how to do that? Ubuntu comes installed with the updater already set up the way I like it. Let me know when updates are available, and let me decide when I want to apply them.

It's not as one-sided as it used to be, pal. Wake up and smell the coffee.

Am I the only one...

... who cannot resist pronouncing "gOS" like "DOS" rather than "gee - oh - es"?

Linux has no chance

While Microsoft is PAYING vendors to ship Windows in preference to Linux

http://www.freesoftwaremagazine.com/columns/more_evidence_microsoft_tying_up_the_asus_eeepc

Microsoft truly are an evil empire.

My PC clueless wife loves Ubuntu

Well, not to be sexist in any way whatsoever, but my wife despite her relatively young years never somehow got to grips with PCs or using them. A few years ago she learned how to use Outlook Express, also firefox, then more recently Skype. She could never work out how to print things, save, etc etc. A fear of computing probably, for whatever reasons.

Well, after several problems with XP SP3 completely f**** things up on my network and making XP home and XP prfessional not play with each other (a bad attempt by Microshaft to get punters to upgrade to Vista), and decided to stop arsing around and set up a dual boot with Ubuntu 8.04 on it, as default.

Well it's like she suddenly discovered America. She loves the simplicity, logicality and aesthetics of Ubuntu. Whilst I hate brown, I must admit she is completely right, and more importantly for me to support Ubuntu my work is an ABSOLUTE minimum compared to frigging around endlessly with XP and all the crapware and so-called security packages (of which you need half a dozen to keep you reasonably secure).

Whilst Ubuntu is not brilliant, it certainly is massively competent, and is much easier than MS to work with and support for 80% of things. And that's what it really comes down to, the 80 / 20 rule. MS fails badly, Ubuntu wins clearly. 80% is all most people need, yet the arguemtn always focuses on the nerdy pointless 20% and some of you lot spend 80% of your time tossing around with that 20% crap.

Roll on Ubuntu. Still some way to go, but certainly getting there.

Linux Therapy - inspired, spot on!

Linux Therapy - inspired, spot on!

@Simpson

You seem to have bipolar disorder. Your inane commenting stared off talking about Microsoft and Windows and then you burst out with some hare-brained waffle that seems to be trying to lead someone to think you were on about Linux.

NOTES: AD is a protected secret. As such, Linux ARE NOT ALLOWED TO PLAY. Nothing to do with Linux not asking, nor Linux users asking, not even about MS Windows users demanding they be kept out. Just MS crying about is "innovation" (which seems to be "steal someone else's work and exhaust them in litigation or add bits that, although people shared with me, I'm NOT SHARING BACK").

If you want how MS act when asked nicely if they will play, have a look at the Massachusetts IT department when they asked that MS implement a standard (as in one that anyone is allowed to implement) for Office formats. What did they do?

a) Go home and make up one "kid-on" open spec and demand that be used

b) Slander and libel (using works you never heard in a bible) when the state said "no, that's not a standard"

c) Get the head of the IT department sacked

d) Still not get their own system to work with the standard they created

Lol - there you go Linux people...

Stick your heads in the sands. Preach the same old tired crap.

You can say what you want. You can list it. You can sing it. It doesn't matter. The reality that you choose to ignore is that out of the box, windows is easier to install and, for the most part, easier to use. The moment 'command line' becomes involved, you've lost the race. The moment you have to pick between 5 different desktops, you've lost the race.

Understand - I'm no windows fan. And sorry, comparing the problems Mac has had vs windows doens't cut it. Mac's can say they are better and still lost to marketing/extortion, whatever. A viable consumer linux desktop is barely a toddle in the scheme of computer years - the linux communities biggest problem..is itself. One only has to read the whiny ass posts to see it.

Conan hit the nail on the head - the distro thing is an unmitigated disaster, as far as desktop penetration goes.

In fact, you should all print Conan's post and put it on your walls. Linux might have a chance then.

Has anyone LOOKED at gOS.

It looks like a fisher-price toy ... Its an operating system for kids. They like the oversized flashy icons. And apart from that , you can't really do anything useful with it.

lets see here what an average person uses ( i take my dad who is almost computer illiterate as example.)

If he were to be using linux :

- internet browsing - works (he uses opera which is cross platform)

- write a word document - That would be a no. There is openoffice but that is 'broken'. It cant evenr ead office2007 files.

- make an excel spreadsheet - no again (see above)

- print to his all in one HP printer - sorry no drivers for loonix

- scan and fax with his all in one - no again no drivers.

- Arrange his photos with Photoshop Elements - no again (photoshop doesnt run on loonix)

- sync his smartphone (gps/phone from htc) to the pc - no again

So out of 7 things he does daily or weekly , only one works .... if Linux is the solution , i want the problem back !

Linux is a 'closet' operating systen :

- it eather sits in a closet as a server ( for which it is excellent by the way ! )

- it is glorified by pale skinned , pmply faced kids that hack away at it . They live in what can be described as a 'closet' and never even come in the real world.

As long as the linux community can't get their sh!t together, and :

- Make a distro that 'feels' like 'wind-woes' ( from a user perspective , minus all the crashes and security holes)

- Get rid of 200 different distos each with their own quircks

- Make a unified self deploying installer that works on ALL distros (right now it is horrendous. this installer only works on that distro , this thing requires this and that as prerequisite , which sometimes break other installed programs , because now they need updating too.)

- Stop bickering about vi vs emacs and gnome vs kde in all the forums and blogs, and go write some usefull applications instead of half finished junk like the Gimp ( Oh and please , hire someone to come up with real names. It's 2008 for crying out loud ! 4 letter program names that are abbreviations, and command lines went the way of the dinosaur ... )

- Get some serious software companies on board to write applications (like adobe and microsoft [yes even them ! Microsoft has office for Mac , so they could easily do it for linux] )

If the above can't be done i fear it will remain a closet operating system. Which would be a shame. It's got potential , but t is being held back because of all the inside fighting. And here is a final hint ( aimed At Shuttleworth, who last week or so, caled for yet another graphics desktop ) STOP MAKING MORE GUI's ! We dont; need 400 different graphics desktops and 5 bazillion colour scemes. What we need is working applications !

netbook vs pc

Most of the arguments here miss the point. People buying netbooks accept limited functionality and a high price in return for a small size unit and style. Similar to those who buy Mac's - there are limited numbers of games and apps, but users are happy with the ones that are there and "just work". These are not the same people who upgrade their games machine every couple of years to the highest ghz cpu & gpu on the market.

This is where linux can shine. These units are not very upgradeable so no need to aptget xyz or recompile webcam drivers from source. Games are not high on the agenda beyond solitaire and mahjong. Its a bit of an appliance so the interface can be a different as long as its good, in the same way we don't need a "start button" and a huge list of apps on a mobile phone. As long as the apps (web, email, office productivity and pim) and os are robust and data file formats are easily exchanged there shouldn't be too much of problem.

Given that these are probably secondary devices, cost isn't such an issue for the consumer, but it has to look good (hardware as well as software) and be a status symbol. That means your customer is really aspiring to a Mac Air, not Vista. Unless your cardboard box and hardware is as cool-looking as Apple's, you will struggle.

Certainly there is an opportunity for linux - if that even matters. It probably isn't one for the little chap working in his garage. Its about vast sums of money being spent on hardware styling, packaging design and channel incentives. Its about branding and its the kind of thing Sony might be able to do. It really has precious little to do with the OS or the GUI and even the capabilities of the applications are not the primary factor for this market.

Tux - a cuddly penguin _and_ a great name for a netbook.

Money talks

M$ strikes again with its anti-competitive business practices.

I only read up here nowadays out of interest. This industry sucks massively with innovation and common sense being stifled to meet the needs of the M$ shareholders. I've left the IT profession altogether to do a 'feel good' job and stop banging my head against the wall, supporting crap software that has better equivalents which are being stifled by the bigger boys or held back by the idiotic in-fighting within the open source community.

It's only going to get worse. The Linux, UNIX and UNIX-like operating systems don't stand a chance against the all powerful marketing and ant-competition departments of Redmond. This, despite the Unices of the world powering some of the most mission critical systems around.

But idiots on the desktop will always tip the balance in M$'s favour.

IT has to be the most soul destroying industry there is.

G'night

@vincent himpe

you complain about the name "GNU Image Manipulation Program" with a name like "vincent himpe"????

Bwahahahahahahahahaaa!

@Nick H

"out of the box, windows is easier to install "

You don't even have to install it!!!! It's included "out of the box".

Now, if your computer needs a little TLC which will you do:

a) buy a new one (no reinstallation necessary)

b) reinstall (which is far, far, FAR worse than making a Linux install)

?

Ignorant peasant.

@mark

"And Ford Motor Cars could rule the motorcar industry if they just made the one car, rather than all this "choice" that is so confusing to users"

Comparing the car industry to the PC desktop industry....what complete and utter wank, like comparing apples and oranges.

Re:Turnkey

Well, make your argument to the idiot twonk that said that all that was needed was Linux to be "Turnkey".

Why is "Windows" better? It doesn't look like a window to me. Is it double-glazed? It's a stupid fucking name. Change it, Ballmer!

What? They didn't listen to me??? Well, that's EXACTLY WHY Windows Vista will NEVER take off! Stupid named products, no consideration for users and no turnkey operation!!!

@ He's right you know

@Patrick O'Reilly

"There are currently no linux based Small and Cheap PC's available on pcworld.co.uk they're all the windows versions."

Can only assume you didn't spend too much time looking. The website (and stores) both stock various linux EEEpcs, the original SCC;

http://www.pcworld.co.uk/martprd/store/pcw_page.jsp?BV_SessionID=@@@@0628351352.1218397500@@@@&BV_EngineID=ccdiadeelfhkfemcflgceggdhhmdgmh.0&page=Product&fm=null&sm=null&tm=null&sku=525082&category_oid=

http://www.pcworld.co.uk/martprd/store/pcw_page.jsp?BV_SessionID=@@@@0628351352.1218397500@@@@&BV_EngineID=ccdiadeelfhkfemcflgceggdhhmdgmh.0&page=Product&fm=null&sm=null&tm=null&sku=457074&category_oid=

http://www.pcworld.co.uk/martprd/store/pcw_page.jsp?BV_SessionID=@@@@0628351352.1218397500@@@@&BV_EngineID=ccdiadeelfhkfemcflgceggdhhmdgmh.0&page=Product&fm=null&sm=null&tm=null&sku=305071&category_oid=

http://www.pcworld.co.uk/martprd/store/pcw_page.jsp?BV_SessionID=@@@@0628351352.1218397500@@@@&BV_EngineID=ccdiadeelfhkfemcflgceggdhhmdgmh.0&page=Product&fm=null&sm=null&tm=null&sku=387394&category_oid=

http://www.pcworld.co.uk/martprd/store/pcw_page.jsp?BV_SessionID=@@@@0628351352.1218397500@@@@&BV_EngineID=ccdiadeelfhkfemcflgceggdhhmdgmh.0&page=Product&fm=null&sm=null&tm=null&sku=833570&category_oid=

There are at least 100* more copies of Vista than Ubuntu out there

It really is about time that the linux devotees started asking themselves why they can't give away a free product, at least to all IT professionals who "should know better".

All I want is a stable OS that will give me browsing and applications similar to Dreamweaver and Photoshop. I tried Ubuntu, it had nothing like dreamweaver and the OS ran painfully slowly and kept hanging. I looked around for reasons why but after six hours gave up. I could have persevered, and have no doubt that if I had it would have eventually run at blinding speed. But why should I bother? I was able to reinstall XP in less than an hour and it worked just fine, I never use more than 10% of processor capacity so efficiency isn't an issue. I run thunderbird, firefox and open office as default apps, so have no aversion at all to OSS.

I'm not interested in learning the guts of a PC operating system, any more than I'm interested in the operating system that my washing machine or playstation 3 run on, I just want to switch the bloody thing on and start working just like the washing machine and the PS3. The fact that some anoraks no doubt think that I'm "lame" for giving in so easily does not bother me in the slightest. If linux can't win people like me over it has got sod all chance of success in the open market.

There's no reason why linux has to be so inaccessible, it's just a reflection of the mentality of the people who build it who seem to have no grasp of the needs of the average end user. Without a philosophy based around making it a turnkey solution linux is destined to remain a badge of geekiness and nothing more.