Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Linux To Take Over The Low-End PC Market?

Zonk posted more than 6 years ago | from the penguins-on-the-loose dept.

Linux Business 391

An anonymous reader writes "Desktop Linux has a recent commentary on the inevitable growth of Linux on the cheaper end of the desktop market. According to the article, the availability of under-$500 usable hardware, combined with a free operating system, free desktop office products, and free or cheap 'software as a service' online applications, opens a new market in which Microsoft cannot compete. 'Microsoft will fight this trend tooth and nail. It will cut prices to the point where it'll be bleeding ink on some of its product lines. And Windows XP is going to stick around much longer than Microsoft ever wanted it to. Still, it won't be enough.'"

cancel ×

391 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Linux is shit (0, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21640271)

*BSD is way better.

Mods on crack (-1, Troll)

morgan_greywolf (835522) | more than 6 years ago | (#21640907)

Linux is shit (Score:1, Interesting)
by Anonymous Coward on Monday December 10, @07:19AM (#21640271)
*BSD is way better.
Who the fuck modded this stupid troll up?

Re:Linux is shit (-1, Flamebait)

tryfan (235825) | more than 6 years ago | (#21641069)

> *BSD is way better.

No, it's dying.

Microsoft will not bleed ink (3, Insightful)

Nefarious Wheel (628136) | more than 6 years ago | (#21640279)

Everything Microsoft has on the market pre-Vista has long since been amortized, I think. And I'm not sure ink is what MSFT has in its veins...

Re:Microsoft will not bleed ink (5, Informative)

ciaohound (118419) | more than 6 years ago | (#21640393)

Don't be impressed by the big accounting word ("amortized," in case you missed it). If they're forced into maintaining the XP code base longer than they had planned, those are real expenses.

Re:Microsoft will not bleed ink (3, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21640579)

Not to mention the absolute huge, gargantuan cost of the total image loss the vista disaster has caused micro$oft. They're the best marketeers the Free Software ever could dream up.

It's funny you can download better operating systems for free than what the richest corporation on earth can sell you. Then again, companies aren't there to make products, they're there to make money.

Re:Microsoft will not bleed ink (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21640913)

Just to note, Microsoft isn't the richest corporation on earth. And as it happens, the richest corporation on earth (Walmart) is now selling Linux PCs.

Linux is a rather high-quality OS used for ultra-high-end applications in HPC. Yet millions of people will now perceive it as the low-end. Strange.

Re:Microsoft will not bleed ink (4, Insightful)

morgan_greywolf (835522) | more than 6 years ago | (#21640987)

Linux is a rather high-quality OS used for ultra-high-end applications in HPC. Yet millions of people will now perceive it as the low-end. Strange.
It's actually both of those things. The cool thing about Linux is that it's like the Swiss Army knife of operating systems. It can scale down to the tiniest mobile device with a low end ARM processor up to the fastest supercomputing clusters in the world. You can use it as a low-end desktop OS or as a high-end workstation OS. It can run file server appliance or as a compute cluster for scientific research.

That's the power, innovation, and advantage of open source -- you have the code, the right to modify and distribute it, so you can adopt it for whatever application suits your needs.

Re:Microsoft will not bleed ink (1)

palegray.net (1195047) | more than 6 years ago | (#21640597)

I'm more impressed with the real math (one plus one equals two, in case you missed it); Sure, I'm writing this post from an Ubuntu64 machine, but Microsoft is making more every day from compound interest than I'd wager they'd pay for ten years of coding upkeep for XP...

Re:Microsoft will not bleed ink (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21640775)

The real expense would not be mantaining the XP code base, but changing it in order to be usable/appealing only to those who run smaller systems. The point is: if XP is still around, I mean if there are still software releases and security updates for it, most people will keep using it instead of migrating to Vista even on high end systems. XP now is more stable, more productive, cheaper and supports more hardware. Even if Vista reached XP's level of stability and compatibility, users would still have to buy more hardware or fight against DRM to reach the same productivity/usability level they had before.
IMO, if MS will have to fight Linux invasion of low end machines, it probably will involve some Win 98 resurrection, of course under a different name and a neat gui to make it appear a new product.

Re:Microsoft will not bleed ink (1, Insightful)

rolfc (842110) | more than 6 years ago | (#21640411)

And dont forget that they just make money on Windows and Office, cut of the moneyflow from them and it will go very fast.

Re:Microsoft will not bleed ink (2, Insightful)

jacquesm (154384) | more than 6 years ago | (#21640615)

that's right on the money. I think that the 'big change' will come the day there is a linux distro out there that will have wine installed and functional to the point where it will run office 2003 out of the box. When that's achieved there will be a large amount of people in a position to switch.

All those people complaining about 'not being able to run their games' forget one thing: Computers were not designed to be game playing machines, they were designed as productivity tools. That the gaming market was able to flourish on the back of the roll out of the PC was a side effect, not the main cause. The spreadsheet was and is probably the biggest single 'invention' in the software world, Dan Bricklin did more for the 'gamers' by getting the PC adopted by the millions than any games programmer ever did.

Re:Microsoft will not bleed ink (4, Informative)

Pecisk (688001) | more than 6 years ago | (#21640819)

You meant Ubuntu 7.10? Because it has Wine (installed by several clicks trough Add/Remove...), and it works out of box. Office 2003, World of Warcraft (Yes, I have account, and yes, I play it everyday), uTorrent... You name it.

So Programmers Should Just Work For Free? (-1, Offtopic)

bcharr2 (1046322) | more than 6 years ago | (#21640465)

Yes, Microsoft makes money on its software. I still fail to see why this is a bad thing. Does anyone believe Microsoft should gather several thousand software engineers together and then ask them to work for free?

So what, exactly, is the argument again? Everyone on this planet has a right to be payed for their hard work EXCEPT someone who spends 4 years at a university learning how to develop software? They should work for free, so that their hard work can then be given away for free?

Re:So Programmers Should Just Work For Free? (1)

AvitarX (172628) | more than 6 years ago | (#21640499)

What does your post have to do with the GP?

Re:So Programmers Should Just Work For Free? (4, Funny)

Fred_A (10934) | more than 6 years ago | (#21640585)

Yes, Microsoft makes money on its software. I still fail to see why this is a bad thing. Does anyone believe Microsoft should gather several thousand software engineers together and then ask them to work for free?
I find your bold business ideas to be very interesting.
Please get in touch for implementation details.

sballmer@microsoft.com

Re:So Programmers Should Just Work For Free? (5, Insightful)

module0000 (882745) | more than 6 years ago | (#21640627)

Not all free software is "free" per-say. Look at MySQL, making money while we all use their software. That's just one example, so here are a few more that produce free products while still earning significant income:

Sun Microsystems
Novell
Mozilla Foundation
Spiceworks(a personal favorite)

Re:So Programmers Should Just Work For Free? (5, Insightful)

Sterling Christensen (694675) | more than 6 years ago | (#21640635)

Many slashdotters fail to make any distinction between the honest hard working programmers/researchers who deserve their pay and the not so honest business execs, lawyers, and lobbiests on some of whom Microsoft's bad behavior can be blamed, lumping them all together as a single entity: "M$".

Nobody's hoping to see software engineers starve, it's just easy to get carried away hating Microsoft for all the monopolizing, anti-FOSS, and other damage it's responsible for. Can you really blame the GP for having no sympathy for Microsoft's bottom line?

Re:So Programmers Should Just Work For Free? (5, Insightful)

Gonoff (88518) | more than 6 years ago | (#21640881)

No. I doubt you will find many of us who object to the idea of having money. It is the methods of getting it and the attitudes that MS have that people here may not be happy with.
In a place like /. I am unable to speak for others, so I shall speak for myself.

I don't like the fact that software is sent out before it is ready, just because some manager types want it to be released now.
If I buy clothes, I assume things are made and they didn't just ship me the cloth and expect me to sew it together myself.

When they release a new product, they will tell us all how fantastic it is.
A couple of years later, when it is about ready for use, they drop it and bring out the next item. They then tell us how this fixes the many shortcomings of its precescessor. I am told how bad it was. I know that in a couple of years, I will be told how rubbish this one is too.

Microsoft bears at least some, and perhaps much, of the blame for the mess we are all in with patents and copyrights.
So they think that GPL is socialism and thus theft? I think that Closed source is protectionist racketeering and thus theft.

When they were small and growing, they relied on the fact that lots of people "borrowed" their software. This enabled them to grow. It was profiting from theft.
Now they are in a position of market dominance, they object to what they once relied on. Stealing is wrong, so when people ask me for a dodgy copy of Office, I point them to a free alternative. I object to their hypocrisy, not the fact that they object to people stealing.

If I buy something, I expect to be able to use what I buy. I expect to be able to sell what I buy, when I no longer want it. I do this with books and cars, so why are MS different?

As I started, I don't object to making money. I just object to some methods of extortion and hypocrisy. I work for money and would love to have more. I will not hit people over the head to get it. My basic objection is that they are no longer a software company. They are a protection racket.

Obligatory Futurama Quote (1)

darkvizier (703808) | more than 6 years ago | (#21640807)

Zoidberg: "And while you're under the knife, you could also get an ink pouch to help you escape your enemies."
Professor: "That's the stupidest idea I've ever heard, you imbecile."
Zoidberg: (squirt) "Woopwoopwoopwoop!"

Microsft Remove Vista's Kill Switch (3, Interesting)

Freaky Spook (811861) | more than 6 years ago | (#21640325)


http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=07/12/04/1331246&from=rss [slashdot.org]

Is it any coincidence that Microsoft has done this? Piracy does help them to a certain extent, it pushes their products into markets where people cannot afford them, or just flat out don't want to pay for it, which still ultimatley counts towards their market share.

Re:Microsft Remove Vista's Kill Switch (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21640379)

>Piracy does help them to a certain extent, it pushes their products into markets

and when they can afford the customer will tend to stick with what they know. This is an definite benefit to MS over the long term.

Putting in a kill switch and severe registration processes implies they realise that their income stream is time constrained.

A little off topic (2, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21640347)

but I'd been using OSX heavily for about one year and since then, my usage of linux has dramatically increased. It started with Kubuntu, but got a little tired of it, before finally settling on Fedora 8 just recently. I've completely flicked Windows now. The last legacy for me using Windows was for the casual gaming, but that was gone when I finally got a console (admittedly a 360). I gradually got used to using a terminal, picked a shell that I liked and stuck with it. Forced myself to do everything with the terminal. Eventually, have a little library of scripts that do most of my everyday stuff. I'll never look back. I think the big thing that made it happen was sites like macosxhints that post little snippets of one line shell scripts that users comment on, improve (if possible) and then are easily searchable. Some of the LinuxForums are useful, but I'm yet to find one that is good, and as simple, as the one I mentioned above.

Re:A little off topic (3, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21640447)

If you enjoy scripting, one of the best sites around is Heiner's SHELLdorado. [shelldorado.com]

Re:A little off topic (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21640721)

You can also check out http://www.coolcommands.com/ [coolcommands.com] for Linux and scripts help.

Re:A little off topic (1)

404 Clue Not Found (763556) | more than 6 years ago | (#21640613)

Was it hard switching from the PC to the 360? I've always wanted to -- console gaming is so much simpler and cheaper -- but can't quite get used to using a gamepad for shooters. Did it take you long to switch over (assuming you even play FPSes)?

Piracy & Linux on the desktop (3, Interesting)

BobKagy (25820) | more than 6 years ago | (#21640363)

Previously sales figures for Linux desktops were suspect because of the argument "Well, everybody buying them is just putting a pirated copy of Windows on them anyway." Scanning the article I didn't see anything about piracy...

But recently with activation & continuous authentication, Microsoft has tried to prevent this.

Has Microsoft finally given up its an extra tier of pricing beyond retail and volume? "You'd never give us a cent for Windows? Well, at least pirate it ..."

News that matters? (3, Insightful)

iBod (534920) | more than 6 years ago | (#21640365)

TFA is just a rather poorly informed opinion piece and a lot of wishful thinking.

Since when did this consititute 'news'?

Re:News that matters? (0, Flamebait)

Ed Avis (5917) | more than 6 years ago | (#21640407)

Since Slashdot jumped the shark a few years back. Most of the opinion pieces from Dvorak etc. are poorly informed wishful thinking or trolling. Should Disney buy Apple?

Re:News that matters? (1)

C_L_Lk (1049846) | more than 6 years ago | (#21641043)

I think you have that backwards - Should Apple (M.Cap - 170.12 Billion) buy Disney (M. Cap 62.42 Billion).

Re:News that matters? (1)

saisuman (1041662) | more than 6 years ago | (#21640533)

Since forever? You must be new here.

Re:News that matters? (1)

iBod (534920) | more than 6 years ago | (#21640561)

I know. I know.

Sometimes I just have to say it.

After burners are outlawed. (0, Redundant)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21640369)

People forget that generally speaking in the world the people who want Windows will pay for it and if they're your picturesque 3rd world Romanian villagers with a penchant for stealing that they'll have no moral qualms about finding a few lei on the back of a horse cart to buy a DVD to burn Vista on.

Re:After burners are outlawed. (4, Interesting)

ciaohound (118419) | more than 6 years ago | (#21640433)

"people who want Windows will pay for it"

Yeah, but they probably aren't the low end, now, are they? I think a lot of people are fed up with virus software updates and other fine Windows features. The high end of the market is moving to Mac, and the low end -- at least the more knowledgeable among them -- are moving to Linux. I live near Howard County, Maryland, which has an award-winning public library system. The free internet access is spectacular there; walk in, sit down, start using, no waiting, no library card required. Guess what operating system and applications it uses? And no one complains about it not being Windows.

Re:After burners are outlawed. (1)

digitig (1056110) | more than 6 years ago | (#21640653)

Yeah, but they probably aren't the low end, now, are they?
But if the low end wants to do business with the high end they may have to stay with MS for a while yet. I have customers that insist I deliver using MS Office templates that use macros, so OO.o is not an option. I keep thinking "Oh, I'll use OO.o for my own stuff", but what's the point since I have to have MS Office anyway and I have to be familiar with it?

Re:After burners are outlawed. (0)

aurispector (530273) | more than 6 years ago | (#21640811)

Linux as it stands right now might be perfect for businesses and institutions but it isn't necessarily perfect for the family pc role if it means gaming. The joke about "mommy why doesnt my new computer run my new game" has already been made, but it does illustrate the fact that many people buying pc's for home use are intending the box to be a "family" computer, which includes junior's copy of bioshock. I think a lot of these folks don't really know what they are getting.

The low end pc market is a sweet beginning. At the very least it forces MS to pay attention. At best Linux will finally move into the mainstream.

Apples and oranges (-1, Flamebait)

BadAnalogyGuy (945258) | more than 6 years ago | (#21640373)

Can you compare 100 sub-$500 PC systems running Linux and a single Linux server to a network of high-end PCs running Vista and/or XP with an Exchange server farm to back it up?

If these two setups are really equivalent, then Linux certainly has come a long way since its humble roots.

Something tells me, though, that as far as Linux has come in its time, we're talking about two different beasts here.

Re:Apples and oranges (2, Interesting)

rolfc (842110) | more than 6 years ago | (#21640443)

I wouldn't say that! I would say that the linux-solution would be superior functionality for the money, and probably in absolute functionality as well. An Exchange server farm has a limited featureset compared to a debian-server.

Apples and apples (4, Insightful)

IBBoard (1128019) | more than 6 years ago | (#21640477)

They're comparing Granny Smiths apples to Golden Delicious apples:

Set of computers that can run all required email and office apps (the latest versions) along with a server to support the mail etc, all based on Linux

Vs

Set of computers that can run all required email and office apps (the latest versions) along with a server to support the mail etc, all based on Vista

The only difference is that the base specs required for one is much higher than the other, which is the whole point of the article.

Okay, so it might not be as viable in a huge company where everyone (especially admins) already have Windows training, but for a ~100 person or less SME (Small/Medium Enterprise) then the huge savings on costs would be a boon.

Re:Apples and apples (2, Insightful)

SargentDU (1161355) | more than 6 years ago | (#21640605)

Well, even at the huge company, having to buy new hardware to handle a Vista upgrade vs. using existing hardware with Linux sounds like an enormous cost savings. Linux boxes with KDE is enough like windows XP or earlier to have little learning curve too. The only kicker is a package for coordinating calendars, etc.

Re:Apples and apples (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21640625)

The latest versions? why? most corporations are NOT running office 2007 and most only recently just migrated to office 2003 within the last year. you might work at a place where the IT department is a bunch of guys that run around with reckless abandon installing the latest version of software willy-nilly but the rest of us remember that windows 2000 and office 97 were the standard corporate image up until 2006.

XP and office 2000 are very serviceable. and you can easily run a multi-billion dollar company using that "outdated" software without ANY ill effects. yes I said ANY. Office 2007 gives zero advantages over office 2000. in fact office 2000 tends to have more productivity as the apps open lightning fast compared to all versions after it, have far fewer security holes, and you dont have to retrain your entire staff to use it unlike 2007. Cripes the productivity lost for office 2007 training makes switching to OO.o and Linux look incredibly cheap and easy.

Fools use the latest "software and operating systems" in their company.

SMEs aren't interested in Linux (4, Insightful)

Colin Smith (2679) | more than 6 years ago | (#21640675)

You have it almost exactly backwards. Speaking from bitter experience.

Their costs towards their IT infrastructure simply aren't large enough to worry about license costs. Microsoft already have this market. SMEs simply buy PCs with windows already installed, and use SBS on the back end. Their savings from Linux are in the thousands, not hundreds of thousands or millions. It isn't worth their while to switch. Especially given the fact they can't afford to hire competent admins and so are stuck with whomever is locally available.

Large companies on the other hand, are a completely different kettle of fish. They can save millions by making use of Linux, and that's exactly what they do. The CTO or CIO's may or may not be aware of it but pretty much every large company out there has Linux just about everywhere from file servers to RDBMS servers to web application servers. They can afford to hire competent admins who can run Linux as well as their other Unix systems and who understand the mathematics of I.T. systems.

The market for Linux is not SMEs. I've been there and tried to sell it. The real market for Linux is on the big end. Multinationals, governments etc. They can save vast sums.
 

Re:Apples and oranges (2, Informative)

SharpFang (651121) | more than 6 years ago | (#21640797)

They are not equivalent but that's not entirely the question.
The question is do they provide satisfactory functionality?

Because actually, 100 sub-$200 PC systems running Win98SE would probably work faster and be cheaper in means of TCO, and quite likely provide all the functionality needed as well (with exception of stability and security).

If I need email, office, file sharing and some, get the work done in acceptable comfort, you ask yourself what you need. You may get Vista and $1000 PCs, you can get XP and $500 PCs, or Linux and $300 PCs and the user experience and efficiency of work will be the same. You can get $150 PCs and Win98 too, but the risk of data loss and intrusion is prohibitory, otherwise it would have the work done as well. This way Linux can compete just fine and seems to be the best choice.

OTOH if you need a development environment of 4GB RAM quad-core 4GHZ CPU computers for all the 100 desktops, the price difference between OSes and their efficiency overhead becomes much lower. Linux doesn't fare just as well here, especially if you need to run WINE to have some essential apps working. If you need a high-end hardware not because it's required to run the OS, but because your application requires it, choice of the OS should be guided by other factors than just price of purchase or TCO. Although not disqualified here (by far), Linux doesn't have the upper hand of "vastly cheaper setup to get the same things done" here.

poppycock. (-1, Troll)

apodyopsis (1048476) | more than 6 years ago | (#21640375)

in chorus now....

"oh no it won't"..."oh yes it will"... time for the inevitable and entirely predictable arguments.

Seriously though, if you think linux will make any inroads to low cost computing you are totally crackers, the moment it looks like it will then MS will crush it like a fly. It will be lost cost Windows, Vista "ultra basic" or something on those lines. MS will simply not permit it, why would they?

Re:poppycock. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21640637)

Like in the server space? :p Times do change, so there may be a future with more major players on the desktop.

Perceived delay (4, Interesting)

Pope Raymond Lama (57277) | more than 6 years ago | (#21640387)

In my coutry we have had GNU/Linux in low end PC's at mainstream outlets for sometime now.Most of these are replaced by an ilegal copy of windows on the first days of use, but still some stick around.That is just part of the vicious circle desktop systems are inserted due to the monopoly exerced by Microsoft, and certainly the few GNUs remaining do contribute for a slow market share shift.

The main problem, IMHO, is not even Joe Newbie who re-formats his GNU PC. It is the mentality of PC vendors itself who do not even configure their GNU/Linuxes correctly on their hardware.

The other day I saw a notebook at a shop with a misconfigured video driver, logged in X11 with a purplish tint and horizontal garbage lines everywhere. Another example: a local LinuxMagazine review a couple of years ago found out that in a Hwlet Packard low end desktop system pre-configured with GNU/Linux (indeed!), OpenOficce would take a full 3 minutes to start!! Because they had configured a 128MB system with a 1GB Swap.

Re:Perceived delay (2, Funny)

BadAnalogyGuy (945258) | more than 6 years ago | (#21640399)

In my coutry we have had GNU/Linux in low end PC's

Are users really interested in Debian, though? Wouldn't they be better off with something a little less religious, like Ubuntu?

GNU/Linux vs. uClinux (1)

tepples (727027) | more than 6 years ago | (#21640567)

In my coutry we have had GNU/Linux in low end PC's
Are users really interested in Debian, though? Wouldn't they be better off with something a little less religious, like Ubuntu?
Ubuntu is based on Debian. Besides, almost every desktop Linux distro is technically GNU/Linux because it uses Bash, Coreutils, and glibc, unlike "uClinux" distros that use BusyBox and uClibc or Newlib.

Re:Perceived delay (2, Insightful)

jimicus (737525) | more than 6 years ago | (#21640723)

OpenOficce would take a full 3 minutes to start!! Because they had configured a 128MB system with a 1GB Swap.

You didn't really need to add "with a 1GB swap" there.

Sure, Linux will run happily on much older hardware. Doesn't mean you can usefully do any typical desktop-type tasks on it - unless you're prepared to forego GUI-based office applications.

Re:Perceived delay (1)

civilizedINTENSITY (45686) | more than 6 years ago | (#21641075)

My preferred spreadsheet (Gnumeric) just opened in less than 3 seconds. Abiword took 5 seconds. OOo Calc took 15 seconds. (OOo Word took 3 seconds. Probably still had parts of OOo in memory from Calc.) One of the reasons I wiped XP from this machine was that I couldn't stand the long startup times for OOo under windows. This is on a Centrino Duo w/2GB RAM, bought refurbished from Frys a year ago.

Re:Perceived delay (1)

andre.ramaciotti (1053592) | more than 6 years ago | (#21640725)

By your email, I imagine we're from the same country. There are serious problems, not only with the hardware, but the 'distros' that come with them, distros nobody's ever heard about. There are lots of options to choose from: Ubuntu, Fedora, Mandriva... there's no reason to make a new one.

Nicest device at present (3, Interesting)

LiquidCoooled (634315) | more than 6 years ago | (#21640389)

The nicest device I can see at present is the Nokia N810 [engadget.com] which runs the Maemo [maemo.org] (linux) OS.

High resolution touch screen (800*480), hardware keyboard, gps and customisable - ~$450

This looks dreamy (and its on my xmas list)

Re:Nicest device at present (1)

rindeee (530084) | more than 6 years ago | (#21640581)

It is 'dreamy'. I've got a slew of 800/810s that are heavily modded (lots of OS mods, 3rd party apps like OpenVNP client, SIP client, blah blah blah) all connecting to a mothership (Sun 2100 running CentOS and all the server side crap like Asterisk, OpenFire, etc.). I dare anyone to find a device that can be so useful(note I said can be...given multiple units and someone who is willing to take the time to extend their usefulness beyond un-boxing it). The 810 with a hardware thumb board is a massive step up from the 800. Not that the 800 isn't great, but the lack of physical keyboard is a real downer. Anyway, I'm using these as part of a bigger system including a bunch of Macs (converging the VTC capabilities of both) and what not. It's far from a complete system at this point, but it's shaping up nicely. I couldn't be happier with Nokia's product. Well worth the money.

Can be (1)

DingerX (847589) | more than 6 years ago | (#21640701)

Aye, that's the thing about the n8x0: it still needs a little work to do what you want it to. But it continually surprises me.

If I may ask, what sort of application do you use a "slew" of 8-balls for? I've only got two on my home network.

Re:Nicest device at present (1)

blackest_k (761565) | more than 6 years ago | (#21640583)

You could save a fair bit by going for the N800, I quite like the N810 but I don't like the micro sd cards, i already have several Gb of sd cards which i use with my phone and PSP (twin sd card adapter from play.com) and PDA

It looks like host usb is going to be a reality on both the N800 and N810, why nokia haven't included it yet I don't know. I think i would be pleased with the N800 but the eee701 has its merits too.

It would make a perfect review comparing the N series nokia's the EEE701 and why not the OLPC laptop and perhaps a modded PSP running homebrew.

Re:Nicest device at present (2, Funny)

the_humeister (922869) | more than 6 years ago | (#21640707)

Nice, but does it play Ogg???

Re:Nicest device at present (1)

R_Dorothy (1096635) | more than 6 years ago | (#21640863)

Yes [maemo.org] .

Re:Nicest device at present (1)

zotz (3951) | more than 6 years ago | (#21641009)

You know, I was beginning to seriously getting one of those for myself and then I run into this:

'Nokia Claims Ogg Format is "Proprietary"'

See:

http://yro.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=07/12/09/2045200 [slashdot.org]

From the pdf:

"Nokia's recommendation for Codec Choices for normative reference by W3C
Considering our requirements, we believe the widespread use of technically
competitive, but not necessarily "free" open standards, such as H.264 for video and
AAC for audio, would serve the community best. This would be fully aligned with the
business model dominant in the digital video ecosystem."

and

"Anything beyond that, including a W3C-lead standardization of a "free" codec, or the
active endorsement of proprietary technology such as Ogg, ..., by W3C, is, in our
opinion, not helpful for the co-existence of the two ecosystems (web and video), and
therefore not our choice."

So they are cool with non-gratis "open standards" like AAC, but Ogg is proprietary. I need a better explanation if they are not do disappoint me greatly.

all the best,

drew

Annoyed (4, Insightful)

Gigiya (1022729) | more than 6 years ago | (#21640395)

I realize I should expect no less from an article on desktoplinux.com, but I'm extremely annoyed by comments like "Still, it won't be enough." I can just imagine a typical Linux fanboy laughing diabolically while typing it. While the article has valid points, comments like that are wishful thinking and immature conjecture.

Great, we need a vista killer (3, Insightful)

zakezuke (229119) | more than 6 years ago | (#21640397)

My biggest complaint wasn't the fact that Vista was a bug ridden piece of filth the likes of which made windows ME look good, but the fact they have Home Basic, Home Premium, Business, and Ultimate... oh and Enterprise too that no bugger seems to be using. An OS which will cost you $100 to $400.

I'm not going to say $100 isn't reasonable for the OS that runs your PC. It's a fair price. But the version game is unacceptable. So hopefully some of the linux based PCs will drive down prices of MS's OS down to reasonable and sane levels.

 

Re:Great, we need a vista killer (1, Funny)

iBod (534920) | more than 6 years ago | (#21640431)

You've got one - it's called Vista!

Re:Great, we need a vista killer (2, Insightful)

drsmithy (35869) | more than 6 years ago | (#21640503)

But the version game is unacceptable.

Uh, why ? It's not like price discrimination is an uncommon market phenomenon...

Re:Great, we need a vista killer (1)

MMC Monster (602931) | more than 6 years ago | (#21640955)

Because there are aspects that the general public believes should be in a general purpose (Home) OS that are only available in the premium and "Ultimate" versions of the OS.

I understand that the bar is being raised every year on what the home user wants to do on his computer (a hell of a lot more now than 10 years ago), but that doesn't mean that $100 should buy an OS that can only do things that an OS 10 years ago could do. Especially since hardware can do so much more now (for the same price) than it could 10 years ago.

Re:Great, we need a vista killer (4, Insightful)

SharpFang (651121) | more than 6 years ago | (#21641049)

It's not uncommon, but it isn't fair (or, taking more objective standpoint: "is perceived unfair by a major percentage of customers") - you're paying 400% the base price to get like 40% extra functionality. Besides, people don't perceive the high-end versions as extended variants of the low-end base system, but the low-end versions as purposedly crippled high-end base.

This still works as profit source in the short run, but it annoys the customer base, undermines loyalty, encourages seeking alternatives. And once alternatives are found, you lose in the long run. You squeeze $50 for Home Premium from an user today, and lose the whole sale and the customer entirely tomorrow.

Except the analysis hardly ever takes into account reasons why people switch to other OS, and even if it does, it comes to entirely wrong conclusions (they are cheaper, they have better marketing) while your own faults - trying to squeeze last penny off the customer - are hardly ever taken into account as the 'real evil'. People hate being cheated and perceive this as cheating. And it doesn't matter you don't and your marketing people will explain to your CEO that it really isn't cheating. For people, it is, and people will hate you for that. And will jump the ship at the first opportunity... or steal from the thieves, not a crime to many.

Re:Great, we need a vista killer (1)

FudRucker (866063) | more than 6 years ago | (#21640523)

agrees with ibod...

we dont need a vista killer, vista pretty much fell on its face right out of the gate, vista committed suicide...

Re:Great, we need a vista killer (1)

Mellotron (1195847) | more than 6 years ago | (#21640657)

LMAO I am pretty sure ReactOS 0.3 alpha version could be considered as a vista killer.

This may not be good for Linux. (2, Interesting)

jellomizer (103300) | more than 6 years ago | (#21640409)

While there is nothing to do to stop it. Having Linux run on Low End systems may not be good overall.
When most people buy a Low End System they are not happy with it...
Packard Bell, Compaq, eMachines... They buy them because they though they are a good deal, or just because they don't have the money for a good System. They are not happy with it. Then throw a OS that people can't buy new software in the stores or the latest or even older games on it. Hardware problems causing the OS to Crash... While saving Windows for the high end systems which have better working hardware and more secure drivers Windows will run rock solid on those.
No it is not Linux's fault but putting linux on the Low end to try to get into the Desktop Market is a poor way to go. Linux already has a knitch in the servers, and if people work half as hard in the imbedded market Linux can get a good foothold there too. Right now there are 2 strong competitors in the Desktop Market Windows and Macs. And for Desktop use Linux isn't close they are still about 6 years behind. (Which is an improvement 5 years ago they were 10 years behind)

Re:This may not be good for Linux. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21640651)

> Right now there are 2 strong competitors in the Desktop Market Windows and Macs.

Though Macs arent really "competing" since they only cover the high end (pricewise) market. Since the majority of computer users does not consider products from the high end market, regardless of the OS, Macs do not compete on the part of the market, where most of the possible customers are.

> And for Desktop use Linux isn't close they are still about 6 years behind.

Only regarding device drivers and special commercial software, but that is nothing Linux developers and distributors can do much about. Device driver support will improve, but slowly. In other terms desktop Linux has long ago surpassed Windows in ease of use, security and newbie friendliness. The only thing Linux lacks nowadays, compared with Apple, is major commercial software support.

Re:This may not be good for Linux. (1)

night_flyer (453866) | more than 6 years ago | (#21640867)

"In other terms desktop Linux has long ago surpassed Windows in ease of use, security and newbie friendliness."

Surpassed? maybe in security, but ease of use? you have got to be joking...

Re:This may not be good for Linux. (4, Insightful)

Lumpy (12016) | more than 6 years ago | (#21640691)

you are almost completely incorrect. Everyone that buys an E-machine or other discount budget pc is happy with them. It plays the silly card games they want, it goes online, it let's them type a letter. Aunt gertie is not going to be entering any UT3 deathmatches soon or getting herself a WoW addiction going. She is happy with that Pentuim III 500 she bought back in 1999 it does everything she wants and windows 98 works fine for her. (in face she get's less infections as most new viruses will not run on a non unicode machine)

If I upgrade her to A old thrown away G3 mac and she can do everything she did before, she will STILL be happy.

That is what the $200.00 walmart PC is for... Aunt Gertie, Grandma Fluffles, and creepy uncle Fred. I have supported far more happy low power pc owners than I have seen happy high power pc owners.

Funny part, most "high power" pc owners think sony Vaio = high end. sad reality is that it's low end just trendy.

Low end pc's are for the bulk of the computer users. They do not play games, they don't run bit torrent and watch movies on their computer. They check email, write and print out letters, do online banking and play solitaire.

For them, these computers are typically 300-400% faster than the 10 year old monster they are using now.

Offtopic but WHAT? (1)

Nursie (632944) | more than 6 years ago | (#21640943)

Vaio laptops are small, light and powerful. Sure they cost a premium for the looks and weight, but the Vaio SZ range is shit-hot.

I almost completely agree with you, other than that one weird throwaway comment.

Re:This may not be good for Linux. (1)

AlXtreme (223728) | more than 6 years ago | (#21640727)

They buy them because they though they are a good deal, or just because they don't have the money for a good System. They are not happy with it. Then throw a OS that people can't buy new software in the stores or the latest or even older games on it.

Totally agree with you here. If you look at the companies using Linux on the low-end of the market (Asus with the Eee PC for instance) they are marketing them as appliances, not computers. Naturally all hell will break out once Jane Doe wants to run the latest version of the Sims, or Timmy's new printer doesn't work. This assumes Jane and Timmy think they are getting a computer, and they will regardless. I don't want to be on the other side of that support-call.

The low-end machines however aren't marketed at all as Linux. Look at the Walmart-PC, or the Eee PC. /. naturally gets a geekgasm about the whole deal, but only in the technical details do you see such machines actually run Linux. These Linux machines have a great niche market as a second/kids/wife computer or laptop and in the case of a backlash Walmart or Asus will suffer, not Linux. So it's not all bad, and perhaps one or more of these computers will catch on and lead to more players in the field.

My personal opinion is that Linux-on-the-desktop is currently best suited for small/medium-sized corporate environments, as 95% of the employees have a fixed set of tasks their computer should be able to do. In home environments people expect their old and new games to just work, together with the printer they just picked up at Best Buy. Managing expectations only works to a degree.

Re:This may not be good for Linux. (2, Insightful)

BESTouff (531293) | more than 6 years ago | (#21640897)

While there is nothing to do to stop it. Having Linux run on Low End systems may not be good overall.

Wrong. That's how Windows got its foothold: it started taking the lower-end of the workstation market. In fact that's often how a newcomer wins into any market: by being cheaper.
I think Microsoft should be afraid.

LINUX / security (-1, Flamebait)

Grampaw Willie (631616) | more than 6 years ago | (#21640419)

all that LINUX needs to do is to is to provide EFFECTIVE security

just cool it with the promiscuous running of anything and everything and set up the idea that only authorized programs are allowed.

Ms. Windows would be toast in a year

and good riddance

Re:LINUX / security (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21640439)

Linux's security for home users on low end pcs is basically they I cant figure out how to use it security.

No one cares about low end pcs running linux and selling them to people who shop walmart, enough said.

Freedom (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21640429)

"'Microsoft will fight this trend tooth and nail."

And those who purchase their products are helping them.

Mr. Linux user who enjoys the Halo he bought for his xbox can stop his anti-redmond rants, he may as well be kissing the flag logo as he hands over the cash and takes a virtual dump on the open source movement.

So you want people to switch to Linux? Convince companies to ditch DirectX and develop games without it for all platforms. Whether you're a console or PC gamer it doesn't matter, if you purchase Microsoft products you're not helping Linux, unless you truly believe Novell and Microsoft are a good thing, in which case you would do well to remember Corel and Microsoft and all the sappy happy working together smell-the-roses shit stories that ended up with Corel Linux going down the shitter only to return later under a different name and experience a beastly patent agreement nibble with guess who.

Go ahead, continue to buy their products and laugh about patent threats, you're probably one of those users who will jump ship to BSD until the patent nostrils come sniffing around for that next. After Compiz became popular I knew the big corp would come into the picture. "They said it couldn't be done!" Disgusting.

Why not, Redmond wants you to buy $$$$ hardware (1)

gelfling (6534) | more than 6 years ago | (#21640449)

Microsoft lives or dies by your upgrades. It's not a casual accident that the term Wintel exists. More hardware more software, the crank turns you spend money and on and on it goes. But today's sub $500 PC is state of the art circa 2004-5. Back then I invested a lot of time in looking into the lowest hardware supportable for the then current latest desktop Linux installations. Starting from a Pentium 1 400Mhz with 112MB RAM I discovered that the stated prereqs of a Pentium 2 500Mhz and 256MB RAM was the absolute rockbottom. A 1.2Ghz machine with 512MBRAM was really where you wanted to be. In other words a Pentium 3. I have one of these running today and while no barn burner its perfectly servicable. I will probably replace it with a Celeron D, double the RAM and it will run fine for several more years. In other words a machine that I could have bought new from eMachines 2-3 years ago will then run fine for another 2-3 years. By comparison XPSP2 will run fine on that old P-3 machine albeit it's good to strip out most of the XP look and feel interface widgets. Running it to look like W2K makes it snappy enough. Of course running iTunes on anything makes it crawl. But how long will Redmond keep XPSP2 around? Another year? After 2008 what options will you have? What will you be able to do with that Via C7 Samuel? Not much. So perhaps there's a lot to believe in the statement that Linux will own the low end of the market soon. What about embedded systems in cars? I think so.

Re:Why not, Redmond wants you to buy $$$$ hardware (1)

iBod (534920) | more than 6 years ago | (#21640519)

Firstly, Microsoft doesn't live or die by one thing. They are a mega-corporation with diverse income streams and assets. Whatever some people think here on ./, MS isn't going to 'die' any time soon - so get over it.

Secondly you misunderstand a fundamental driver in the market: people (individuals and businesses) actually WANT to upgrade! Shocking isn't it?

We live in a culture where continuous 'improvement' and 'economic growth' are the goals. Making do with what you have is definitely not the message.

People want newer, shinier stuff. It makes them feel good. It makes them feel successful and that they belong.

I'm no more immune from this trend than anyone else - even though I sometimes feel a pang of shame and think I should be more noble.

That's why I'm sitting in front of a 24" iMac instead of the 266Mhz Pentium box I had 10 years ago (that and the fact that it probably wouldn't still be working and none of the software I use would even run on it).

Re:Why not, Redmond wants you to buy $$$$ hardware (1)

Socguy (933973) | more than 6 years ago | (#21640981)

Firstly, Microsoft doesn't live or die by one thing. They are a mega-corporation with diverse income streams and assets. Whatever some people think here on ./, MS isn't going to 'die' any time soon - so get over it.
While they doubtlessly have diverse assets, I would argue that Microsoft has only 2 revenue streams of any consequence.
1. Windows.
2. Office.
This is the nucleus that supports the vast MS empire.
But you're right, MS is not going to die anytime soon.

Secondly you misunderstand a fundamental driver in the market: people (individuals and businesses) actually WANT to upgrade! Shocking isn't it? We live in a culture where continuous 'improvement' and 'economic growth' are the goals. Making do with what you have is definitely not the message. People want newer, shinier stuff. It makes them feel good. It makes them feel successful and that they belong.
Ya, That's pretty much right. It's really sad. I know these people. They see an ad for the latest and they're all over it. Most of them don't even have a clue about what they've purchased. They just need to be the first to own it. I don't really know why this is, but it's a phenomenon that I've witnessed again and again. I work with a fellow who knows nothing about computers. Literally, all he does is email, play chess on Yahoo games, and occasionally visit U-tube. He can't even operate a scroll wheel on the mouse, and all typing is hunt and peck. Everyone around him was getting a laptop, so he felt that he should get one too. He asked me what he should look for. I told him to buy the cheapest one he could get his hands on. He thought that sounded good. Then He came back with a $2500 machine and was proud of it, 'cause it was the best'.

Well, I had to give him that: it WAS the best.
S.

I'd like this to be true, but ... (3, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21640469)

Op-ed from a pro Linux site isn't exactly an unbiased "news" source. Yes desktop Linux is going to become a bit more common, yes we'll see more entry level boxes shipping with it ... but MS' virtual monopoly on the OS market is not going to suddenly go away. If this becomes a serious threat to them they'll release something like XP starter edition for next to nothing, or even at a net income to the vendor after paid crapware pre-installs are added on. At that point Linux loses the main advantage that most people (initially at least) care about : that it's free-as-in-beer.

Re:I'd like this to be true, but ... (1)

SL Baur (19540) | more than 6 years ago | (#21640859)

At that point Linux loses the main advantage that most people (initially at least) care about : that it's free-as-in-beer.
And that's where there's a disconnect to the market place. Marketing a free-as-in-beer product requires something else to make a profit.

What makes Linux interesting to me (and why I've contributed so much time and code to various projects over the years) is that it is a system that cannot ever be taken away from me. Ever. Various distros can flourish and then die when their corporate sponsors go away or become insane as in the case of Caldera, but the code doesn't die and something else will take its place or you can keep upgrading it yourself since you have all the source code.

The free-as-in-beer aspect of Linux is not something I find interesting. I certainly do not mind paying for Linux distros - making a working distro is hard work. Even when I worked for Turbolinux, I bought the CDs of the stuff we produced. There are many ways a convicted monopolist with a huge entrenched market share can keep it as the AC points out. In free countries, one can walk into a random brick & mortar computer store and purchase a notebook or desktop computer with Linux preinstalled. Whether or not that ever becomes true in the United States is no longer something I care about.

SJVN hit a nerve (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21640473)

Take a look at the frantic hand waving and tossing of straw men left and right by the MS shills. Its hilarious.

whois paying for the 'presidentshill' hypenosys (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21640497)

a full 11 months until the next crook takes over. why must there be constant 'coverage' of all the petty squabbling? maybe to take the focus off of 'stuff that really matters'?

as for the lot of the felonious stock markup FraUD softwar gangsters, good riddance. they should be in prisons, as opposed to wasting yOUR resources with the same costly 24/7 payper liesense hypenosys they spew, whilst pursuing a variety of other wasteful endeavors.

we're intending for the corepirate nazi execrable (the REAL life0cidal terrorists) to give up/fail even further, in attempting to control the 'weather'.

http://video.google.com/videosearch?hl=en&q=video+cloud+spraying [google.com]

consult with/trust in yOUR creators. providing more than enough of everything for everyone (without any distracting/spiritdead personal gain motives), whilst badtolling unprecedented evile, using an unlimited supply of newclear power, since/until forever. see you there?

The arguement... (2, Interesting)

MMC Monster (602931) | more than 6 years ago | (#21640529)

In the grand /. tradition, I haven't RTFA. However, I guess that the argument is that as the price of hardware comes down, the price of commercial software makes up a bigger part of the total expenditure.

Customers will balk when they realize that they use the computer for just internet and simple word processing and maybe some multimedia.

The problem is, in the real world Linux isn't even on the radar of most individuals. If they did hear about it, it's probably something from a few years ago and not about one of the modern distributions.

The solution: Whoever sells these cheap machines has to advertise. It should be simple enough. A short TV add showing wireless internet and desktop productivity apps for a $200 machine like the OLPC would sell them like hotcakes. Especially when you say that the price includes full versions of all the software. (You can even have two people discuss during the ad about how they hate trial versions that came with their last computer, and comparing it to amarok, k3b, openoffice.org, and digikam. Especially mention seamless integration with mp3 players and digital cameras.)

Re:The arguement... (1)

Anne Thwacks (531696) | more than 6 years ago | (#21640617)

mention seamless integration

Not unless you are selling panty-hoes.

The wiords you want are "it just works!"

Re:The arguement... (1)

CSMatt (1175471) | more than 6 years ago | (#21640997)

Except that saying "it just works" when whatever "it" is could very well not work would be false advertising.

no comments (1)

nerdyalien (1182659) | more than 6 years ago | (#21640595)

as I earned bad karma for just being too frank about linux last time :)

Linux will be seen as "cheap" (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21640621)

As much as I love and use Linux on my machines, I cannot help but think that this is the wrong way to go. One thing that Microsoft has been good at (as well as Alienware and Apple) is showing that people believe that price is an indicator of quality in the personal computer business. That is, unless they're a business, they will perceive a lack of quality in computers that are cheaper or will only buy these items for somebody else and not themselves, say a child.

While I think the spread of Linux is a good thing, people are going to see a sub-$500 computer with the cheapest, third rate, break-in-an-instant parts and think "That thur Lin-ucks broke my com-pu-tar". I'd rather have Linux targeting the high-end systems, the gaming machines. That is where the big win is and where people are most likely to be influenced.

Hardcore gamers upgrade their machines every 18 months to keep up with the games. Get the next-generation game engines ported to Linux along with the multiplayer servers and keep the 3D drivers coming, and you'll find that you'll have gamers moving to the platform that doesn't slow them down for the benefit of copy protection, that allows their game to run at full framerate, that doesn't require that they have a "genuine" copy, and allows them to tweak their computer to their hearts desire. This may compromize RMS's wet dream where every computer gives him the Verilog source to the microprocessor along with a reacharound, but there are significant gains and hearts and minds to win. Think of this as getting the masses to a free platform. You can move them to free software and get them writing free software when they have the right platform to hack on.

Or keep trying to peddle crap. It's the same strategy we've been trying for the last 10 years. It's bound to work this time!

Re:Linux will be seen as "cheap" (1)

iBod (534920) | more than 6 years ago | (#21640689)

>>the gaming machines. That is where the big win is and where people are most likely to be influenced.

Developing modern, mainstream games is a hugely expensive process - akin to making a movie.

What, exactly, is going to persuade a major game developer to develop a title for a highly marginal platform (Linux) when it already has to cover Windows PCs and the console market?

Re:Linux will be seen as "cheap" (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21640903)

The key here is to go for the engine developers, not the game developers. If you hand a game developer an engine and say "this engine runs on Linux, Windows, Mac OS X, and *BSD", all they have to do is target their assets at the engine and they're suddenly cross-platform without having to do any other work. It's that simple. The biggest expense in developing a game is the assets. The engine, even now, is not the greatest expense. If you get the engine cross-platform, the game will be cross-platform.

Tragedy of the Commons (4, Interesting)

mark99 (459508) | more than 6 years ago | (#21640659)

MS can create a cheap version of Vista or XP with very little effort. And because they are earning *something* on it, I suspect in the long run it will get better support than anything that can be had for free. Commercial version of Linux are of course another story.

I think Linux cannot succeed on price alone. It has to be enough better that people will invest the time needed to change their habits - which today drive them straight to Windows.

Prediction... (3, Interesting)

itsdapead (734413) | more than 6 years ago | (#21640667)

These devices aren't going to directly hit MS's products - what they could do is cost them mindshare and threaten the future of their monopoly.

Products like the eeePC occupy a precarious niche just below cheap "regular" laptops - put a bigger screen and a CD drive on them and there'll be a cheaper Dell laptop - so while they may be successful for their manufacturers they're not going to make a big dent in PC sales. People will buy them as "extra" machines for kids or as spare "take anywhere" machines (don't buy a £2000 ultra-portable - buy a £1000 desktop or large screen laptop plus an eeePC for when you don't need the power or don't want to risk carrying your main machine). But if they find that, out-of-the-box, they can connect to web and EMAIL and open most of their documents with these things called "Firefox", "Thunderbird" and "Open Office" then they might have their eyes opened to other possibilities.

Remember, MS's real monopoly is Office, not Windows. How many lUsers have you met who, when asked what version of windows they are running, respond with their Office version? However, I was in a school (in England) recently and saw a big (homemade) poster on the wall saying "Haven't got MS Office at home? Have you tried the free alternative from www.OpenOffice.org?" - so there is hope for the world.

If I were MS right now I'd be busily developing something like "Vista Lite Edition" that could be sold on a memory stick alongside eeePCs and the like for about $25, probably including a stripped down office. ISTR they did do something similar in some countries but it was perceived as "Windows - crippled edition". It might be an easier sell if it was linked to built-to-a-price "appropriate technology" hardware.

Cannot or will not? (3, Insightful)

Bright Apollo (988736) | more than 6 years ago | (#21640681)

I think there's a potential goldmine for Microsoft just looming off to the side.

If Microsoft made Windows 2000 Pro available for $20 per copy in 2008, then shuttered it; and Windows XP Pro/64 Pro for $40 in 2008, then 2009, then shuttered it, imagine how easy it would be for many 'cloned' copies to get right. Now imagine how easy it would be for Microsoft to compete against Linux in the low-end market. Microsoft would be able to say -- which Linux cannot -- "Our OS works with Microsoft Office natively, including Exchange". The real cash cow is untouched, i.e. Office, and Microsoft finally gets into the "sell the blades, not the razor" business once and for all.

-BA

Microsoft is like the MAFIAA (1)

guruevi (827432) | more than 6 years ago | (#21640749)

They can only compete through shady business practices, bribery and plain old crookery unless they change their ways. They (still) have enough money to stop business for a few years, work on a lightweight kernel (you know, those that run on any x86 with 16MB RAM) and some good software practices that makes it more open (maybe not open source, but at least more transparent) and more within the legal constraints of today's anti-trust requirements. As soon as anyone can build another shell around Windows we'd be far better off since there are a lot of smart people outside of Microsoft.

I hate Microsoft, not because of their products (although they could do better) but because of the way they treat their CUSTOMERS (we're not consumers) and partners and the way they treat the market ever since they gained major market share. They have to change though, they had it for the last 12 years, they can be happy. If Microsoft doesn't pull an Apple they will go the way of SCO or if they're lucky IBM.

Not logical (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21640779)

All Microsoft would have to do is to release a Windows Free Edition. Efter all, there are a lot of things that is included with XP (Pro at least) that home users do not need, but are essential to any serious business. Kerberos, message queuing and distributed transaktion handling; to name a few. Businesses get a lot of value for money with XP; things that are not available or simply complete crap on Linux. But I guess MS shareholders doesn't want a free striped down and very fast Windows version. (My stripped XP is way way faster than Xubuntu for example, and I got accelerated graphics in Linux.)

I installed Xubuntu for my father, as it does what he needs and I do not have to worry about security as much. However, I still use XP, OS X and the *BSD for everything. They are more powerful and has things that Linux simply cannot offer, and in the case of BSD, it's also free.

et tu ? (1)

nfractal (1039722) | more than 6 years ago | (#21640873)

even selling Vista at $40 apiece ??

Linux fanboy hypocrisy (2, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21640937)

More /. hypocrisy.

You guys always talk of Linux taking over, but at the same time demand that govt. tie Microsoft down in monopoly regulations. If Linux is going to take over, then Windows is not a monopoly, by definition. Which is it slashdot? Is Windows doomed and therefore not a monopoly or is it the other way around?

Linux as "poor man's operating system"? (2, Interesting)

wvmarle (1070040) | more than 6 years ago | (#21641005)

If Linux becomes the O/S of choice for cheap hardware, then I hope GNU/Linux will not get the name of "poor man's operating system". While it may be free of charge, it is not is a label the software deserves. Oh well Lindows or whatever it's now could be "poor man's Windows", they deserve that I guess. Seems to be the market they're targeting anyways.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?