Asus EEE --Is it really good news for FOSS and Linux?

Discussion in 'NZ Computing' started by impossible, Apr 5, 2008.

  1. impossible

    impossible Guest

    Nothing throws Linux ideologues for a loop more than a little commercial
    success. Great, so people are buying Linux-powered Eee's. But are they
    buying them for the "right" reasons?

    http://www.geekzone.co.nz/foobar/4708

    "When people buy the EEE PC, they don't choose Linux. That's just what it
    comes with. Just like most people don't care about the OS on their mobile
    phone. Or the OS in the on-board computer of their modern car...."

    So what, you might ask? After all, the Eee "just works" and people are
    buying it. What could possibly be wrong with that? Well, lots, actually,
    because the Eee "sets a precedence (sic) and constitutes a signal to other
    device manufacturers that the consumer is happily willing to accept Linux as
    an OS for ultra portables - as long as they don't have to actually deal with
    it, as long as the wonderful freedom and flexibility of Linux is largely
    hidden."

    Market share is all well and good, so the ideologues grumble now, but if
    users fail to become dedicated converts who will swear off all things
    proprietary, then it's all for naught. They might as well be using Windows
    or OsX.

    http://itmanagement.earthweb.com/osrc/article.php/3733286

    "...you only have to glance at the user forums of major distributions like
    Fedora or Ubuntu to see that more users are concerned with getting
    proprietary video drivers installed than with having control of their own
    computers. After all, the proprietary drivers are available at no cost, just
    like the ethically free ones, so why not use them, especially when they are
    technologically more advanced? I've even seen some users castigate Fedora
    for not providing the proprietary drivers in its repositories.
    "Never mind that to do so would be against Fedora's policy of including only
    free software -- with such users, the short term convenience of the
    technically superior proprietary drivers outweighs the ethos of freedom.
    Many of the complainers do not even appear to have heard of free software
    ideals. Nor do they bother listening when those ideals are raised.

    "Admittedly, some might be using the proprietary drivers as a temporary
    expedience until improved free ones are released. Still, the general
    attitude suggests that they have no understanding of the long-term
    considerations whatsoever. Perhaps they might help swell the number of
    GNU/Linux users enough to encourage the manufacturers to release free
    software drivers, but I suspect that their real contribution is only to
    ensure the manufacturers that they can continue with their usual practices.
    For all the long-term good such users have done themselves or others, they
    might as well have stayed on Windows."

    So maybe instead of a "Welcome" screen when users boot up the Eee, there
    should be a mandatory "History of GNU" video, followed by an FSF essay exam,
    and (for those who receive a pass) a Pledge of Allegiance recorded via web
    cam and uploaded directly to YouTube. Yeah, that should get market share
    under control.
    impossible, Apr 5, 2008
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. impossible

    Lodi Guest

    >On Sun, 06 Apr 2008 09:20:38 +1200, whoisthis wrote:

    > The thing is, I have no objections to paying for software, after all I
    > pay for everything else I have in my home.
    >
    > Somewhere, some how, some one must end up paying the programmers unless
    > of course there is an expectation that they will work for free. However
    > I pay my plumber, I pay my builder, I pay my mechanic, dentist, doctor,
    > etc etc so I am happy to pay the programmer by buying the software.


    But would you pay for a mechanic/dentist/doctor if just down the road
    there were other mechanics/dentists/doctors who offered the same services
    for free. One of the many things that I appreciate about using Linux is
    not having to fork out cash for software.

    It seems that "open source for Windows" software is also increasing,
    which is great. But when I was a Windows user (a few years ago) I
    distinctly remember having to pay £49 for Partition Magic 6 cos there was
    no other alternative. And borrowing a friends Office97 cos it cost £89 to
    purchase new. I'm so glad those days are gone.

    Regards
    Lodi
    Lodi, Apr 5, 2008
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Re: Asus Eee -- Is it really good news for FOSS and Linux?

    In article <ft905t$tfe$>, Lodi did write:

    > One of the many things that I appreciate about using Linux is
    > not having to fork out cash for software.


    I was at Dick Smith yesterday, helping a friend choose a camera. During the
    hour we were in the shop, I couldn't help noticing the laptop stand; the
    little Eee on the end was attracting about as much attention as all the
    other machines put together. And it was the Linux version; the Dimdows
    version was nowhere to be seen.
    Lawrence D'Oliveiro, Apr 6, 2008
    #3
  4. impossible

    impossible Guest

    "Lodi" <> wrote in message news:ft905t$tfe$...
    > >On Sun, 06 Apr 2008 09:20:38 +1200, whoisthis wrote:

    >
    >> The thing is, I have no objections to paying for software, after all I
    >> pay for everything else I have in my home.
    >>
    >> Somewhere, some how, some one must end up paying the programmers unless
    >> of course there is an expectation that they will work for free. However
    >> I pay my plumber, I pay my builder, I pay my mechanic, dentist, doctor,
    >> etc etc so I am happy to pay the programmer by buying the software.

    >
    > But would you pay for a mechanic/dentist/doctor if just down the road
    > there were other mechanics/dentists/doctors who offered the same services
    > for free.


    I've never actually run across a situation like that myself. But I will tell
    that I'd be a little suspicious about the "free" offers, so I'd be carefully
    checking credentials and references, and then I'd be carefully querying each
    of the vendors to determine whether or not "the same" for one was really
    "the same" for another. Wouldn't you? That just seems like the common sense
    thing to do.

    > One of the many things that I appreciate about using Linux is
    > not having to fork out cash for software.
    >


    Sure, but just because you''re not forking out cash doesn't mean you're not
    incurring an expense. Think of all the time you've invested in learning how
    Linux works -- What's that worth to you? Enthusiasts, of course, tend not
    to value their free time very highly in that sense, because figuring Linux
    out is what they live for. But most consumers have other passions and
    priorities, and so they tend to base their willingness to pay for software
    on some kind of time/money tradeoff.

    > It seems that "open source for Windows" software is also increasing,
    > which is great. But when I was a Windows user (a few years ago) I
    > distinctly remember having to pay £49 for Partition Magic 6 cos there was
    > no other alternative. And borrowing a friends Office97 cos it cost £89 to
    > purchase new. I'm so glad those days are gone.
    >


    Free software tools have been available for Windows since as long as I can
    remember, so if you really didn't think that Partition Magic or Office 97
    were worth the money, then you should have looked to one of the public
    domain, hobbyist, freeware, or shareware vendors for a solution. In any
    case, I don't know think the future of Linux lies in catering to people with
    no money.
    impossible, Apr 6, 2008
    #4
  5. impossible

    peterwn Guest

    On Apr 6, 4:07 am, "impossible" <> wrote:
    > Nothing throws Linux ideologues for a loop more than a little commercial
    > success. Great, so people are buying Linux-powered Eee's. But are they
    > buying them for the "right" reasons?
    >


    Hi Brett
    peterwn, Apr 6, 2008
    #5
  6. Re: Asus Eee -- Is it really good news for FOSS and Linux?

    In article <>, whoisthis did
    write:

    > In article <ft92ak$2me$>,
    > Lawrence D'Oliveiro <_zealand> wrote:
    >>
    >> I was at Dick Smith yesterday, helping a friend choose a camera. During
    >> the hour we were in the shop, I couldn't help noticing the laptop stand;
    >> the little Eee on the end was attracting about as much attention as all
    >> the other machines put together. And it was the Linux version; the
    >> Dimdows version was nowhere to be seen.

    >
    > who cares how many people were looking at it.... LOTS of people were
    > looking at the MacBook Air too in shops I have been in...


    Funny, isn't it, how I didn't mention the MacBook Air, and yet you did.

    In theory, the two machines are worlds apart, and shouldn't be seen as
    competing at all. And yet Apple, like Microsoft, is looking nervously over
    its shoulder, isn't it, at this fast-growing new category of machines where
    it simply doesn't know how to compete.
    Lawrence D'Oliveiro, Apr 6, 2008
    #6
  7. impossible

    Lodi Guest

    >On Sun, 06 Apr 2008 13:16:58 +1200, whoisthis wrote:

    > How much charity work do you do ?
    > How much of your skills do you give to others for free ?


    I'm not too sure of the relevance of your question but I do very little
    charity work.

    If someone asks for my help I'm more than willing to muck in be it hard
    disk data recovery or mowing their lawns. But I don't see myself as a
    charity worker. Someone standing on corners collecting for Daffodil Day
    is a charity worker. I've nothing but admiration for them.

    Can you explain your question :)

    Lodi
    Lodi, Apr 6, 2008
    #7
  8. Re: Asus Eee -- Is it really good news for FOSS and Linux?

    In <ft9amd$7l1$> Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
    > In article <>, whoisthis
    > did write:
    >
    >> In article <ft92ak$2me$>,
    >> Lawrence D'Oliveiro <_zealand> wrote:
    >>>
    >>> I was at Dick Smith yesterday, helping a friend choose a camera.
    >>> During the hour we were in the shop, I couldn't help noticing the
    >>> laptop stand; the little Eee on the end was attracting about as much
    >>> attention as all the other machines put together. And it was the
    >>> Linux version; the Dimdows version was nowhere to be seen.

    >>
    >> who cares how many people were looking at it.... LOTS of people were
    >> looking at the MacBook Air too in shops I have been in...

    >
    > Funny, isn't it, how I didn't mention the MacBook Air, and yet you did.
    >
    > In theory, the two machines are worlds apart, and shouldn't be seen as
    > competing at all. And yet Apple, like Microsoft, is looking nervously
    > over its shoulder, isn't it, at this fast-growing new category of
    > machines where it simply doesn't know how to compete.


    Yes, poor poor Apple. They're doomed! If only they knew how to make a
    small computer. Ideally it would be about 8 mm thick and could fit in a
    pocket, have a multi-touch screen so it didn't need a keyboard and
    trackpad, have at least 8 GB of flash storage, and Wi-Fi for network
    access. And it would need to run OS X and retail for, say, $449.

    If only they could do that they'd be able to sell millions of the things!

    Oh, wait...

    http://www.apple.com/nz/ipodtouch/specs.html

    --
    Roger Johnstone, Invercargill, New Zealand -> http://roger.geek.nz
    Roger Johnstone, Apr 6, 2008
    #8
  9. impossible

    Lodi Guest

    >On Sun, 06 Apr 2008 00:31:25 +0000, impossible wrote:

    >> "Lodi" <> wrote in message news:ft905t$tfe$...
    >> >On Sun, 06 Apr 2008 09:20:38 +1200, whoisthis wrote:

    >>
    >>> The thing is, I have no objections to paying for software, after all I
    >>> pay for everything else I have in my home.
    >>>
    >>> Somewhere, some how, some one must end up paying the programmers
    >>> unless of course there is an expectation that they will work for free.
    >>> However I pay my plumber, I pay my builder, I pay my mechanic,
    >>> dentist, doctor, etc etc so I am happy to pay the programmer by buying
    >>> the software.

    >>
    >> But would you pay for a mechanic/dentist/doctor if just down the road
    >> there were other mechanics/dentists/doctors who offered the same
    >> services for free.

    >
    > I've never actually run across a situation like that myself. But I will
    > tell that I'd be a little suspicious about the "free" offers, so I'd be
    > carefully checking credentials and references, and then I'd be carefully
    > querying each of the vendors to determine whether or not "the same" for
    > one was really "the same" for another. Wouldn't you? That just seems
    > like the common sense thing to do.
    >


    If it was a mechanic offering services for free then of course I'd be
    wary. But you're the one who made the initial comparison between software
    programmers and plumbers/builders/etc

    I do try out the various software offerings in the repositories and OSS
    projects site when looking for new software. Some are inadequate, some
    are perfect for the job. All are offered without charge.

    >> One of the many things that I appreciate about using Linux is not
    >> having to fork out cash for software.
    >>
    >>

    > Sure, but just because you''re not forking out cash doesn't mean you're
    > not incurring an expense. Think of all the time you've invested in
    > learning how Linux works -- What's that worth to you? Enthusiasts, of
    > course, tend not to value their free time very highly in that sense,
    > because figuring Linux out is what they live for. But most consumers
    > have other passions and priorities, and so they tend to base their
    > willingness to pay for software on some kind of time/money tradeoff.
    >


    If my neighbour pays $200 for Office 2007 and I pay $0 for Open Office
    we're both going to have to take the time to learn how to use our new
    software.

    I'm assuming, never having used Office 2007, that both programmes do
    pretty much the same job. For me, choosing between OpenOffice and Office
    2007 at $200 is a no-brainer. As is QTParted over Partition Magic. As is
    GIMP over Photoshop. As is K3B over Nero etc.....(For the record, I don't
    use OpenOffice. I prefer AbiWord and Gnumeric. Both suit me perfectly.
    Both are open source. Both cost $0.00)


    >> It seems that "open source for Windows" software is also increasing,
    >> which is great. But when I was a Windows user (a few years ago) I
    >> distinctly remember having to pay 49 for Partition Magic 6 cos there
    >> was no other alternative. And borrowing a friends Office97 cos it cost
    >> 89 to purchase new. I'm so glad those days are gone.
    >>
    >>

    > Free software tools have been available for Windows since as long as I
    > can remember, so if you really didn't think that Partition Magic or
    > Office 97 were worth the money, then you should have looked to one of
    > the public domain, hobbyist, freeware, or shareware vendors for a
    > solution.


    I agree that freeware for Windows has been around for forever but IMO was
    never of the quality of the commercially available products. You said
    "hobbyists and shareware" which pretty much summed it up nicely circa
    1995-2002. So I paid the price asked.

    The high quality of current "freeware" means there is very little need
    for a Joe Public home user like me to spend money on software.

    > In any case, I don't know think the future of Linux lies in
    > catering to people with no money.


    Believe me when I say that I am not the future of Linux. I have no idea
    what the future of Linux is. But I could be the future of MicroSoft as
    I've already got four of my family into using Ubuntu plus open source
    software and leaving MS and commercial software.

    Regards
    Lodi
    Lodi, Apr 6, 2008
    #9
  10. impossible

    Lodi Guest

    Re: Asus Eee -- Is it really good news for FOSS and Linux?

    >On Sun, 06 Apr 2008 14:25:30 +1200, Bobs wrote:

    >
    > You can buy a cheap laptop with a gig of ram, a celeron processor, and a
    > 80gig hard drive for about $800. You can format it and put on Linux if
    > you so prefer. Don't understand the point myself to get an EEE for only
    > $200 less when the hardware specs are something from 2001.


    Agreed. Last month I spent $635 at Dick Smith for the above specs with
    Ubuntu pre-installed.

    Lodi
    Lodi, Apr 6, 2008
    #10
  11. Re: Asus Eee -- Is it really good news for FOSS and Linux?

    In article <47f83517$>, Bobs did write:

    > You can buy a cheap laptop with a gig of ram, a celeron processor, and a
    > 80gig hard drive for about $800. You can format it and put on Linux if
    > you so prefer. Don't understand the point myself to get an EEE for only
    > $200 less when the hardware specs are something from 2001.


    That's fine if you want to pay over 30% more. But not everyone does.
    Lawrence D'Oliveiro, Apr 6, 2008
    #11
  12. Re: Asus Eee -- Is it really good news for FOSS and Linux?

    In article <>, Roger Johnstone did
    write:

    > In <ft9amd$7l1$> Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
    >
    >> In article <>, whoisthis
    >> did write:
    >>
    >>> who cares how many people were looking at it.... LOTS of people were
    >>> looking at the MacBook Air too in shops I have been in...

    >>
    >> Funny, isn't it, how I didn't mention the MacBook Air, and yet you did.
    >>
    >> In theory, the two machines are worlds apart, and shouldn't be seen as
    >> competing at all. And yet Apple, like Microsoft, is looking nervously
    >> over its shoulder, isn't it, at this fast-growing new category of
    >> machines where it simply doesn't know how to compete.

    >
    > Yes, poor poor Apple. They're doomed! If only they knew how to make a
    > small computer. Ideally it would be about 8 mm thick and could fit in a
    > pocket, have a multi-touch screen so it didn't need a keyboard and
    > trackpad, have at least 8 GB of flash storage, and Wi-Fi for network
    > access. And it would need to run OS X and retail for, say, $449.


    But it isn't really proper OS X, is it? Can it run the usual OS X
    applications, like Office 2004/2008 or Photoshop? No it can't. It's really
    only "OS X" in name, nothing more.

    The Eee can run a full office suite, among lots of other regular PC apps.
    Lawrence D'Oliveiro, Apr 6, 2008
    #12
  13. impossible

    impossible Guest

    "Lodi" <> wrote in message news:ft9guo$i3b$...
    > >On Sun, 06 Apr 2008 00:31:25 +0000, impossible wrote:

    >
    >>> "Lodi" <> wrote in message news:ft905t$tfe$...

    >
    >
    >>> One of the many things that I appreciate about using Linux is not
    >>> having to fork out cash for software.
    >>>
    >>>

    >> Sure, but just because you''re not forking out cash doesn't mean you're
    >> not incurring an expense. Think of all the time you've invested in
    >> learning how Linux works -- What's that worth to you? Enthusiasts, of
    >> course, tend not to value their free time very highly in that sense,
    >> because figuring Linux out is what they live for. But most consumers
    >> have other passions and priorities, and so they tend to base their
    >> willingness to pay for software on some kind of time/money tradeoff.
    >>

    >
    > If my neighbour pays $200 for Office 2007 and I pay $0 for Open Office
    > we're both going to have to take the time to learn how to use our new
    > software.
    >
    > I'm assuming, never having used Office 2007, that both programmes do
    > pretty much the same job. For me, choosing between OpenOffice and Office
    > 2007 at $200 is a no-brainer. As is QTParted over Partition Magic. As is
    > GIMP over Photoshop. As is K3B over Nero etc.....(For the record, I don't
    > use OpenOffice. I prefer AbiWord and Gnumeric. Both suit me perfectly.
    > Both are open source. Both cost $0.00)
    >


    Good for you. But 98% of the market prefers other tools and is willing to
    pay to get them. Go figure!

    >
    >>> It seems that "open source for Windows" software is also increasing,
    >>> which is great. But when I was a Windows user (a few years ago) I
    >>> distinctly remember having to pay 49 for Partition Magic 6 cos there
    >>> was no other alternative. And borrowing a friends Office97 cos it cost
    >>> 89 to purchase new. I'm so glad those days are gone.
    >>>
    >>>

    >> Free software tools have been available for Windows since as long as I
    >> can remember, so if you really didn't think that Partition Magic or
    >> Office 97 were worth the money, then you should have looked to one of
    >> the public domain, hobbyist, freeware, or shareware vendors for a
    >> solution.

    >
    > I agree that freeware for Windows has been around for forever but IMO was
    > never of the quality of the commercially available products. You said
    > "hobbyists and shareware" which pretty much summed it up nicely circa
    > 1995-2002. So I paid the price asked.
    >
    > The high quality of current "freeware" means there is very little need
    > for a Joe Public home user like me to spend money on software.
    >


    Most users clearly don't agree. And I dare say it's precisely that sort of
    smug self-satisfaction with the status quo in free software that doesn't
    bode well for the future. Why do you think Asus is so eager now to get
    Windows installed on its new Eee's? Because, outside the age 6-12 group that
    was Asus's initial target, consumers expect to actually be able to do
    something useful with their hardware gadgets besides boot an operating
    system and open a browser.

    >> In any case, I don't know think the future of Linux lies in
    >> catering to people with no money.

    >
    > Believe me when I say that I am not the future of Linux. I have no idea
    > what the future of Linux is. But I could be the future of MicroSoft as
    > I've already got four of my family into using Ubuntu plus open source
    > software and leaving MS and commercial software.


    As I said, there's been a demand for cheap/free software for as long as I
    can remember. Enjoy. But that will not alter the business strategy of
    Microsoft, Adobe, IBM, Sun, or anyone else one bit.
    impossible, Apr 6, 2008
    #13
  14. impossible

    impossible Guest

    "David Goodwin" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > On Sat, 05 Apr 2008 16:07:23 GMT, "impossible" <>
    > wrote:
    >
    >>Nothing throws Linux ideologues for a loop more than a little commercial
    >>success. Great, so people are buying Linux-powered Eee's. But are they
    >>buying them for the "right" reasons?
    >>
    >>http://www.geekzone.co.nz/foobar/4708
    >>
    >>"When people buy the EEE PC, they don't choose Linux. That's just what it
    >>comes with. Just like most people don't care about the OS on their mobile
    >>phone. Or the OS in the on-board computer of their modern car...."
    >>
    >>So what, you might ask? After all, the Eee "just works" and people are
    >>buying it. What could possibly be wrong with that? Well, lots, actually,
    >>because the Eee "sets a precedence (sic) and constitutes a signal to other
    >>device manufacturers that the consumer is happily willing to accept Linux
    >>as
    >>an OS for ultra portables - as long as they don't have to actually deal
    >>with
    >>it, as long as the wonderful freedom and flexibility of Linux is largely
    >>hidden."
    >>
    >>Market share is all well and good, so the ideologues grumble now, but if
    >>users fail to become dedicated converts who will swear off all things
    >>proprietary, then it's all for naught. They might as well be using Windows
    >>or OsX.
    >>
    >>http://itmanagement.earthweb.com/osrc/article.php/3733286
    >>
    >>"...you only have to glance at the user forums of major distributions like
    >>Fedora or Ubuntu to see that more users are concerned with getting
    >>proprietary video drivers installed than with having control of their own
    >>computers. After all, the proprietary drivers are available at no cost,
    >>just
    >>like the ethically free ones, so why not use them, especially when they
    >>are
    >>technologically more advanced? I've even seen some users castigate Fedora
    >>for not providing the proprietary drivers in its repositories.
    >>"Never mind that to do so would be against Fedora's policy of including
    >>only
    >>free software -- with such users, the short term convenience of the
    >>technically superior proprietary drivers outweighs the ethos of freedom.
    >>Many of the complainers do not even appear to have heard of free software
    >>ideals. Nor do they bother listening when those ideals are raised.
    >>
    >>"Admittedly, some might be using the proprietary drivers as a temporary
    >>expedience until improved free ones are released. Still, the general
    >>attitude suggests that they have no understanding of the long-term
    >>considerations whatsoever. Perhaps they might help swell the number of
    >>GNU/Linux users enough to encourage the manufacturers to release free
    >>software drivers, but I suspect that their real contribution is only to
    >>ensure the manufacturers that they can continue with their usual
    >>practices.
    >>For all the long-term good such users have done themselves or others, they
    >>might as well have stayed on Windows."
    >>
    >>So maybe instead of a "Welcome" screen when users boot up the Eee, there
    >>should be a mandatory "History of GNU" video, followed by an FSF essay
    >>exam,
    >>and (for those who receive a pass) a Pledge of Allegiance recorded via web
    >>cam and uploaded directly to YouTube. Yeah, that should get market share
    >>under control.
    >>
    >>

    >
    > Running a few bits of proprietary software on an open platform is
    > still a whole lot better than running proprietary software on a
    > proprietary platform. At least then everyones operating system is not
    > under the complete control of a single vendor and
    > people/companies/OEMs are free to pick which OS best suits their needs
    > - Linux, *BSD, OpenSolaris, etc.


    People/companies/oems are free to make that choice any day of the week.
    Don't blame Microsoft just because the competition's offerings aren't always
    the most attractive.

    > At the very least adoption could
    > actually cause microsoft to compete a bit more like firefox did with
    > IE.
    >
    > It is also possible that with a free software operating system on the
    > majority of systems might help things might move a bit faster.
    > Microsoft, for example, didnt make 64bit versions of Windows NT
    > available until version 5.1 even though it has run on 64bit
    > architectures since it was first released at version 3.1 with native
    > support of DECs 64bit RISC architecture.


    Yes, if there were a free software operating system on the majority of
    systems, the software market would look quite a bit dfferent. We'd all still
    be paying someone for our software, it just wouldn't be Microsoft.
    impossible, Apr 6, 2008
    #14
  15. Re: Asus Eee -- Is it really good news for FOSS and Linux?

    In article <47f86ee5$>, sam did write:

    > Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
    >
    >> The Eee can run a full office suite, among lots of other regular PC apps.

    >
    > It can also run OSX according to some recent articles


    Not legally, though. And not without some nasty hacks: OS X is tied to the
    TPM chips built into Macs, to prevent it from running on other
    Microsoft-compatible hardware.
    Lawrence D'Oliveiro, Apr 6, 2008
    #15
  16. Re: Asus Eee -- Is it really good news for FOSS and Linux?

    In article <47f876f1$>, Bobs did write:

    > Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
    >
    >> In article <47f86ee5$>, sam did write:
    >>
    >>> Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
    >>>
    >>>> The Eee can run a full office suite, among lots of other regular PC
    >>>> apps.
    >>>
    >>> It can also run OSX according to some recent articles

    >>
    >> Not legally, though. And not without some nasty hacks: OS X is tied to
    >> the TPM chips built into Macs, to prevent it from running on other
    >> Microsoft-compatible hardware.

    >
    > Funny how you always give Microsoft a hard time for being proprietary,
    > but Apple are the kings of it.


    I give Apple just as hard a time. Or did you misunderstand the tenor of my
    comment?

    > Shit, they even restrict their OS. Why don't they sell it retail for all
    > Intel based computers?


    Can't afford the support headaches. And it would mean an end to their high
    hardware margins.
    Lawrence D'Oliveiro, Apr 6, 2008
    #16
  17. Re: Asus Eee -- Is it really good news for FOSS and Linux?

    In <ft9m09$edv$> Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
    > In article <>, Roger
    > Johnstone did write:
    >
    >> In <ft9amd$7l1$> Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
    >>
    >>> In article <>, whoisthis
    >>> did write:
    >>>
    >>>> who cares how many people were looking at it.... LOTS of people
    >>>> were looking at the MacBook Air too in shops I have been in...
    >>>
    >>> Funny, isn't it, how I didn't mention the MacBook Air, and yet you
    >>> did. In theory, the two machines are worlds apart, and shouldn't be
    >>> seen as competing at all. And yet Apple, like Microsoft, is looking
    >>> nervously over its shoulder, isn't it, at this fast-growing new
    >>> category of machines where it simply doesn't know how to compete.

    >>
    >> Yes, poor poor Apple. They're doomed! If only they knew how to make a
    >> small computer. Ideally it would be about 8 mm thick and could fit in
    >> a pocket, have a multi-touch screen so it didn't need a keyboard and
    >> trackpad, have at least 8 GB of flash storage, and Wi-Fi for network
    >> access. And it would need to run OS X and retail for, say, $449.

    >
    > But it isn't really proper OS X, is it? Can it run the usual OS X
    > applications, like Office 2004/2008 or Photoshop? No it can't. It's
    > really only "OS X" in name, nothing more.


    It's OS X. It's not Mac OS X, so no it can't run Mac applications, and
    it doesn't have non-useful stuff like the POSIX layer, but it has a
    nearly identical API (Cocoa Touch).

    You said Apple didn't know how to compete in the small computer space.
    I'm saying Apple already does. The fact that the Touch platform (iPhone/
    iPod touch) can't run Photoshop or MS Office doesn't matter much to the
    people buying it. What they want is a full web browser they can carry in
    their pocket.

    > The Eee can run a full office suite, among lots of other regular PC
    > apps.


    I think the market for it is going to be fairly limited. At the smaller
    end will be the pocketable computer/smartphone category, and at the
    larger end the laptops which double as desktop replacements. In between
    is the Asus Eee, which is nothing more than a small, cheap laptop.
    Rather than a small laptop I'd much rather have a small tablet,
    something with an A5-sized, multi-touch display. No keyboard, no pen.

    --
    Roger Johnstone, Invercargill, New Zealand -> http://roger.geek.nz
    Roger Johnstone, Apr 6, 2008
    #17
  18. Re: Asus Eee -- Is it really good news for FOSS and Linux?

    In article <47f88c31$>, sam did write:

    > Which is all the Asus eee is, hardware, a little powder-puff compact
    > toy, not the ground breaking earth shattering paradigm shift that you
    > keep pretending it is.


    Ah, someone else who can't see the forest for the trees.

    Yes, it's hardware. It's hardware that couldn't have been packed into such a
    small, low-powered, low-cost package before, until Moore's Law made it
    possible.

    And as the hardware costs have fallen, the costs of closed-source software
    are thrown into ever sharper relief by comparison. The Eee has reached the
    point where, for the Dimdows version, the cost of the OS is the largest
    single item on the bill of materials. Which is one of the reasons why the
    Linux version looks so attractive.

    In other words, what you're missing is that it's not about the technology,
    it's about the economics. But in the computing business, it was ever thus;
    those who only understood the technology, but ignored the economics, could
    never have understood what was going on, or where the trends were going.
    Lawrence D'Oliveiro, Apr 6, 2008
    #18
  19. impossible

    Lodi Guest

    On Sun, 06 Apr 2008 20:36:12 +1200, whoisthis wrote:

    > In article <ft9en0$bod$>, Lodi <> wrote:
    >
    >> >On Sun, 06 Apr 2008 13:16:58 +1200, whoisthis wrote:

    >>
    >> > How much charity work do you do ?
    >> > How much of your skills do you give to others for free ?

    >>
    >> I'm not too sure of the relevance of your question but I do very little
    >> charity work.
    >>
    >> If someone asks for my help I'm more than willing to muck in be it hard
    >> disk data recovery or mowing their lawns. But I don't see myself as a
    >> charity worker. Someone standing on corners collecting for Daffodil Day
    >> is a charity worker. I've nothing but admiration for them.
    >>
    >> Can you explain your question :)
    >>
    >> Lodi

    >
    > Yep.
    > I was wondering if you saw yourself and your time as having value. There
    > seems to be this expectation from the FOSS community that the
    > programmers must give the fruits of their labour away free of charge,
    > yet they themselves have to give nothing away.
    >
    > Can a FOSS programmer book into a motel and say hey, you are using my
    > work for free guess that means I will stay here for free ? No ?, Linux
    > conferences are no free either, and the programmers still pay for their
    > doctor, plumber, mechanic, etc etc etc.
    >
    > Just wondering why is it the the goods/services that programmers create
    > must be free yet no one else must be.


    I agree 100% with what you've said. It constantly amazes me that such
    high-quality products are, to all intents and purpose, given away for
    free by their creators to JoePublic. And yet that is the situation, as I
    see it.

    I also agree that I now have an expectation of not paying for software
    (in the legal sense, not in the crackz and warez sense).

    Totally barmy. I find it really hard to explain to other people that
    there's no catch.

    My niece and my sister are examples. My niece said she needed Photoshop.
    I told her to try out GIMP. More than adequate for what she wants (home
    user) and there's no charge. She said "What's the catch" then proceeded
    to bid on a Photoshop CS3 disc selling on TradeMe. I gave up.

    And my sister.....I bought a pre-installed Ubuntu laptop from Dick Smith
    for sister #3. I told sister #2 that because XP wasn't installed there
    was about a $100 saving to a similar specc'ed model at Dick Smith. She
    said what's the catch. I told her sister #3 needed to use Open Office
    instead of Word and Firefox instead of IE. They were both free. She again
    said "What's the catch". I gave up.

    FWIW, if the writers of FireFox/GIMP/K3B/OpenOffice/etc ever need their
    lawns mowed then I'd willingly offer my services gratis.

    Regards
    Lodi
    Lodi, Apr 6, 2008
    #19
  20. impossible

    Lodi Guest

    >On Sun, 06 Apr 2008 20:46:52 +1200, sam wrote:

    > The benefit to the individual home users is a byproduct of the open
    > source collaboration model, not its primary purpose.


    Thanks Sam. I just replied to whoisthis saying I had no idea why there
    was all this free software available. And now you've answered that by
    saying that the free stuff is a byproduct of already-paid-for work. Makes
    sense. Thanks for the explanation.

    Regards
    Lodi
    Lodi, Apr 6, 2008
    #20
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Alan
    Replies:
    8
    Views:
    699
  2. impossible

    Asus: Windows EEE will outsell Linux EEE

    impossible, Mar 22, 2008, in forum: NZ Computing
    Replies:
    42
    Views:
    1,394
    impossible
    Mar 31, 2008
  3. Lobster

    Linux voip client for Asus EEE PC?

    Lobster, Jun 28, 2008, in forum: UK VOIP
    Replies:
    24
    Views:
    1,483
  4. Dean
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    538
  5. Giuen
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    865
    Giuen
    Sep 12, 2008
Loading...

Share This Page