Re: All major OEMs switching to desktop linux

Discussion in 'Computer Support' started by Rex Ballard, Jan 28, 2010.

  1. Rex Ballard

    Rex Ballard Guest

    On Jan 24, 4:03 pm, 7 <> wrote:
    > Micoshaft Appil asstroturfing fraudster with a big girlie butt
    > pounding the sock One Shot, One Kill wrote on behalf of Half Wits from
    > Micoshaft Appil Department of Marketing:

    > > the oems make money selling computers people want to buy.

    And Linux users buy machines that have Windows preinstalled.

    > > there is no market for desktop linux machines.

    More accurately - Linux users would rather install their favorite
    distribution than be bound to a stripped-down version provided by the

    > One blank and one pre-mature ejactitation from a micoshaftee
    > fanboi paid to asstroturf on its behalf.

    > You been claiming that since when fanboi?

    WinTrolls in this group have been predicting the death of Linux since
    about 1995, and Microsoft has been predicting the death of *nix since
    about 1983. Every version MS-DOS was supposed to be the "Unix Killer"
    and every version of Windows since Windows 3.11 was supposed to be the
    "Linux Killer". Microsoft announced NT 3.0 vaporware as "a better
    Unix than Unix". At the time he was referring to Sun's newly
    announced Solaris based IPC Lunchbox and SLC Pizza Box. Adding 1 X11
    terminal brought the cost of the Sun to less than $3000 per seat, and
    Windows 3.1 cost about $3500 per seat. The Sun could actually support
    up to 4 X-terminals, quite easily.

    By the time Microsoft announced NT, Linux had already been posted on
    the FSF site, and the GNU project had ported most UNIX apps and X11 to
    Linux. By January of 1993, you could get an "ammo box" of 100 3.5
    inch floppy disks to load Linux. About 2 months later, you could get
    a CD-ROM to eliminate the manual disk flipping. SLS Linux had a
    default screen saver that said "Avoid the 'Gates' of Hell - Use

    Microsoft was concerned enough that when Walt Mossberg of the Wall
    Street Journal wrote a mildly positive review of Linux, Microsoft
    pulled a full page ad, telling the management that if Dow Jones liked
    Linux so much, Linux could pay for the ad.

    Microsoft wasn't that worried about competing with a $7,000 UNIX
    workstation, but when Linux started popping up on discarded 80386 and
    80486 SX/50 machines, AND was offering better performance, stability,
    reliability, and security, that was a problem for Microsoft.

    > Dell still got more PCs on offer than ever before you started
    > ranting and make bucket loads of money selling Linux.

    Dell, HP, Acer, and Lenovo are all acutely aware that a substantial
    number of their PC customers are running Linux on the machine. Each
    company has limited support for Linux, and there are some tell-tale
    signs that the customer intends to run Linux, like purchasing extra
    memory, extra hard drive, and installation media for Windows XP.

    Many Linux users have been buying Windows NetBooks, not because they
    want windows so badly, but because they can install their favorite
    version(s) of Linux on the real hard drive, and the 1 Gig of RAM.

    And of course, Dell, HP, Acer, and Lenovo are eyeballing Apple's
    profit margin, compared to the losses they have been experiencing,
    especially on "Windows only" devices, and are itching to find a way to
    tap into the Linux market in a way that gives them the ability to make
    40-60% profit margins like Apple does.

    HP and Dell announce that some of their products will be offered with
    Linux about 4 times a year. It's not that they actually plan to sell
    these machines without Windows. It's their way of telling buyers that
    they can buy these machines and install Linux themselves and
    everything including the 3D graphics, WiFi, cellular, and storage will
    work perfectly.

    > So do most mainstream hardware suppliers
    > switching over to Linux phones, Linux Android tablets, and
    > they of course shipping 33% of all netbooks.

    And then of course, there are the millions of Linux CDs shipped with
    books, magazines, mother boards, and PCs.

    > A lot of CN manufacturers have now entered the desktop PC market
    > as a commodity with commodity pricing.

    Actually the United States is one of the few markets where you can't
    go into the popular retail stores and buy a "NO-OS" machine. These
    machines are specifically designed to run Linux. The US courts are
    have let Microsoft sue OEMs and demand full retail price for promoting
    piracy - this based on the Napster case as a precedent.

    > 75% of Linux is now written and supported by corporate paid developers.

    And the other 25% are professionals supporting corporate developers
    who don't want OSS contributions credited to them out of fear of
    liability or retailiation from Microsoft.

    > And your post is a purile attempt to compete with Linux
    > without a working desktop micoshaft product.

    Windows 7 works. It's better than Vista (but then so was XP).
    Still to be resolved though:
    Is Windows 7 better than Windows XP?
    Is Windows 7 better than a Mac?
    Is Windows 7 alone better than a PC running Linux AND Windows XP?
    Is Windows 7 alone better than a PC running Linux AND Windows 7?
    Is Windows 7 alone better than a PC running Linux alone?

    To answer that, we have to look at those things that ONLY Windows 7
    can do.

    MS-Office 2007 and 2010 - Will corporate and professionals be willing
    to spend all of the time and money to upgrade to Windows 7, MS-Office
    2007 knowing that MS-Office 2010 will render MS-Office 2007 obsolete?
    Keep in mind that the cost of these upgrades isn't just the hardware
    and software - it's the cost of professional installers, license
    administration, registration of users, backup of personal and
    corporate information, installation itself or replacement of a working
    PC with another only marginally better PC, restoration of information
    to the new system, configuration of 3rd party software and personal
    preferences, and re-entering forms, shortcuts, and other "Lost"
    information embedded in the guts of Windows registries and other
    proprietary files.

    Then comes the question of RETURN on this investment.

    Will Windows 7 run faster?
    Probably not. It needs more memory and hard drive, and still uses the
    NTFS file system which limits overall performance of the system. Most
    users are already running Windows XP on 2 gig or 3 gig dual-core
    processors with accelerated 3G graphics. Windows 7 will use more of
    that memory for "dead code" and will have even more registry values
    and file I/O and network I/O due to the larger libraries and
    application code.

    Will Windows 7 be more secure?
    Probably not. Most experts are still recommending that Windows 7
    users get a good 3rd party Anti-Virus package such as Norton-360 or
    McCaffee. These provide Anti-Virus, firewall, and malware detection
    and removal. The filters are updated at least once a week, and can
    generally clean up machines even after they've been infected.

    Will Windows 7 be more stable?
    Probably not - Windows XP has become pretty stable these days. If it
    suddenly became unstable, it's highly likely that customers would
    suspect that Microsoft was sabatoging their own product in an attempt
    to force Windows XP users to upgrade to Windows 7. While the tactic
    might work for some customers, many large corporate customers got so
    burned during the release of Windows XP that they have formulated
    plans to migrate to Linux if Microsoft attempts a forced upgrade such
    as this again.

    Will Windows 7 be more functional?
    There are no real "Killer Apps" for Windows 7. At the same time,
    Linux has several "killer apps" such as SecondLife viewers, the
    OpenOffice suite, and a variety of collaboration tools based on those
    used by the teams that developed the Linux kernel, libraries, and
    thousands of Linux applications.

    Will Windows 7 lower software costs?
    Actually, the opposite - 3rd party software will have to be upgraded
    or repurchased, even Microsoft applications, license packs, and
    support programs will have to be upgraded - with an increase in
    recurring costs.

    > The joke is still on micoshaft crocporation to produce
    > desktop PCs cheaper than Linux.

    Actually, Windows makes PCs cheaper than those capable of running
    Linux. Since there is almost no significant difference in the
    performance between most PCs running Windows 7 (due to the intense
    disk I/O), the machines that ONLY run Windows generally costs more to
    produce - and are generally harder to sell. Machines that are ready
    to run Linux with fully supported hardware so that everything works
    automatically or with minimal GUI configuration - tend to sell for
    much higher prices, even though they are cheaper to produce. In
    addition, since Linux users often want to run XP as a virtual client,
    they are more likely to purchase extra RAM. Often they will want to
    purchase a second hard drive and a carrier that will allow them to
    boot from the alternate drive (which boots into Linux) or they will
    want to save the Windows 7 drive in case they need warranty support on
    the hardware. These extra devices are usually sold at a higher
    profit. Linux users will also be inclined to go for faster drives,
    such as 7200 RPM SATA-II drives - since Linux can actually exploit the
    3 gigabit/second transfer speeds.

    What Linux users DON'T order is Microsoft Office, Visio, Project, and
    Quicken. These applications could be run under virtualized XP and
    wouldn't need to be upgraded. The virtual images are easier to back-up
    than native mode Windows, and the backups are very reliable.

    What Linux users ARE likely to purchase is support services,
    especially extended hardware replacement plans, since they get
    software support from the Linux distributor and problems that can't be
    resolved are nearly ALWAYS hardware related problems. Insurance
    against a broken fan, broken LCD, or keyboard that has had soda-pop
    spilled on it is a good investment in "peace of mind". You know there
    is a 99% chance that you'll never need it, but if the graphics chip
    overheads because the fan got loaded with dust after two year on your
    favorite woolly pants and sweater, next to your crackers, cookies, and
    soda - it's nice to know that you can swap out for a reconditioned
    machine that has a new graphics chip.

    > It is worthwhile for everyone to learn Linux.
    > compiz and linux and you begin
    > to see how the other half live a world apart
    > and more advanced than micoshaftees.

    Linux is easy enough for very non-technical people to use. At the
    same time, those who really want to know how a computer works can get
    as much information as they like. Even if they can't get the source
    to DB/2, they can learn how databases really work by looking at open
    source code like MySQL and PostGreSQL. Even if they want to see how
    graphics editors like Power Point work, they can look at the source to
    Open Office Presents.

    Bill Gates has already retired. Several other of the "greats" at
    Microsoft have already cashed in and moved on. Paul Allen is almost
    completely gone. Nathan Myrvold is also gone. Others have moved out
    of the technical and into more business and legal related executive

    At some point, Microsoft will be completely at the mercy of a handful
    of elite Vunderkids who think they are indespensible - much like the
    guys who supported MVS back in 1992 - and were suddenly terminated -
    leaving a vacuum of expertise for a while. Many of these guys had to
    be hired back for Y2K - at 4 times the hourly rate.

    > Here is some guidance to go practice your Linux
    > to achieve similar results with 3D translucent Linux Desktop.

    If your really want to look at the trends in software that are likely
    in 2010, take a look at the Emerald Viewer for Linux. Compare it to
    the SecondLife viewer for Windows. The Windows version is slow,
    jerky, and in most cases looks more like a sequence of stills at about
    4 frames per second. The Linux version of Emerald looks more like a
    movie running 30 frames per second (or faster) with the ability to get
    remarkably good detail as you pan around the room, looking at objects
    as you walk by them, and as you dance looking at other people dancing
    using mouse-look.

    Imagine a company like QVC setting up "stores" where you could look at
    real designs of real clothes using an avitar that has your real
    measurements, including waist, hips, thighs, calves, and feet. You
    could also get real color approximating the color of your real hair
    and face by comparing them to a photograph. Then you could actually
    model the items you like best, buying virtual clothes with Lindens,
    then picking REAL versions of your favorites, paying for them with
    real dollars.

    Fashion designers are already taking inspirations from Second Life,
    and are even test-marketing designs there, offering virtual clothing
    that almost exactly matches designs they can actually mass-produce.

    There are even concept cars that are being shown in SL that may be
    available for actual sale in real life within 2-3 years. You can even
    design buildings, including all the interior decorating - using items
    that can be purchased in real life now, or in the future.

    And that's just ONE application that Linux makes possible and Windows

    > Converting an ISO file to a bootable USB stick or a bootable
    > SD Card for EEE is easy.

    The most important thing about that bootable USB stick is that you can
    test a PC or laptop to know, for certain, whether a computer you are
    purchasing will work with your favorite Linux distributions. Lately,
    most retailers have been locking down the DVD drive to prevent
    shoppers from running the "Knoppix test". The "Thumb Drive" test can
    be done without making ANY ugly modifications to the hard drive. And
    most retailers are not going to want to block off the USB ports on all
    4 sides of the machine. And then there's that SDHD slot...

    > Without being able to convert a distro into a bootable USB flash /SD Card,
    > that distro can't be easily loaded into netbook like EEE
    > and stand to miss out on users installing it into netbooks.

    Flash/SD distributions are also perfect for people who have to move
    between different machines at different locations. Rather than try to
    sort out some user's crazy windows settings, you plug in the thumb
    drive, bring up Linux, get connected, and you have all your favorite
    apps, personal files, and private information ready to go. Add an
    external USB drive and you can pretty much do anything you want.

    This is also handy when you want to review documents or make notes on
    your netbook while you are travelling, then want to have access to the
    full power of a full sized notebook when you are working in an office,
    hotel, or from your couch at home.

    > So I would recommend all distro mainters look at their netbook
    > boot strategy and offer something to boot their distros
    > from USB flash and SD cards or miss out on users installing it into
    > netbooks.

    Most top distributions now have a solid "floor to ceiling" strategy.
    They can boot from the DVD, install to a thumb drive or USB drive, and
    can support dual 1080p monitors, remote X11 servers, remote access
    Windows systems, and then plug into a netbook where they can run a
    1024x768 display on a 10 inch screen with a keyboard and screen that
    fit nicely in the "coach" seat of an airplane.

    There are also teleconferencing services such as Unyte, which allow
    Windows and Linux users to take turns presenting with minimal effort.

    > Having done a few conversions, a pattern emerges that works well for
    > most syslinux / isolinux / extlinux based distros.

    One of the big challenges for the OEMs is trying to figure out how to
    package Linux and Windows together. Should they pre-install Ubuntu?
    Red Hat? Fedora? SUSE? something else? Should they install "the
    works" or just "the basics"? How can they make sure that a computer
    sitting on the shelves for 2 months doesn't become obsolete because a
    new version of Linux came out? Or a new distribution?

    And the Final barrier is Microsoft - who still refuses to permit OEMs
    to install Windows and Linux on the same PC in a configuration that
    will allow both to run at the same time.

    On the other hand, the Linux community has already figured out how to
    install Linux on a machine that has been preconfigured with Windows 7,
    shrinking the Windows partition, adding Linux partitions, and
    configuring a boot manager such as grub, so that the user can boot
    into Windows when absolutely necessary. In additon, using Xen,
    Virtual Box, or other virtualization software, it's possible to run
    Windows as a Linux application.

    The irony is that Windows running as a Linux application actually runs
    faster than Windows running in native mode. This is because the Linux
    file system is easier to buffer, easier to cache, and has better
    memory management.
    Rex Ballard, Jan 28, 2010
    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. ImOkYoureNot
    Peter C
    Oct 26, 2004
  2. woo
    Duane Arnold
    Dec 30, 2005
  3. asdf
    Christophe Fillot
    May 29, 2007
  4. Rob S
    Rob S
    Aug 11, 2007
  5. M.L.

    Are these Win XP OEMs legit?

    M.L., Apr 9, 2010, in forum: Computer Support
    Desk Rabbit
    Apr 12, 2010

Share This Page