• On TV.com: New TV sex symbol: Vintage black PORSCHE
March 23, 2009 7:07 AM PDT

Is Ballmer conceding victory to Linux Netbooks?

by Matt Asay
  • Font size
  • Print
  • 78 comments

In the process of pillorying the intelligence of buying Macs in the recession, Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer may have admitted defeat in fighting Linux-based Netbooks. Ballmer said:

Paying an extra $500 for a computer in this environment--same piece of hardware--paying $500 more to get a logo on it? I think that's a more challenging proposition for the average person than it used to be.

But if this reasoning is sound against the Mac, doesn't the same apply to Microsoft in its competition with Linux? Glyn Moody thinks so:

This is a very frank analysis of the problem for Microsoft: after all, who's going to pay extra money just to get the Windows logo on a Netbook, when they can get the same features for less with free software?

What goes around, comes around. Indeed, Canonical's Ubuntu distribution already claims fealty from a host of OEMs (original equipment manufacturers) like Dell and Hewlett-Packard, with more signing on, and Novell also has scored some considerable points on the Netbook.

Even if consumers and businesses don't opt for Linux on their Netbooks, the Windows they're choosing is not very profitable for Microsoft, and getting users to upgrade to a pricey Windows 7 could prove to be a fool's errand, as Microsoft admits. Microsoft may well end up winning the Netbook war against Linux and losing at the same time.

Why pay a few hundred dollars for Windows on a device that costs only a few hundred dollars and drops all the time? The economics of the recession may help Microsoft against Apple, but they're no help against Linux-based Netbooks.


Follow me on Twitter at mjasay.

Matt Asay brings a decade of in-the-trenches open-source business and legal experience to The Open Road, with an emphasis on emerging open-source business strategies and opportunities. Matt is vice president of business development at Alfresco, a company that develops open-source software for content management. He is a member of the CNET Blog Network and is not an employee of CNET. Disclosure. You can follow Matt on Twitter @mjasay.
Recent posts from The Open Road
At its best, is open source unbeatable?
Your new software vendor? Domino's Pizza
The 'wisdom of crowds' loses steam
Microsoft's embrace of MySQL could kill it
Apple: 'Enterprise' is as enterprise does
Theory of competition fails in open source, elsewhere
Microsoft's Web business spurring development of IE
The case for the open-source Goliath
Add a Comment (Log in or register) Showing 1 of 2 pages (78 Comments)
by chocklat March 23, 2009 7:26 AM PDT
This analogy is faulty. First, Ballmer was referring to Apple hardware vs. hardware that runs Windows. They are essentially the same making it nonsensical to pay more for one over the other. The same really cant be said for Linux vs Windows (or OS X for that matter). Although functionally similar they're are several differences which distinguish them to users. Second, Windows doesnt add a few hundred dollars to the cost of a netbook, notebook or any other machine. The OEM price is likely between $15 (for mobile devices) and $75 for full Win product.
Reply to this comment
by aMUSICsite March 23, 2009 8:12 AM PDT
But hardware prices compared like for like in quality, quality of build as well as just raw specs, then Apple are not that much more expensive. You can always buy something cheaper but you get what you pay for.

I guess MS will respond with "But you get better quality with Windows" which also applies to Apple!

If you are price driven only then Linux and the cheapest PC with the cheapest parts is for you. Even if not, if you are paying less than $750 for a system more than 10% of that price is going to MS... But it's not a tax ;)
by dragonbite March 23, 2009 9:08 AM PDT
An equivalent PC to Mac stats doesn't come out very different and that difference can be argued with the abilities of the software and OS at that price.

With Netbooks, though, the willingness of people to shell out a lot more (maybe even $75) will deter more people in this market than in the full-blown computer market and that's only IF Microsoft can sell it at that point without loosing too much.

Microsoft will have to either suck up the losses or push the advantages as being worth the added cost while Linux already works well with Netbooks and looks to grow in the future without the added costs of anti-virus, anti-spyware and what-nots not only possibly costing money but also sucking up resources.

Netbooks is one market that Linux has a chance with. I hope they take full advantage of it while they can!
by aka_tripleB March 23, 2009 10:19 AM PDT
@aMUSICsite

Have you ever compared like machines before? For the low end machines (Macbook, Mac Mini) there is only $100-200 difference. However, try to get a machine that cost as much as the 17" Macbook Pro. It might be a little unfair because Apple includes that second video card, but the extra card does not justify the gap in price.
by giant_david March 23, 2009 7:29 AM PDT
M$ will not give it up even if it means loose some money.

Average users get used to the OS they are on. It is like an addiction, M$ wont let the users get used with Linux.

The solution will be to keep XP for free. Or downgrade 7 to a point that a netbook can run, netbooks power will keep growing.
Reply to this comment
by stuxstu March 23, 2009 7:35 AM PDT
Matt come on... Linux is no where as near productive as MS is for the business and consumer world. The Mac and PC are competitors and Linux has not effectively entered the consumer market.

Also, Windows is not that pricey when bought in bulk... Just ask HP and Dell. I think the price for Dell is less than $40 a copy for Vista. If Win 7 is better and can be configured for a netbook to a highend desktop that would do Microsoft well...
Reply to this comment
by executorvs March 24, 2009 12:43 AM PDT
you do know hp and dell offer primarily linux on there netbooks right? frequently with support. Additionally redhat and Suse linux have held a respectable portion of the enterprise server market for years. Canonical's (makers of Ubuntu) biggest service contracts are to a number of French government agencies. how are these not competitors?
by Mr. Dee March 23, 2009 7:36 AM PDT
Again you fail at this foolish optimism of yours. Windows owns the Netbook market with 90% dominance, Linux has dwindled to a measly 10%, its only a matter of time until its all Windows. So tell me Matt, how is Microsoft losing? There are more OEM's supporting Windows as the best choice for consumers. Yeah, there are the few who might want Linux just so they can format it and install Windows on it.

Why pay a few hundred dollars for Windows on a device that costs only a few hundred dollars and drops all the time?

Industry standard support for applications and hardware. Windows works, everybody knows it, its reliable. You are guaranteed any application you buy out there will run on Windows. So don't try to ignore that Matt, its just very foolish and plain craaaaaaaaaazzzzzzzzzy.

Matt, you can continue to ignore my plea to understand what you love about this 'Linux', its just not pretty and not easy to use. Now everyone can reply with their negativity, I really don't care. Stop being closed minded and understand that Windows is here to stay and dominate. Linux is just hype and hot air, nobody is using it and nobody cares about it. Even you Matt, I know that your house is full of Mac's because your family knows that Linux is just not usable.
Reply to this comment
by giant_david March 23, 2009 7:44 AM PDT
Totally disagree, Linux is very good, safe. Actually, you can do anything you would with Windows and more. But needs some knowledge.
by kelmon March 23, 2009 8:07 AM PDT
I rather think that the idea that Microsoft's position is unassailable is incorrect. It certainly won't be lost overnight but it is not guaranteed either, particularly with continued movement to thin-clients and cloud-based services.
by zelrik March 23, 2009 8:30 AM PDT
@Mr Dee. How old is Linux ? 15years maybe? Has it died yet? Hell no, it's quite the opposite I would say. You cannot fight communities do you understand that? Repeat after me : Linux is NOT a corporation, Linux is NOT a corporation, Linux is NOT a corporation, Linux can NOT go bankrupt, Linux can NOT go bankrupt. Oh and also Linux is INEVITABLE, all the tech industry knows about it, it's just a matter of timing and setting milestones. There is nothing you can do about it but whining and watch **** happen.
by Mark_Anderson March 23, 2009 9:07 AM PDT
Sure, zelrik, that's why Linux has made absolutely no significant market penetration in the last 15 years.

No-one cares and no-one will until it settles on one homogenous version.
by SactoGuy018 March 23, 2009 9:52 AM PDT
I think in the netbook market, something like Ubuntu Linux will be around for really low end machines, but anyone who's going to need high levels of software compatibility and compatibility with third-party hardware will pay a little more for a netbook loaded with Windows 7 when that comes out late this year.
by zelrik March 23, 2009 9:58 AM PDT
@Mark_Anderson : There is a difference between market penetration and new technologies. Remember how long it took for the automobile market to take off? for the phone/cellphone ?... Those things are always slow because they are killing a lot of existing corporations/technologies.
by mattumanu March 23, 2009 9:59 AM PDT
@Mark_Anderson

If Linux were about making sales, your statement about "Market penetration" would be valid. Stop thinking in terms of sales. Do you think there is any way for you personally to know how many linux installations there are out there? How many machines have dual boots? My Linux installation is portable, did you know that? I can run it via portable media on any machine and keep it synced to any workstation I own.

You go by what your eyes see. You walk into best buy and see row after row of windows computers and think that means something, but each and every one of those computers represents a potential linux installation. So how do you conclude "market penetration" in this?

I believe you don't. And by the way, if you happen to admin a website of your own you can see through you chosen analytics service just how many computers show up at your website with Linux.
by dudemanguysondog March 23, 2009 10:05 AM PDT
I don't know what your talking about. My younger brother uses opensuse on a cheap laptop of his, and it blows xp out of the water, no waiting a half hour to boot to a usable desktop. My ubuntu install is easier to use than windows ever was, and way faster to install than a reinstall of xp takes to get up and running. My brother agrees with his suse box. Right there that is two flavors of linux that kick windows in the crotch so to speak. There are probably others like madriva that do so as well. If people would stop being so judgmental about linux, usually before even trying it, windows would probably lose a lot of market.
And on the note of you get what you pay for, people payed for windows me and it cost about the same as the boxed versions of xp and vista when they first came out. What does that say about the value of buying windows?
by pentest March 24, 2009 10:13 AM PDT
DeeDeeDee,

You should think about giving your MS shill check back. You don't do it very well.

Linux is years ahead of Windows and can do things that Windows users can only dream about.
by pentest March 24, 2009 10:15 AM PDT
No market penetration?

Really? I guess the fact that Linux owns the web server and high performance markets is nothing?

I guess that MS is madly copying Linux is nothing?

And of course, the fact that MS spends millions of dollars spreading FUD doesn't mean that they are concerned about this non-competition?
by forever4now March 23, 2009 7:55 AM PDT
My ultimate netbook configuration is dual-boot (possibly virtualized) with:
- Android as the "thin" OS.
- Ubuntu as the "thick" OS.

Android would be for general use (fast, light, easy to use, easy on the battery, cool market apps).
Ubuntu would be for any heavy lifting I need to do on-the-go (e.g. software development/testing, OpenOffice).

Fortunately, both run on x86 and ARM, so I can choose whichever architecture provides the most bang for the buck.
Reply to this comment
by zyxxy March 23, 2009 7:58 AM PDT
I am running OpenSUSE 11.1 on an old Thinkpad (1.3Ghz/1GB) at home. Just used for web and email. My kids use it all the time. It works great. Full FLASH support. Only thing lacking really is QuickTime video support. The interface is very smooth and attractive and FireFox works great. For a netbook that is only being used for Web access, both SUSE and Ubuntu have turned the corner as far as the user experience.
Reply to this comment
by B-Ri March 23, 2009 9:52 AM PDT
You should be able to use VLC to get Quicktime video playback. I'm pretty sure it supports it. It's my video player of choice. Heck there's even an iPhone app remote for it.
by mattumanu March 23, 2009 10:01 AM PDT
You can fix the quicktime problem with VLC player. Should run under openSUSE
by Admodieus March 23, 2009 8:04 AM PDT
You do know that XP has a greater marketshare in netbooks than Linux, right? While the first bunch were extremely Linux-heavy, the inclusion of more capable technology and bigger screen sizes have made XP a more comfortable option for many users.

But hey, don't take my word for it. Computer World has the NPD numbers (http://blogs.computerworld.com/study_windows_clobbers_linux_on_netbooks_with_over_90_share).
Reply to this comment
by aMUSICsite March 23, 2009 9:08 AM PDT
Yes but it's also the first time Linux has taken a 10% OS market share in any consumer computer range.
by longhairjnr March 23, 2009 1:37 PM PDT
These are interesting numbers about Linux but people have to remember that buying a not windows PC/netbook/laptop is darn near impossible, take the eee for example, there are linux versions but buying this in the shop is not going to happen as shops only stock xp versions and if you want the linux version they add at least $50 due to the better specs, the point is the Linux is getting drowned out not buy the consumer but by the retailers who have either no idea about the products which they are selling (Often the case) or pro windows or profit driven. I do not disagree with those who believe that Linux is not ready for the big time but it has made leaps and bounds towards this in the last few years that I have been following it. I personally think there is room for windows mac and Linux to play in the home market, they just have to stop doing the political thing of draging down the other and get on with the job.
by maulfest March 23, 2009 8:05 AM PDT
it's called osx86 :) i have it working 100% on my acer one netbook... mac netbook is easy to be had
Reply to this comment
by blueghost27 March 23, 2009 8:09 AM PDT
When something is free, it usually bears the quality of free. paying the extra $500 is not just for the logo but everything that comes with the logo. Support, maintenance, upgrades, etc...
Reply to this comment
by crhode March 23, 2009 8:12 AM PDT
Silly Ballmer, you're not paying the $500 for a logo, you're paying it to not have Windows! It's a bargain!

But really, Apple computers are priced competitively for all the features you get. You can get PCs cheaper, but it's like the Nissan where it looks good on paper but in reality they cut corners everywhere. There's also the longevity. This computer is 3.5 years old and still going strong. My Sony (supposedly one of the better brands at the time) died after 3 years and I had to factory restore it very couple of months the last year to keep it running at more than a snails pace. With the Mac the battery had an issue, and I took it into the store and they replaced it for free with zero fuss even though the computer was past the warranty. When the hard drive broke, I took it into the store for free and got a definitive answer that the issue was my hard drive, and told by a person exactly what I needed to get to replace it. There were also clear instructions on the Apple website with pictures of my exact model on now to replace the hard drive.

I think they have everything the middle 80% of people need. They aren't the company for the cheapos who want barebones (which will backfire after a few years) and the high enders who want to be able to customize every aspect of their machine (though the Mac Pro is the best high-end computer out there). The latter people are mostly gamers and gaming software is written for Windows anyway.
Reply to this comment
by ewsachse March 23, 2009 8:30 AM PDT
"My Sony (supposedly one of the better brands at the time) "

Sony one of the better PC brands? Are you kidding me?
by therealgeeves March 23, 2009 8:42 AM PDT
I worked out my friend has my old ti667, it is running latest OS X.
Although it can not run windows natively, it still rund virtual pc 6 ok.

now that is coming up to 6 years old, one battery replacement.
Try running latest win on a 6 yr old non-mac laptop for starters. 500 bucks saved me a whole new pc... if I had not upgraded to an intel mac - ah the irony.
by Mark_Anderson March 23, 2009 9:08 AM PDT
"Try running latest win on a 6 yr old non-mac laptop for starters."

W7 will and does.

Next.
by pentest March 24, 2009 10:17 AM PDT
Win7 on a 6 year old laptop? LOLOL
by oce.net March 23, 2009 8:16 AM PDT
"Microsoft admits."
?
All they say in that quote is that what they need to do is up-sell the customer.
This is an issue that anyone involved with the netbook/low power computer industry is having to deal with.
If the consumer can purchase a low margin, low cost system- that they at least perceive to be an alternative to a higher margin, higher cost machine/part- why would they buy the higher margin, higher cost product?

I admit- though I'll probably never buy one- Linux netbooks are very capable machines- and have their uses.
But Microsoft will not lose any significant marketshare in the overall netbook economy- if anything- its a growth space.
The issue is- How do we make money- real money- on these machines?
Reply to this comment
by CDubber March 23, 2009 8:17 AM PDT
Ballmer is a clown. A very rich clown. And every time he opens his mouth, something stupid spills out.

I pay more for Apple hardware because my time (and sanity) are worth the extra dollars.

Microsoft is the McDonalds of software. And some of us don't care to eat McDonalds just to save a couple of bucks.

I wonder if Ballmer pays extra for a better logo on the hood of his car? Yeah, he does.

Steve Ballmer: hypocrite and tool.
Reply to this comment
by mbenedict March 23, 2009 8:24 AM PDT
That Windows is absolutely killing Linux with 90% share is hardly surprising.

Most consumers who purchased early netbooks simply HATED running Linux. Lets face it, this is giving Linux a bad name!!!! The exception seemed to be in Asia where they bought the cheaper Linux versions, then simply installed pirated copies of Windows.

It's game over now because many stores are no longer stocking Linux-based netbooks. Why should they stock two SKUs for each netbook model, plus their sales staff don't even know Linux.

E.g., I went to Best Buy (Canada) to check out their netbooks and they were ALL running XP. Someone suggested going to their online site, but even there 100% of the netbooks have XP pre-installed.

Ballmer might hate the form factor, but he's not losing any sleep due to Linux on netbooks.
Reply to this comment
by zelrik March 23, 2009 8:40 AM PDT
I dont think so, look at how well Dell is doing with its ubuntu offer. And Dell is not far behind in terms of market share. HP also starts to have some ubuntu offer.
by jusben1369 March 23, 2009 8:35 AM PDT
If I could be so bold as to be the "average consumer" for point of illustration:

- Mac: More expensive than MSFT. I might have some compatibility issues still in a Windows world but I'm willing to pay the premium because the closed world of Apple makes for a very seemless day to day interaction with my computer
- MSFT: Much cheaper than Mac although not as easy to use but is the clear market leader so I know I won't have any issue with software availability etc
- Linux: Sounds like I might save $50 or $100 on laptop or Netbook but is that going to feel like penny wise/pound foolish when I realize it doesn't run some key application I need/like such as iTunes/IE/printer drivers/camera drivers?

That's why Linux is going to struggle (forever?) in the consumer space.
Reply to this comment
by zelrik March 23, 2009 9:01 AM PDT
Itunes : can be installed using Wine (should be straighfoward now, Wine passed the 1.0 threshold a while ago ;) )
IE : What? are you still using that??? forget it and use firefox (note that IE works with Wine too)
printer drivers : if HP printer then no problemo.
camera drivers : hmm not as bad as it seems ... just look around before buying.

So what's the problem here?
by sanjayb March 23, 2009 9:18 AM PDT
Who in the world besides us tech geeks are going to look for Wine and camera drivers? Most people that buy computers don't want to deal with the headaches in getting stuff to work.
by c4s2k3 March 23, 2009 9:36 AM PDT
@sanjayb: I couldn't agree more. I have been a SW developer for 20+ years. Computers and software are my job, not my hobby. When I come home at night, the last thing I want to do is spend time getting my computer to work right, whether it requires installing the right driver for a device on Windows, or looking for an updated distro or new utility to do the same thing the other 5 utilities already do in Linux. I have to use both (Windows and Linux) at work I would not want either one for home use.

If tinkering with computer hardware, OS, and software is your hobby, more power to you. Nothing wrong with that. but understand that for the vast majority of users, a computer is a tool to get something done, not a hobby.
by zelrik March 23, 2009 9:50 AM PDT
Actually there is no problem either unless you were talking about webcams but even that is mainly working. Linux now supports more hardware than Vista. Also you are talking about something that is fading away, there is less and less problem with Linux and hardware. Can you tell if Windows7 will support all your hardware when it will come up?

As for itunes, if you are a mac fanboy just buy a mac...

Talking about hassle, I had to deal with Windows for 8+ years and what I can tell is that it's not hassle free ....

Dont get me wrong here, I am not seeing Linux @ 50% market share tomorrow. There are still stuff to be worked on.
by pentest March 24, 2009 10:20 AM PDT
Talk about ignorance.

iTunes is garbage, there are better option in Linux.

Linux has far better support for printers than you ignorantly assume. I would be willing to wager that Linux has better support for printers than Vista.
by pentest March 24, 2009 10:22 AM PDT
C4,

You obviously aren't much of a computer professional. 99% of apps and drivers for Linux is in one place, no having to look all over the place. That is how the Windows world operates.

Clicking 3 buttons to get a fully set up system with all drivers is not tinkering. Tinkering is what happens in Windows.
by c4s2k3 March 25, 2009 9:29 AM PDT
@pentest: How about you learn to read first, then come back so I can teach you something about SW development. My comment specifically mentions "drivers" for Windows, and "utilities" for Linux. I've used many distributions that contain multiple tools for doing the same thing (whether that is configuring sound, network, video, etc.) and only SOME of them actually work on the machine I am using at the time. Having to hunt down the one that will actually work is "tinkering" in my book. It's a waste of my time and it supports my position that Linux is not ready for prime time for anyone who does not have the knowledge and/or inclination to "tinker". That includes the vast majority of computer users out there.
by msjonker March 23, 2009 8:38 AM PDT
The difference between an OSX and Windows is really that you're paying more to do less with OSX (since Apple has the lock on the hardware).

The difference between a Windows Netbook and a Linux Netbook is that you're paying less to do less with a Linux Netbook.

So not the same thing at all.
Reply to this comment
by seven7dust March 23, 2009 11:15 AM PDT
since Macs run Windows OSX and n e Linux Distro
I throw at them
I would love to know How they do less ?
in fact there r thousands of OSX/Unix Apps that Windows Pcs can't run {eg-: iLife , quicksilver etc }
by freemarket--2008 March 23, 2009 11:26 AM PDT
"you're paying more to do less with OSX "

Less crapware removal.
Less waiting for bootup and shutdown.
Less adware/spyware detection and removal.
Less waiting due to virus scanning.
Less waiting due to bloated OS.
Less re-installing OS to fix incremental slowdown.
Less replacing under-powered hardware to run the latest apps.

Yes, without all of that, I can do more of what I want to do...for a lot longer.
by msjonker March 24, 2009 2:26 PM PDT
Less crapware removal.
-That's the fault of the PC manufacturer, not Microsoft. Windows comes clean. If you don't like the crap Dell, HP etc. put on your computer, choose a different PC manufacturer.

Less waiting for bootup and shutdown.
-Score a huge win for Mac, they saved you a couple minutes when you do shutdown/startup. Big win.

Less adware/spyware detection and removal.
-This kind of software doesn't magically just end up in Windows. Its the user's fault. If you have ever had any of this on your PC, you are the one to blame.

Less waiting due to virus scanning.
-Like I said above, you are the one to blame.

Less waiting due to bloated OS.
-Broad generalization with no facts. How is it bloated? XP and Vista run pretty fast for me. Maybe it happened when you installed Banzai Buddy.

Less re-installing OS to fix incremental slowdown.
-XP and Vista both run fine for me after years of being on the same install.

Less replacing under-powered hardware to run the latest apps.
-Hmm ok... seeing as how that has nothing to do with Windows and has everything to do with third party applications, again not the fault of Windows. Also, technology improves and software improves to take advantage of it. Are you still using the first iMac? Didn't think so.

Yes, without all of that, I can do more of what I want to do...for a lot longer.
-The point of what I was trying to say is that Mac has a fraction of the software that Windows has. OSX does nothing more than Windows can do and has a fraction of the software, yet you pay more.
by anirothan March 26, 2009 9:27 AM PDT
"The difference between a Windows Netbook and a Linux Netbook is that you're paying less to do less with a Linux Netbook."

Eeeehmmmm. Less? with Linux?

With windows you get a black box, with a very very very restrictive license. Actually, that windows black box isn't yours. You don't buy it. It does not become your property. You just "rent" the right to use it, only on one machine. And it is a black box.

With Linux, or with any other open source OS, instead of a black box you get something open. You can look right into the guts of it. You know exactly to the last detail what you get (and even if you don't understand what you see when you do the looking, there always is someone that does). And, of course, since it is open, you can do anything you want with it, as long as it remains open. In the case of netbooks, anything you can expect to do with them can be done with OSS. And of cource, you are given the right to use any other OSS on your netbook.

How is this less? In my point of view it is quite the opposite. OSS gives you ground to do more.
by msjonker March 26, 2009 9:14 PM PDT
It's less because there is less software for it. The operating system is just the base for real work to be done. Very few people just install Linux, just install Windows, just install OSX, and that's it, nothing else. If you're selling software, typically Windows is where the money is at, especially in the consumer market. So naturally, that is the main platform for consumer software. A simple example to illustrate my point: How many games are there that are developed for Linux? I think you would be hard-pressed to find software made for Linux that software for Windows couldn't also do. I don't think you can say the same for the opposite.

Look at all the open source software that gets ported to Windows, simply because that is where a real user base exists. Take Pidgin (Gaim) for example.
by claytonabbott March 23, 2009 8:38 AM PDT
No, this is a valid argument. For mac you pay at least $500 more. For what? You do not get anything more than the logo and an "Alternative" OS that supports 1% of the software as Windows does.

No in regards to Linux, I love it. I use Ubuntu, SUSE and a few others. BUT, it is not ready for prime time because not even 5% of the world has adopted it.

I like Netbooks and plan to buy one. But remember, it is a stipped down laptop.
Reply to this comment
by seven7dust March 23, 2009 11:13 AM PDT
well you get peace of mind !
something Windows most certainly won't let you have
If you Like being a slave to your O.S thats fine
but Some people have Higher Standards
by pentest March 24, 2009 10:24 AM PDT
Macs run more software than Windows can. Windows software is a subset of Mac software.
by kast5089 March 25, 2009 6:18 AM PDT
You do get more. You get UNIX. So you get a consistent, easy-to-use GUI on top of UNIX, co-installed with X11. That's a pretty big win for developers like myself. Yeah, it's more expensive, but I'm willing to pay extra money so I don't have to use Windows.
by punterjoe March 23, 2009 8:57 AM PDT
I'm not so sure the argument holds. I'm a strong open source and GNU/Linux advocate, but I'm mindful of the audience. I think the Windows platform is still the obvious choice for casual users without access to a tech-savvy acquaintance to help them track down obscure drivers or tweak .cnf files. Windows' flaws and risks are well known to even casual users and have spawned a thriving protection industry. I think Win7 will play to the potential netbook audience while avoiding some of the expense of Apple's proprietary hardware/software ecosystem.
Is OSS a less expensive alternative? Sure. But when you factor in "sweat equity" - especially among non-technical users - it may not be the bargain it initially appears.
Reply to this comment
by sean_001 March 23, 2009 9:18 AM PDT
linux does not have a market. the only market linux works is web servers where it belonged to Unix. on server market, linux never take anything from windows. if you take math like this: windows server vs (linux + unix), you will notice the former is growing, the latter is shrinking. of course, if you look at linux itself, it is growing too. but it is growing by eating unix. eventually linux + unix will be gone.

cosumer martket? i don't see anyone in the world with a normal nerve system cares about linux.
Reply to this comment
by giant_david March 23, 2009 10:46 AM PDT
I really hope not.
What a vision you share ! Take a look at Windows EULA : it states that you should'd "overcome technical problems" or something of the same (just below where it state that you are not allowed to do benchmark tests).

Hey, let us be men!
by viper396 March 24, 2009 2:01 PM PDT
@giant_david what EULA are you referring to? Because the actual Windows XP, Vista, and 2008 EULA's do not say anything similiar to what you claim to have read. http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/eula/home.mspx

It appears you're just making details up and using things out of context just to fit your own agenda, just like the author of this article did.
by Librum March 23, 2009 9:19 AM PDT
Not sure how they've conceded anything - I paid $387 for my Eee PC netbook running WinXP, off Amazon, and I love it. As others have said, I would cripple my netbook functionality if I was running anything else. I don't care that there's a possibility that I could do some of the same things with Linux - I'd have to spend time and effort learning a new OS to do the very same thing that I already know how to do in Windows. What a waste of time that would be.

Most honest Linux supporters do agree that while it's got its strengths, it's got its own set of weaknesses, and there's just no way it's a mainstream consumer OS as it stands.
Reply to this comment
by March 27, 2009 5:27 PM PDT
How is a dell mini 9 not mainstream (especially the "just no way it's a mainstream" part) ?

MS explicitly noted that netbook sales (linux, forced to offer xp, much lower margins on OS) in it's most recent quarterly statement for missing it's expected profit number and for it's future numbers.

Weird that this could be true if you were correct.
by RighteousSoutherner March 23, 2009 9:26 AM PDT
Pure fantasy drivel. Matt I like you as a person, but your "logic" simply drives me insane! :-)
Reply to this comment
Showing 1 of 2 pages (78 Comments)
advertisement
Click Here

The browser battles go on and on

roundup From Firefox to IE and from Chrome to Opera and Safari, there's no sitting still for browser makers looking to keep their products fresh and competitive.

3G wireless still holds promise

The next generation of 4G wireless may get all the headlines, but advanced 3G technology will likely dominate services for the next few years.

advertisement

About The Open Road

Matt Asay brings a decade of in-the-trenches open-source business and legal experience to the Open Road, with an emphasis on emerging open-source business strategies and opportunities. Matt is general manager of the Americas division and vice president of business development at Alfresco, a company that develops open-source software for content management. He is a member of the CNET Blog Network and is not an employee of CNET. Disclosure.

Add this feed to your online news reader

The Open Road topics

advertisement
advertisement

Inside CNET News

Scroll Left Scroll Right