Comments on: Linux PCs: Customer service or lip service?

Despite much hype over Linux, finding a new home PC running the open-source operating system is no easy task.
Photos: Looking for a Linux PC

[macemoneta]

Weird

You went to Windows PC vendors to get a Linux PC? Do you go to Apple to get your Windows PCs too?

How about:

http://www.linux.org/vendor/system/desktop.html
http://www.linux.org/vendor/system/laptop.html

[FutureGuy]

Linux growing abroad??

or is it pirated Window's that is growing? It's a well know fact that most who buy desktops with no OS or Linux then turn around and get themselves a pirated copy of XP. And this will likely continue till MS can figure out a bulletproof anti piracy measure (if there is such a thing). I am surprised this article doesn't even mention that.

[JuggerNaut]

Facts versus Speculation!

It has not been proven and this hogwash you speak of comes from
the propaganda beast published by the spin doctors who
evangelize for Microsoft and hate all things Linux!

[steviesteveo]

That's a little bit silly

I dunno about you but installing windows isn't for most people, especially installing a pirated copy that makes you jump through hoops just so you can get it free

[capfan12]

Consumers Don't care

The general consumer does not care whats loaded on it as along as it work and they can get software they want to run on it. It's only the techie that even cares and even then it's only the techie that dislikes microsoft. Which is hardly a market dell or any major maker is going to bother supporting in the desktop market.

[FutureGuy]

Good Point

Customer's only care about using something that is easy to use, better supported, comes with more software and hardware options etc. Basicly they have not been affected by the braiwashing that Sun and IBM have done to some geeks.

[Blito]

It's DirectX 9's fault. Short term solution though.

Nvidia and ATI have, sneakely, recently closed
source their drivers so Linux has a very
difficult time supporting these DirectX9 OpenGL
2.0 graphics cards and
systems.
Just check out Mandrive and notice how
you have to cryptically install a closed source
Nvidia, ATI driver from the company websites that
oft times creates a blurry Linux desktop and
other glitches like not supporting certain
hardware for example. Then there are the game
companies who are locked into M$ contracts so
they only support there beloved DirectX fetish.
(Don't you love these Linux debates :)
So, getting a newer mobile graphics setup like
the Intel Mobile media processor, SiS Mirage 2,
or Via Savage IGPs (Intigrated Graphics
Processor) saves a TUN of money on purchase and
upgrade.
These drivers and graphics systems are open
source and very well supported by Linux
this year they are on the slower side supporting
UnrealTournament2003 at like 60 FPS but next year
with the Mirage 3 they will support OpenGL 2.0
and DirectX9 more properly and thus run Doom3 and
HL 2 at decent speeds.
How do you think they are getting computer prices
down so much. They using small form factor IGPs
and not bulky systems. Computers used to be so
much smaller.
So this is really a major factor as well.
It's not only games, though, as graphics are
playing a major role in everything as we go
forward so it really intigrates into everything.

[Bill Dautrive]

What does DX have to do with it?

There are no supported DX libraries for linux, that I know of.

I haven't had any trouble with my nvidia 6800 gt on linux, but it has whatever driver is on Suse download list. I keep my games on my toy OS.

It is still an issue of Hardware taling to Software

I think the main reason that Linux still hasn't taken off is because you are hard pressed to find compatible hardware. If there was a Linux distro that when you plugged in a piece of hardware and inserted as disk, if necessary, and voila! it worked,then I would see Linux becoming a major player. Until Linux comes to that point, Windows will always dominate the market place because recently everything seems to just work with Windows. Generally no questions asked.

Most Linux distributions are precisely how you describe...

Linux supports a much broader array of hardware
"out-of-the-box" than Windows. The only things
that I know of that aren't automagically
configured today are some lesser known
"Winmodem" devices and a few models of 802.11g
and pre-n cards (most of which work fine, but
require you to download the driver), and a few
of the low-end USB flat-bed scanners.

I use Linux systems at work and at home all the
time and I don't even bother to check if
hardware is "Linux compatible" when I buy it. My
experience so far has been that you get a
reasonably recent Linux distro and it will
detect and autoconfigure everything for you.

I do digital video editing under Linux, have
Firewire external drives, USB fobs, webcams, a
cheap USB scanner (which pops up an icon on my
desktop when I plug it in, and scanning works
fine), an iRiver audio player.

No, so far my experience has been that Linux has
the edge in hardware support over XP at least
(my 802.11g card didn't work in XP without
tweaking the registry, despite coming with
drivers, whereas it works flawlessly in Linux).

It is still an issue of Hardware talking to Software

I think the main reason that Linux still hasn't taken off is because you are hard pressed to find compatible hardware. If there was a Linux distro that when you plugged in a piece of hardware and inserted as disk, if necessary, and voila! it worked,then I would see Linux becoming a major player. Until Linux comes to that point, Windows will always dominate the market place because recently everything seems to just work with Windows. Generally no questions asked.

[Lynn_S]

What hardware support am I hard pressed to find?

Because I will need an example or a reminder in order for this to correspond to my experience.

Tha last time I ran into a hardware support issue on any computer that I own was for low end onboard video chipsets back in 1998.

I don't run a lot of exotic hardware. I have a Compaq AGP video card with an ATI chipset and an HP SCSI RAID card with 3 drives currently hooked up to it. My computer has an ECS motherboard with onboard AC97 sound and an onboard VIA Rhine II network chipset.

Do you have some examples of even relatively common hardware that's not supported?

Who would want Linux PRE-Installed?

Wouldnt most techies rather get a blank machine and install Linux themselves? If I were buying a linux machine thats what I would do.

[aabcdefghij987654321]

Right, even as a Windows user I prefer my own install

That way all the garbage the vendor loads and all the parts of Windows they mis-load are left off and I get a much quicker and more functional system.

[Sboston]

But

Getting Linux on the desktop for everyone is the target correct? What about Joe user?

Linux needs a push

I'm using a Linux desktop to write this. I don't hae to worry about viruses and trojan on this system which is mainly used for email and web browsing. I have Windows systems which are dedicated for things I can only do on Windows but I will not do email on them due to poor Windows security and having worry about some virus that will get through before the anti-virus folks have a signature for it.

I recall several years ago many local computer shops offered Linux based systems but the SCO thing put a chill on things for a while. I think it is bad form to have one company dominate the OS field so Linux needs a push and from what I've seen the community is busy trying to make it an alternative to ordinary computer users.

I also took in LinuxWorld this year but found it was mainly server oriented and offered little in the way of showing Linux as a desktop solution.

[jatos]

Linux needs a push

Before anyone pushs Linux too much the following problems need sorting

1. Way to many distributions

When I first used Linux I went searching through many distributions till I found what I want. Including slackware, debian and Cent OS. If it the Linux community agreed to have only a small number of distros for a few mainstream purposes then switcing to Linux would be SO much easier.

2. Sound and Multimedia problems

I can tell you how many problems I have had with sound and multimedia, suchs as XMMS not working because the deamon XMMS used didn't work because another program was using a Deamon

Also I had problems with decoders for things like WMA and MP3, granted that may be my distro but that goes back to point 1

3. Windows compatibility

Wine, Cedega and Crossover office just don't provide the windows compatibility for me to run all the windows programs I want

4. GUI's

There are too many completely different GUI's sometimes with different API's

If the GUI's shared more in common... life may be a lot easier. I have used KDE, Gnome and XCFE, I would a lot easier if for example Linux had a GUI tool for managing system settings that worked across all the GUI's

Anyway if these problems where sorted out I think Linux would have a LOT better chance against Windows...

[k6ekb]

FreeBSD Desktop

I'm reading this thread with a FreeBSD X-Windows desktop! :-) I switched my home computer to FreeBSD (which has a Linux compatibility layer that enables direct execution of Linux software) several years ago and have not regretted it at all. As computer novices, my kids do all their homework on this system without any problems. Performance is excellent and there is no performance degradation over time which is typical of Windows OS environments. There are security patches for FreeBSD just like any OS these days, but we spend a lot more time computing and less time patching and maintaining our computer. Having a copy of the source code to all of the programs on our system that create our data files means that we really own our personal data. We don't worry so much anymore about some proprietary vendor of a program we use changing their policy/program/business and impacting the usability and access to our stored data. As far as support goes, it's good old fashioned American self-reliance which still works just fine for us.

[Captain_Spock]

Just Where In The World Is OS/2!

Perhaps hidden in Windows ( , EcomStation ( http://www.ecomstation.com/ ) also, parts of the of the Linux System codes!

"IBM Opens Fire -- On Itself

In any case, IBM took a backseat to no one when it came to doing injury to OS/2 and its consumer users. On July 31, 1995, the very day that The New York Times went all gooey over the still-unreleased Windows 95 and announced that IBM would soon discontinue OS/2, IBM CEO Lou Gerstner told a group of securities analysts something that sounded very much as if IBM were conceding the standalone computer to Microsoft". This was just too bad for this once promising Operating System!

http://www.linuxandmain.com/features/os2retro.html

[Lynn_S]

Dear Waldo, where are you?

OS/2 is mostly used in banks and other financial institutions that need a high reliability operating system with good vendor support. If you're not a finance-related IT person I can see how you might not be aware of that.

If you're not informed about operating systems at all I can see how you might not have any ideas about OS/2 at all, but disjointed references that mix the related and the unrelated seems a bit disingenuous at best.

Windows NT and OS/2 were based on the same code base, which you seem to be alluding to. They haven't shared code for quite a while though, so implying that OS/2 is "hidden" in Windows could be humorous if that's the kind of thing you find funny.

eComstation pretty much is OS/2 now that IBM has end-of-lifetimed it again and doesn't seem to be willing to make a new extension to supporting it, but new drivers and fix packs are still being released for download for OS/2:

http://www.ibm.com/products/finder/us/en/finders?Ne=5000000&finderN=1000100&pg=ddfinder&collection=dblue&collectionN=4294967280&sid=465863341130963811459&cc=us&lc=en&oldC1=5000998&tmpl=%2Fproducts%2Ffinder%2Fus%2Fen%2Ffinders&C1=5000998&C2=5001138#dropdowns

What might "parts of the of the Linux System codes" be a reference to? JFS maybe?

It's been 10 years since the article you referenced was published. Is it now relevant since the actual end of support is coming up next month? If so, please elaborate rather than conflate and imply.

[jatos]

that article

dispite its age that article is still extremely interesting to read.

Thanks for posting that.

[open-mind]

Walmart Sells Linux PC's.

They're on their web site. Start at $220.

[FutureGuy]

But nobody buys them ...

inspite of its ultra low price...I guess what you pay is what you get.

[FutureGuy]

walmart thanksgiving surprise...

I found this link right on this page under the readers choice section. Their big thanksgiving plan is to sell a specially discounted PC. Opps but it runs Windows http://news.com.com/Will+Wal-Mart+sell+398+notebooks%2C+desktops/2100-1041_3-5924640.html
So for those linux fans, here's your chance to upgrade ;)

[R Me]

linspire

linspire is a joke to a real linux user. It is not free and neither is access to the library.

The machines that Walmart sells are obsolete and s-l-o-o-o-w which when tested give linux a bad rap and poor showing. Its no wonder hardly anyone buys them.

[robanga]

Linux on the desktop is a joke

Let's face it your average consumer cares nothing about Linux. Your average consumer does not hate Microsoft. Linux fanatics are driven by some strange belief that they can unseat MS in market share, backed up by their dislike for what they see as a Monolihic MS. For the consumer its a choice betweem Windows and the Apple OS plain and simple.

A precentage of these techie types are resentful of the success of MS to the point that they are laughable. Linux as a server OS has at least a semi-compelling argument as does do open source niche applications.

[JuggerNaut]

Linux on the desktop is a reality!

And it really gets under the skins of you Microsoft fanatics who
hate the idea of choice (Mac, Linux, Amiga and etc...) and its
presence in the computer market!

I'm a choice fanatic myself ;-)

[Earl Benser]

Comments....

Let's face it your average consumer cares nothing about Linux.
>> Probably true. The average consumer hasn't a clue about
what goes on inside of the computer as long as it does what he
wants it to do.

Your average consumer does not hate Microsoft.
>> Probably true. Microsoft is just a name on his desktop. He
doesn't care whose name is there as long as the computer does
what he wants it to do.

Linux fanatics are driven by some strange belief that they can
unseat MS in market share, backed up by their dislike for what
they see as a Monolihic MS.
>> Probably true, matched by the equivalent fanaticism among
many MS adherents who firmly believe that MS can do no wrong.

For the consumer its a choice betweem Windows and the Apple
OS plain and simple.
>> Probably wrong. The average consumer is blindly following
the marketing buzz, as encouraged by his fellow consumers,
equally blinded by the buzz. For him, COMPUTER=WINDOWS. His
experience and education lack the ability to go any further. Any
consideration of Apple as an alternative almost entirely depends
on the consumer having a somewhat trusted acquaintance or
friend who can explain the differences, and who is capable of
actually determining which platform the consumer should be
using. Then, it's still marketing buzz unless the consumer
actually recognizes that Apple is a viable alternative (assuming
that it really is).

A precentage of these techie types are resentful of the success
of MS to the point that they are laughable
>> No more laughable than the MS techies who can't accept that
the Mac and OS X are quite effective alternatives for many
computer users. To many brainless fanboys run off at the mouth
with the slightest provocation relative to either platform.

Linux as a server OS has at least a semi-compelling argument as
does do open source niche applications.
>> LInux,or Unix, and indirectly OS X since it is built on a Unix
base and can run Unix programs.

[djhomeless]

The Joke Is On You!

Robert D: Your statement is about 5 years out of date. Desktop Linux is a reality and more and more people are switching every day. Me personally, I use Xandros Linux and I love it.

Me, a fanatic? Hardly. I'm no geek, and I don't even play one on TV. But I can plug and play USB & Firewire devices w/o having to 'Safely Remove It'. I can leave my system running...for...a day, maybe 2! All without the Blue Screen of Death. Also, I still quite happily run MS Office XP.

Linux is still 1-2 years behind XP and OSX in terms of raw functionality. But it is changing fast. But all I care about is my system just WORKS. No Spyware, no Viruses, and no bloatware.

I don't resent MS, Steve Jobs would be 1,000 times worse if given the chance. MS just make a crap OS. Period.

It was a joke, years ago...

Today, it's at least on par, if not easier.

Installation is MUCH easier, but most people
wouldn't know that since most people don't
install Windows.

Depending on the distribution, software
installation is typically easier under Linux
today. Fire up the software installer and tell
it what you're looking for and it will find it
and any prerequisite software and install it.

Configuration issues are a mixed bag. Some
things are far easier in Linux, others easier in
Windows.

For Linux, hardware comes in three flavors "just
works", "just doesn't", and "ask someone". Most
hardware falls into the "just works" category,
but obviously people ought to ask around. I
bought a DWLG-650 802.11g wireless card for my
laptop, which came with Windows drivers.
However, the Windows drivers were nearly
impossible to get working (WinXP/SP2) and
ultimately required Googling and tweaking some
registry settings and going back and forth
between "let Windows manage this card" and "let
the manufacturer's driver manage this card"
before it worked. In contrast, I googled the
card model and "linux" and found the driver. I
followed the half page of installation
instructions, and it worked. Prior to that I've
used several 802.11b cards, all of which worked
in Linux without any need for additional
drivers.

I use the KDE desktop environment which is
similar in many ways to MS Vista's environment.
Applications function much like they do under
Windows but applications "talk to each other"
better in KDE than Windows. The appearance is
less distracting under KDE, and the VFS support
is quite remarkable. Things like fast user
switching an the like also work better under
Linux and KDE (if that matters to you).

On top of that, you get much better performance
(even Linux video drivers have gotten to the
point where they're surpassing their Windows
couterparts), quicker filesystems, and much more
software at no cost.

I recently suggested to my director that we
might try introducing Linux systems for people
to use alongside their Windows systems for work.
To date, everyone whose been using both reports
a preference for Linux (and all of them were
pretty skeptical about using Linux desktops) and
it's pretty much replaced Windows as our
standard environment at this point. The general
take was that the Macs we had were the simplest
for common everyday tasks, Linux with KDE for
more involved tasks and anything involving the
network (seemless integration of SMB, NFS, FTP,
SFTP, WEBDAV, and SSH into the desktop), and
Windows not particularly best at anything (other
than running the corporate standard Lotus Notes
client).

While I do digital video editing under Linux, I
concede that at the low-end, Windows beats Linux
for DVD menu and design apps. OS/X is better
than either. Linux takes the cake in supporting
various media formats and encoding schemes
though. I get much higher quality video output
using the same sources than I've gotten from any
Windows application I've tried -- which I don't
really understand since so many of the Windows
apps use code derived from Linux projects.

Windows simply cannot be beat for games. Sure,
many Windows games will run under Linux, but the
DirectX emulation just isn't complete.

For ease of use, I use my mother and
mother-in-law as the metrics. They are green
novices (my mother still gingerly touches each
key expecting the computer to explode). They
both found KDE much more intuitive than XP
(until one opened the "Control Center" by
accident and was faced with all those buttons).

I'm really of the opinion that Linux on the
desktop is at least equally viable as Windows on
the desktop is -- particularly if connected to a
network, and doubly so in a corporate setting
where games are not a principle concern.

[Lynn_S]

You've got me pegged!

>>A precentage of these techie types are resentful of the success of MS to the point that they are laughable.<<

Yup, that's good ol laughable me. I wanna be a criminal monopolist. But MS won't allow me to compete in that arena and I feel cheated.

I need your expert advice though. Where do I rank on the consumer scale? Above average, average or below average. I need the opinion of someone who knows about this stuff.

[VI Joker]

The joke is....

True the average consumer does not care about Linux, but they do not care about Microsoft, OSX or any operating system for that matter. They just wanted turn on their machines and have them work with little effort. I perfer MS OS, but I have tried OS X and will try Linux. If Linux works out better then I would switch, however I have not had problems with XP. No viruses, no spyware, no blue screen of death. I have left my PC on for days and no problems. I would say its luck, but its because I work to take care of my PC, which does not bother me. There in lies the problem with MS, working to maintain it from viruses, spyware, malware, etc. However, be aware that the more popular the OS the more likely the chances are that coders will be creating viruses, spyware, malware, etc, because they care about affecting as many users as possible. So if Linux, OS X, or any other OS does become the dominate OS then the same will happen to them as it happens to MS now. Its not that techies are resentful of MS they just want choices and ways to enhance their computers to better suit them. A true techie does not choose select anything based on brand, they do choose something cause it works for them.

[shoffmueller]

This thread contributes to the misconception...

... that Linux is for techno-geeks. Randomly ask some person in a mall on a Saturday what they think of Linux, they'd most liklely say, "what's that?", or at best, they'd say it's an Operating System for ultra-techies. And it will remain that way forever. Until it finally dies.

[lefty.crupps]

a joke?

Linux on the desktop is fantastic, but there is no one pushing it so the average user has never heard of it or seen it. With anyone that I've talked with, they know Windows is horrible and see their only alternative being an overpriced Mac. I don't know ANYONE, truely, that likes Microsoft products, including all the techs in my IT company. The avg user just doesn't know of options because Linux is not sitting on the shelf at BigBox Superstore, and no one is pushing them towards purchasing a high-end Linux system loaded with software that they don't need, like all-to-often happens with Macroshaft products.

[FutureGuy]

joke it is..

Couldn't agree more... I am guess that most Linux worshipers are techies who once got paid thousands of dollars to get a button to show up. There is no point in hating MS for that.

[Betty Roper]

It's worse than that...

It's not just resentment of MS success. Alot of the the so-called "open source" movement is anti-capitalist and anti-free market. Probably the last gasp of European-style socialism. It's the economics of Intellectual Property that they are trying to subvert.

Bad juju.

Want a non-Windows PC?

TigerDirect offers many systems with no OS, all cheaper than their Windows counterparts. Avoid the $249 and $269 Linspire offerings though, because their 3D chipsets aren't Linux compatible, as ironic as that sounds.

[johnwlittle]

Sun Ultra 20

If you want to run Linux (and run it fast) the Sun Microsystems Ultra 20 is an excellent choice. 64-bit power, available with SUSE via Sun if you like, and under $1000.

[stealt403]

CNET is lagging

theregister.com did a story on this a few weeks ago. it always seems to me that cnet is lagging a little bit. i still like cnet, but recomend theregister.

You only need to do a simple search to find these...

a simple search on the internet will find many companies that do PCs with Linux pre loaded and configured....my company, vastute.com, for starters has been ofeering PCs for over a year now.

[lingsun]

The calls to the computer companies show no one wants linux

The calls to the computer companies show that no one wants linux on their computers. That shouldn't be a surprise. There's nothing worth running on linux that isn't a lot better on a Windows PC. Try going to Best Buy and buying software for linux. It's a joke. It makes Mac software look inviting by comparison.

[JuggerNaut]

What Calls???

What calls and to what companies are you talking about?

And from your statement;

..."There's nothing worth running on linux that isn't a lot better
on a Windows PC."...

What's nothing (worth running) exactly? Please enlighten the
rest of us here!

[jatos]

someone wants Linux

The main people who want Linux (on their desktop) are those people who are prepared to go hunting around for the right distro and of then those who want to able to tweak anything and everything. I think you will find Linux will become a lot more popular if and when the Linux iron out the problems outlined in my post here:

http://news.com.com/5208-1042-0.html?forumID=1&threadID=11104&messageID=82586&start=-139

Though if your thinking about servers most would prefer Linux to Windows.

[dba7dba]

Ever heard of sourceforge.net?

Check out www.sourceforge.net
And yes you don't find boxes of software for Linux because they are available for free from http://sourceforge.net/ such similar sites.

Please, do not show off your ignorance...

IMHO

[Eggs Ackley]

Linux on a Dell?!!

Good OS but you're still getting dogs hit hardware and paying for a Windows license you don't get.

[Bill Dautrive]

Indeed

If the fact that some many people use Windows, and the vast majority are not knowlege beyond clicking a few icons, does not convinve you that Windows is not widely used because people like it, then the fact that so many buy Dells should.

Dell = garbage hardware + garbage OS + crap support + bloat

[Bill Dautrive]

I was going to post a long serious of thoughts

But Francois Stiglitz did it first and far better then I could. Good job!

http://news.com.com/5208-1042-0.html?forumID=1&threadID=11104&messageID=82404&start=-149

[deepanjan_nag]

Linux is unknown in India

Being a techie in India, I can well vouch for Linux being a non-entity on desktops here. I've rarely seen a desktop running Linux, and those that do are used only to practise Unix shell commands. Let's face it: Linux will never be adopted by mainstream users for their desktops. Linux has had many years to mature and yet where does it stand today?
What's more, if TCO is its only selling point for servers(as it very much seems now), its destined to be doomed. All that Microsoft has to do to up the ante is lower the cost of its own servers.
I'm an Open Source evangelist, but believe Linux is the worst possible product to showcase it. Wikipedia is a much better exhibit.

[FutureGuy]

Speculation

Some Linux fans would say this is all "Speculation" and you are getting paid :) But I agree and no I don't get paid.

[Blito]

OpenSolaris is good in Bangalore though

http://belenix.sarovar.org/belenix_home.html

[pythonhacker]

Get real...

I saw this comment and could not resist a reply considering how inane it is.

Which company do you work for in India ? How many years of IT experience do you have to say that Linux is not used in desktops ? I think you mean corporate desktops since clearly Linux penetration in India is limited to the corporate world. If you are saying Linux is a non-entity on the corporate desktop in India, you are very much mistaken my friend.

Novell has a policy of using only Linux on the desktop. IBM has already moved a number of desktops in their Indian offices to Linux. Hewlett Packard gives employees the option of installing Redhat Enterprise Linux on their desktop instead of XP if they want. Not only that, Infosys has an entire department which uses only Linux on the desktop, called SETLABS which is a kind of research and consulting wing for the company. I can vouch for HP and Infosys since I have worked there and worked on a Linux desktop in these places.

Your argument that Linux desktop is used for learning Unix shell commands is childish and silly. As I said Linux is used for performing serious research and development in these companies I mentioned.

Perhaps that is the way in your company. However corporate India does not agree with your viewpoint. Do some research before posting stupid comments in public forums.

[dargon19888]

The point of the article...

I believe the point of the article was that consumers who should have a choice and access to non Microsoft OSs are still not getting that choice.

Breaking this down to the following:

A) Most home computer users want the "standard" PC so that they can "surf the web".

B) Large manufacturers cater to this group and do not want to invest in Linux for the masses.

C) Linux on the Desktop? Not ready for Prime Time.

The point being is that large PC vendors do not see the demand for a "desktop" linux, thus they "offer" linux just to say that they do offer an alternative.

I would love to run an ALL Linux shop in my SOHO. However, I need to also run a Microsoft based PC and a Microsoft Laptop so that I'm compatible with my customer's environment along with being able to test GUI's and client server apps.

The weird thing... I went to check Best Buy Online, they only offer Linspire. No SuSE.