Comments on: Linux: Coming soon to a Windows laptop near you

Linux is being deployed everywhere these days, including Windows laptops.

[supoman]

I would have thought!!! Windows has not had a good track record. It's like the old saying that if you notice me that means I'm not doing my job. Take VMS or UNIX for example(even MACOS X). Users of these systems never spend a bunch of time belly aching about the OS. You just use it. The fact that Windows draws so much attention to itself doesn't say much about Windows. Over time that NOT a good thing. Even if 70% of people drove Yugos that doesn't make them any better. It's still a Yugo.

[bdaughtry]

Absolutely agree! If people could look 'under the hood' of Windows, they would not use it. I believe that thousands, perhaps millions, of computers are replaced each year because of Windows problems that people interpret as unsolvable without buying a new system. Now that Vista is for the most part their only Windows option, this situation will only get worse......and IMHO will drive more and more to OS X and Linux.

[jandler]

"Users of these systems never spend a bunch of time belly aching about the OS."

It took me almost a day to figure out how to connect to the internet with pppoe under ubuntu. One of the most helpful instruction I got was the following link.

http://www.ubuntux.org/how-to-install-broadband-adsl-pppoe-client-rp-pppoe

[gerrrg]

I seriously doubt 70% of the populace would drive Yugos.

People like Windows because while it may not be easy to navigate for a lot of people, some critical software is written only for use on Windows and because it's a hellllllish-lot cheaper to buy a dumbed-down windows than to buy the cheapest, refurbished mac, any day of the millennium, even when they're running the same hardware specs.

[MrKleinpaste]

@gerrrg - Then you haven't done the numbers. Tons of articles are out there showing the how little the up-front costs are and in some case how less Macs are. I've done the numbers myself and usually I can get a better price on the Mac side than the PC side and I'm talking brand new to brand new.

But overall value doesn't just involve what you pay at the cash register. The real value can only be determined at the end of the system's life cycle. Over the long run Macs are usable (not just functional) for a longer term than PCs. My old 1.33 GHz G4 is running just as good today as it did the day I bought it and that's after two OS upgrades from 10.3 (Panther) to 10.4 (Tiger) to 10.5 (Leopard). And I've put that poor thing through hell. I can tell you as a Windows admin, the same can't say the same for the Windows world.

[top8]

Matt rocks! Every comment of yours for last few weeks makes more sense than anything out there.

[Vegaman_Dan]

I find myself agreeing in your parody comments. His postings have dropped steadily downhill to not much higher than a bottom feeder, simply reposting news without adding any value or content.

This can change, however, and I hope that it does.

[softwaredesignengineer]

I'll believe it when it happens.

We've been hearing about "the year of the Linux desktop" for ages. This guy says "next year".... oh wait, "next year" is just two months away. So then he covers it up in the end of this post with "end of next year". Convenient! By then, everyone will forget this piece of hyperbole.

[odubtaig]

Not that he's saying that, but you're right; while some people have been rattling on about the 'year of the Linux desktop' (it's even a running joke in some Linux magazines now) OS X has been gaining substantially more marketshare without any such talk, just a lot more marketing. An example to learn from maybe? I mean, when MS took over the home computing world they didn't even say they were going to do it, they just did it.

[softwaredesignengineer]

odubtaig,

Your right in one sense. But there is a big difference. Windows can run on any hardware. OS X is locked to Mac machines. Not only that, Mac Laptops are relatively more expensive compared to lower end laptops. So you'll first have to deal with the PC vs Mac segment before going to the Windows vs Mac OS segment.

Saying that it is gaining "more marketshare" sounds a bit misleading. It is definitely growing in the market space but so far. it still pales insignificant to Windows dominance.

[odubtaig]

I was talking more in the sense of Macs, as computers (not specifically of any type), gaining considerably more marketshare than Linux without any hullabaloo about the 'year of the Mac'. If they'd done that, it would have impacted negatively due to the failure to immediately take over the world (impossible) and worked against Apple as a brand. It might even be more significant that Linux can be run on any computer you're likely to have (it's still developed for PPC Macs) but substantially more people use OS X and the entire new computer + set of software they have to buy with it.

Being egotistical about the prospects of any system is going to bring a certain amount of resentment (some people don't seem to get that Torvalds was joking about world domination) while Apple has benefited enormously from embracing the role of the minority player/underdog/niche producer and yucking up the role of 'the little guy'.

[softwaredesignengineer]

You're right on that. Too much self publicity will raise the minimum bar for expectations. Lot of examples come to mind when it comes to the concept kicking out the big players- to name a few, spock and cuil were supposed to replace google when it comes to search (though spock was more of a "people search" thing), however, after all the hype generated by themselves, they failed miserably.

[jandler]

I got a instant on pc. I just put the damn thing on sleep mode! It already exists linux, vista, mac os x, etc etc. After that I don't limited access to my apps like the article say (something perhaps that you conveniently failed to mention). Some would argue that this is from total power shutdown to 'on' but it's more like from total power shutdown to a cripple machine.

[Vegaman_Dan]

It's a neat trick and I like how Linux is showing up on these systems. However, the OS is stored on the hard drive and not on the system board in most models. That means when you replace the hard drive due to a failure, you just lost everything and those same OEM's don't have the OS to download. You are forced to use an imaging recovery disk which may or may not have what you want on it.

A flash based ROM version on the system board would be much better in my opinion, but would add greatly to the cost of the system.

[rapier1]

What I'm still trying to find out is how this would actually work. Booting quickly into a minimal linux system would be fine if thats what I want to do. However, if I don't want to do that what's the process? Is it going to impose a delay on getting into the OS of my choice? Am I going to need to physically interact with grub or lilo to boot into a different OS? etc etc etc...

[wango2007]

Who would have thought?


Who would have cared? Only the Microsoft-haters and/or Linux fanatics.

Other than to boot Windows a few millisconds faster, Linux servers no useful purpose on a Windows machine. No victory for Linux here, it has been reduced to a mere minor utility to serve the greater Windows master.

[odubtaig]

Speaking of fanatics...

[Dalkorian]

Say goodbye to any credibility you thought you once had. It's obvious the only thing you know about computers is what your mommy told you before she let you play with hers.

[fcs25]

Linux is a great OS for people that both have the time and will power to learn about it.You cannot just load up a linux machine and start to operate like you can with a windows machine and that one fact is what holds back linux and will continue to do so.

[kilgore63]

Have you installed Ubuntu Desktop lately? It's no harder than Windows!

[tmb_ayebe]

In this case, the Linux part is hard wired into the laptop.
- you switch on
- 6 seconds later a screen comes up
- you click on firefox
- now you're browsing the web just like you always do

So:
time = 6 secs
willpower = 1 click

That's quite an investment!

[gerrrg]

As soon as Apple gets off Psystar's back, I'll consider buying a 'mac'.

Apple fanboys don't seem to mind that Apple acts exactly like a monopolistic Microsoft, but Psystar is paving the way into an open future for Apple (and probably for Apple's own good.)

[MrKleinpaste]

I have to disagree. People assume because Apple has a great OS that everyone wants (there's so many "emulations" you really can't argue it) that they are a software company but they are not. Apple is a hardware company that writes software for it's hardware. Opening OS X "to the world", isn't in the best interest for a company under that paradigm.

Apple controlling the direction of it's products is hardly monopolistic. When was the last time you heard about Apple attempting to force a competitor out of business through unethical business or outright illegal activities? Microsoft has been convicted of this on two continents now. Apple controlling? Sure. Monopolistic? Not quite.

While there are people that can't appreciate Apple's position, it's that control that created a product that is know for ease of use, innovation and (as the "Hi I'm a Mac commercials point out) stability. Controlling the hardware and the software combination may not have given them in the #1 position, but it has certainly allowed them to create the best product out there.