Windows 7 and Microsoft

[Sean_W]

Originally Posted by Acid Rain

Yeah I know, but a company's got to make money to survive, right? So you have to pay for Windows. Big deal.

You're the one with a selective reading problem. I said "We like our software freedom" not 'we like our software free'. Two totally different things.

[saturnotaku]

Originally Posted by Sean_W

Linux has more share in netbooks than the desktop. It started with nothing and has about 10%. where's the failure there?

Got a link to back this up? If that's true, 10% is still pathetic considering how much cheaper Linux netbooks are compared with their Windows counterparts.

It seems as though brick-and-mortar retailers have been hesitant to stock netbooks or have even ignored them, at least until now. Why do you think that is?

Retailers have been hesitant to bring netbooks into stores because at that moment they were afraid that the netbook category would eat at their notebook sales. They were also only selling the only available product from ASUS, and sales were only okay, and they struggled with return rates, especially of Linux systems. But now it has become more of a trend and these retailers just have to be in this business.

You mention the return rates being high. Has that been the case with the Wind as well?

We have done a lot of studies on the return rates and haven’t really talked about it much until now. Our internal research has shown that the return of netbooks is higher than regular notebooks, but the main cause of that is Linux. People would love to pay $299 or $399 but they don’t know what they get until they open the box. They start playing around with Linux and start realizing that it’s not what they are used to. They don’t want to spend time to learn it so they bring it back to the store. The return rate is at least four times higher for Linux netbooks than Windows XP netbooks.

Interestingly enough, we struggled with the Linux version of the Wind U90. Are there plans to tailor a Linux OS for the Wind?

We plan to bring the Linux version to the U.S by the end of the year. But we are working on some of the issues with the SUSE Linux and even continue to explore other flavors of Linux. We have discussed Ubuntu with a Mac OS type of look and feel. We are talking to different suppliers to figure out the best user experience.

http://blog.laptopmag.com/msi-wind-c...ls-coming-soon

[Sean_W]

Linux lost out to Microsoft this year on network sales, since Linux netbooks had 70% of the market last year. Now it's projected around 10%. This is really not a surprise considering the tactics being played by Microsoft.

It's known that Microsoft are selling XP at a loss just to gain market share. I'm not going to lie to you like some sort of Linux/ Windows fanboy would, it's a big blow to what was a great start for Linux with netbooks. That's always been Microsoft's way of killing the competition.

There are all sort of questions being asked out there about Microsoft like "Is Microsoft ‘Buying-Off’ Linux Netbook Vendors?"

http://www.theopensourcerer.com/2009...tbook-vendors/

Disputed Netbook claims

http://www.desktoplinux.com/news/NS3469282186.html

More info.

http://broadcast.oreilly.com/2009/05...tbook-mar.html

They start playing around with Linux and start realizing that it’s not what they are used to. They don’t want to spend time to learn it so they bring it back to the store. The return rate is at least four times higher for Linux netbooks than Windows XP netbooks.

That's fair enough. Clearly not Linux's fault and it shows that people even bring XP netbooks back to the store. You see Microsoft gained desktop share by getting people used to Windows from the enterprise market 'use at work, why not use at home' sort of slogan.

It's always hard to get people using something they're not used to, it's just a fact and not that Linux is bad as a desktop OS. Apple is barley making 8% share and just about everyone consciously knowns the name "Apple" from iPods and iPhones unless you've lived under a rock for the past 20 years.

[ViN86]

Originally Posted by saturnotaku

Got a link to back this up? If that's true, 10% is still pathetic considering how much cheaper Linux netbooks are compared with their Windows counterparts.



http://blog.laptopmag.com/msi-wind-c...ls-coming-soon

Sure sat, but let's be completely honest. The reason the return rate is 4 times higher is because people are so freaking lazy. No one wants to learn something new when they can get by on their same old knowledge. It's not because the netbooks are "neutered" or anything, it's a problem with the average consumer (no surprise there).

[snowmanwithahat]

Windows 7 was once described as "the 2nd half of vista"..... which is very accurate.

If you look at all the documentation on "windows longhorn" vista before it lost the codename... it was supposed to do what windows 7 is doing now. really windows 7 should be dropped, it should be Vista Sp2 and be free..... because come on, this is what vista was meant to be but they just didn't do it in time.

(revised search engine, new file system, better stability)

.... it's a great platform for gaming and I support the linux front too. I'll be dual booting ubuntu and w7 probably, but I just can't do without the games and we all know how linux is with those games...

[nekrosoft13]

Originally Posted by ViN86

Sure sat, but let's be completely honest. The reason the return rate is 4 times higher is because people are so freaking lazy. No one wants to learn something new when they can get by on their same old knowledge. It's not because the netbooks are "neutered" or anything, it's a problem with the average consumer (no surprise there).

or it could be from consumer point of view that everything you happen to buy from a store would not work on it.

[ViN86]

Originally Posted by nekrosoft13

or it could be from consumer point of view that everything you happen to buy from a store would not work on it.

People aren't running many programs like that on netbooks. Besides, for the bulk of necessity programs (ie Internet browser, email client, word processor, image processing, etc.), there are free Linux counterparts for all the Windows applications that are just as powerful (Firefox, Thunderbird, Open Office, gIMP, etc.).

It really comes down to people not wanting to go outside their comfort zone, which is completely their prerogative, but that's just how it is.

[ViN86]

Originally Posted by snowmanwithahat

Windows 7 was once described as "the 2nd half of vista"..... which is very accurate.

If you look at all the documentation on "windows longhorn" vista before it lost the codename... it was supposed to do what windows 7 is doing now. really windows 7 should be dropped, it should be Vista Sp2 and be free..... because come on, this is what vista was meant to be but they just didn't do it in time.

(revised search engine, new file system, better stability)

.... it's a great platform for gaming and I support the linux front too. I'll be dual booting ubuntu and w7 probably, but I just can't do without the games and we all know how linux is with those games...

/me thinks you mean Vista SP3...

SP2 is out already

[Riptide]

Originally Posted by ViN86

I agree. I haven't really had any issues with Vista.

Same. I had to reinstall once due to a hardware failure and have been on that build for quite some time now. No problems with stability. No BSOD and CTD and other errors are extremely rare.

Usage is running steam games, email, internet browsing, and burning discs/media. YMMV.

[Rakeesh]

Originally Posted by Sean_W

Yet another, 'I'll selectively read what's given to me'

Linux has more share in netbooks than the desktop. It started with nothing and has about 10%. where's the failure there? Considering Linux doesn't get any air time compared to Windows and Microsoft are selling XP at a loss just to keep the market.

In the end people pick what they know and are familiar with, so it's go nothing to do with Linux having poor usability for the Average Joe. Companies like DELL advertise here in the UK, yet I've never seen a advert for Linux. It shows how 'under the thumb' they are when it comes to Microsoft.

Little flaw in your argument there. Actually Linux had a much greater share of netbooks initially, then over time Windows overtook it, and now it is way ahead. The netbook market saw its first exposure to Linux, but Linux wasn't attractive enough to hold its position there.

[Rakeesh]

Originally Posted by Sean_W

Linux lost out to Microsoft this year on network sales, since Linux netbooks had 70% of the market last year. Now it's projected around 10%. This is really not a surprise considering the tactics being played by Microsoft.

Like what exactly?

Here. Read this quote:

People would love to pay $299 or $399 but they don’t know what they get until they open the box. They start playing around with Linux and start realizing that it’s not what they are used to. They don’t want to spend time to learn it so they bring it back to the store. The return rate is at least four times higher for Linux netbooks than Windows XP netbooks.

That is not due to anything microsoft is doing. This is because they don't like linux. They aren't you. They aren't buying an ideology, they're essentially buying a tool. If they wanted to buy an ideology, they wouldn't be going to a computer store.

Originally Posted by Sean_W

It's known that Microsoft are selling XP at a loss just to gain market share. I'm not going to lie to you like some sort of Linux/ Windows fanboy would, it's a big blow to what was a great start for Linux with netbooks.

Not going to lie eh? Ok prove it. Show me how it's "known" that microsoft is selling XP at a loss. In fact I'd like to know how it is even possible to sell XP at a loss. Even if they sold it for $10 per unit they'd still make a decent profit (which I don't even think they sell it for that low to netbook makers.)

Originally Posted by Sean_W

There are all sort of questions being asked out there about Microsoft like "Is Microsoft ‘Buying-Off’ Linux Netbook Vendors?"

http://www.theopensourcerer.com/2009...tbook-vendors/

Terrible source for your argument. One, it's heavily biased. Two, I like this little part:

familiar – Well, OK I’ll give them that. But I could make Ubuntu blue and have big child-like buttons if I really wanted to.

WELL GUESS WHAT, YOU DIDN'T.

Furthermore his case for them being bought off is a bad one. It's pretty simple really, the OEM's have an easier time selling windows because consumers like windows better. And when they do sell linux netbooks, they are four times more likely to be returned. I like his little speculative argument here:

This whole thing reminds me of the stupid and cringe-worthy adverts you see in the press where Vendor X says that they “Recommend Proprietary OS Home Premium”. Do they hell. Do you think they really believe that? Or do you think they have been given incentives to say so?

Yes to the first question, no to the second one. For the most part, the consumer doesn't even know what the hell the OS is. They just turn their computer on and click start and click word. Sure they've heard the name microsoft, and windows, but they don't even know what exactly windows means. So when you ask them what OS they want, how the hell do they know what they are going to pick? Hence the vendor makes a recommendation. If you don't know what OS you want, you are probably looking for Windows.

Gee, ya think?

...

Some people are so retarded, they have to put a conspiracy theory behind something that is otherwise so simple.

Disputed Netbook claims

http://www.desktoplinux.com/news/NS3469282186.html

More info.

http://broadcast.oreilly.com/2009/05...tbook-mar.html

We keep hearing every year that "this year will be the year of linux on the desktop" because it is going to get x improvement here, etc etc etc. Yet does it ever happen? These articles are basically making that same claim, only with netbooks instead.

That's fair enough. Clearly not Linux's fault and it shows that people even bring XP netbooks back to the store. You see Microsoft gained desktop share by getting people used to Windows from the enterprise market 'use at work, why not use at home' sort of slogan.

No, people just got used to microsoft, and eventually brought it home. Microsoft never even marketed to non-business related use until windows 95 came out, and at that time people had been using it in the home for years.

It's always hard to get people using something they're not used to, it's just a fact and not that Linux is bad as a desktop OS. Apple is barley making 8% share and just about everyone consciously knowns the name "Apple" from iPods and iPhones unless you've lived under a rock for the past 20 years.

Well if linux was so great, how come it isn't ahead of apple even? Windows has a huge cost advantage over apple, and linux has a huge cost advantage over windows.

[XDanger]

Originally Posted by Sean_W

Microsoft are selling XP at a loss just to keep the market.

XP is ancient ,considering the price hasn't changed much for 10 years I'm sure they've made enough on it already...

also ,right or wrong Microsoft is the market


PC = poor man's Mac was hilarious


This thread should have been moved (or something) a while ago.