Verily I say unto thee, that Megabyte spake thusly:
> Homer wrote:
>> Verily I say unto thee, that Roy Schestowitz spake thusly:
>>> ____/ Megabyte on Tuesday 30 December 2008 23:53 : \____
>> [snip Ubuntu Netbooks deal]
>>
>>>> Isn't this similar to what someone else advocated here recently
>>>> and was labeled a troll? ;-)
>>>
>>> How so?
>>
>> He was arguing that Linux Netbooks need (in his opinion) to be
>> preloaded with "full" distros, rather than "locked down"
>> interfaces, and also that they were disadvantaged compared to XP
>> Netbooks, because of the PDA-like perception people have of them,
>> and the use of SSDs instead of HDDs.
>
> My argument was that more Linux Netbooks could be sold by OEM's if
> they had full Linux distributions
And this is misleading, since there simply is no such thing as a Linux
distribution which is anything other than "full", assuming it actually
boots and runs at all. The only way you might accurately argue this to
be the case, is if you make the pedant assertion that any given distro
(which does not come preinstalled with every single one of the tens of
thousands of Free Software packages available for it), is somehow less
than "full". I think you can now see why this is misleading, since you
are implying that the omission of even one of those packages make this
distro somehow "crippled", when it quite demonstrably isn't. The truth
is that you simply have a personal preference for one DE over another,
and you've discovered other people with that same preference, and then
assumed this somehow represents a serious problem.
This misrepresentation is what has caused others in COLA to label your
assertions as "FUD". Instead of proclaiming that this distro is "not a
full distro" and is "locked down" you should simply be arguing for the
default DE to be changed to Gnome; KDE or whatever other DE you prefer
to see on these devices. That is a more accurate representation of the
"problem" as you see it. To argue that a distro is not "full", because
it doesn't use Gnome or KDE by default, appears somewhat arrogant.
> and were offered on the same hardware as the Netbooks with XP. The
> SSD vs HDD issue is one of personal preference, there are advantages
> and disadvantages to both
But again, this is just your opinion, and does not somehow represent a
serious problem. Something else you apparently fail to realise, is the
inclusion of HDDs in Netbooks was something which mainly transpired as
a result of Microsoft trying and failing to squeeze XP into SSDs, then
they had little choice but to "push" the industry for HDD support. The
use of SSDs is not some kind of second-rate compromise, as you seem to
be implying, it is (and should be) the natural choice for this kind of
device. There should never have been HDDs used in the first place. You
are arguing that Linux Netbooks should adhere to a condition, that was
only really necessary to overcome deficiencies with Microsoft Windows.
> my point was that to my knowledge you can't presently buy a Netbook
> from most OEM's with a HDD and Linux.
UK:
http://www.acerdirect.co.uk/ACER_ASIRE_ONE_A150L_-_White_LU.S040A.105/version.asp
http://www.play.com/PC/PCs/4-/5825963/Acer-Aspire-One-A150L-Intel-Atom-N270-1-6GHz-512MB-120GB-8-9-Linux-NetBook-Blue/Product.html
http://www.overclock.co.uk/product/Acer-Aspire-One-A150L-White-Intel-Atom-N270-1.60GHz-512MB-120GB-Linux-Netbook_6528.html
http://www.internetreadypcs.co.uk/product/Acer-Aspire-One-A150L-Blue-Intel-Atom-N270-1.60GHz-512MB-120GB-Linux-Netbook_6527.html
http://www.emodder.com/product/Acer-Aspire-One-A150L-White-Intel-Atom-N270-1.60GHz-512MB-120GB-Linux-Netbook_6528.html
http://www.amazon.co.uk/Acer-Aspire-One-Netbook-Sapphire/dp/B001BZ4QV2/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=electronics&qid=1231406516&sr=8-1
http://direct.tesco.com/q/R.204-8860.aspx
US:
http://www.buy.com/prod/aoa150-atm-1-6-8-9w-1gb-160gb-wls-cam-lnx-blue/q/loc/101/209974917.html
http://www.pcconnection.com/IPA/Shop/Product/Detail.htm?sku=9196644&oext=1038A&ci_src=14110944&ci_sku=9196644
http://www.beachaudio.com/Acer/S050a-280-p-162873.html?utm_content=reg&utm_campaign=lu-s050a-280&utm_medium=cpc
http://www.compuplus.com/i-ACER-Aspire-One-Linux-Netbookblue-LUS050A280-1025970~.html?sid=16pu4yf9v072o4h
http://www.provantage.com/acer-lu-s050a-280~7ACEN0JN.htm
http://www.valleyseek.com/product.action?itemID=128614
http://www.amazon.com/Acer-Aspire-Netbook-Notebook-1-6GHz/dp/B001J7QMHI/ref=pd_bbs_sr_8?ie=UTF8&s=electronics&qid=1231407646&sr=8-8
All Linux Netbooks, all HDDs, and all in stock.
> Therefore anyone needing the higher storage capacity of a HDD can not
> presently buy a Linux model.
See above.
It took me all of 30 seconds to discover these sources.
This is why I (and others) view your assertions with such scepticism, as
they are just opinions based on misconceptions and ignorance.
> If you would like to argue this puts Linux at an advantage because it
> is usually only offered on the lower capacity SSD models
It is neither an advantage nor a disadvantage, because your statement is
demonstrably false (HDD Linux models are available) and incomplete (SSDs
have advantages beyond mere capacity, and the question of capacity is an
issue only really relevant to Windows, since Windows absolutely requires
that higher capacity).
> okay. If you would like to argue that a Linux interface that someone
> can, albeit inaccurately, perceive to limit their ability to add or
> remove applications as an advantage, okay.
No, I would not argue that other's misconceptions are an advantage.
>> IIRC he was "labeled[sic] a troll" because every one of those
>> assertions is false, and so his rants on the subject were
>> considered FUD.
>
> I showed several comments from Amazon that supported the perception
You showed several comments from others who shared your misconceptions.
Now certainly the fact that such people /have/ these misconceptions, may
be considered a problem (FSVO "problem" e.g. if you're Mark Shuttleworth
looking to strike a lucrative deal with a hardware manufacturer). It may
be a "problem" for potential Netbook customers (most of whom do not even
know what Linux is) if /your/ expectation is that they should have a KDE
or Gnome DE "out of the box". It is unlikely to be much of a problem for
the kind of potential Netbook customers who already know about Linux and
want those aforementioned DEs, as they will most likely already know how
to install them. IOW the only real complaint here, is that certain Linux
users, who are already familiar with other X11 DEs, would prefer another
DE installed by default. The only other aspect to this complaint is that
you personally seem to want to promote the use of these DEs, and see the
current situation as somehow disadvantageous to GNU/Linux, however there
is no explanation as to exactly what that disadvantage might be.
I can only assume your "concern" is that the Gnome or KDE DEs need to be
featured prominently on Netbooks as a means of promoting GNU/Linux. That
concern is somewhat misguided though, for several reasons:
1. Netbook displays are too small to properly accommodate DEs which have
not been customised for such displays. This applies to both Linux and
Windows (in this respect, Windows is clearly at a disadvantage, since
it only really has a single shell, and the degree to which that shell
can be customised (by Microsoft, the OEM, or the user) is /extremely/
limited compared to GNU/Linux
2. You make the assumption that potential Netbook customers will be more
attracted to GNU/Linux just because they see one particular DE rather
than another, but taste is a wholly subjective matter (or as they say
- you can't please all the people all the time). Most Netbook vendors
have come to the conclusion that simplicity is more appropriate for a
small device, and after all they base their decisions on considerable
market research, so you shouldn't just dismiss that decision based on
your own preferences. The fact that these vendors then submitted to a
desperate campaign by Microsoft to somehow squeeze Windows onto these
Netbooks (in order to "fscking kill Linux") should /not/ persuade you
that this development was somehow warranted, and that "full Desktops"
are in any way the best solution for such devices. This "solution" is
only for Microsoft's benefit.
3. You seem to lack any clear motive for promoting GNU/Linux, beyond the
concept of attaining ubiquity, but typically the only people for whom
such things actually matter, are those who stand to make some kind of
financial profit from that widespread adoption. Inasmuch as FLOSS can
(and is) used in successful business models, that fact has no bearing
on either the availability or Freedom of FLOSS, since it is by design
not dependant on licensing revenue. Indeed this Freedom is its entire
raison d'être in the first place; /nothing/ else should matter to you
or any other GNU/Linux user. It is this Freedom which enables Netbook
vendors to provide GNU/Linux on their products and to provide heavily
customised interfaces which are more suitable for those devices. This
Freedom enables /you/ to do anything you want with those devices too,
including change the DE to anything else. So unless you have a vested
interest in seeing the widespread adoption of just one particular DE,
or a wish to inflict your preferences as a default condition onto all
Netbook users, then I fail to see what your motives are
> people had with the factory installed version of Linux which in many
> cases was replaced with full Ubuntu or another distribution.
You keep using this word "full", but in this context it is meaningless.
> If folks familiar enough with Linux that they could install another
> distribution have the perception that the factory installed
> distribution offers less than a full distribution what is Joe
> Consumer who has no previous knowledge of Linux going to perceive?
He will perceive nothing in particular, since he can not possible desire
something he is completely unaware of. I would /hope/ he perceives these
devices for what they are - miniature laptops with miniature interfaces,
which provide a low cost; energy efficient; portable; and simple (whilst
still being feature-complete) computing experience. This is /presumably/
the same expectation that the Netbook vendors have, since their research
lead them to produce these Netbooks to these specifications in the first
place.
> In contrast, the version of XP Home on a Netbook is the same version
> of XP Home on their home computer
Yes, and this is a /disadvantage/ of Windows-based Netbooks, because the
"full" interface of Windows is rather inappropriate for the small screen
on a Netbook. But then the "Home" version of XP is quite a disadvantaged
OS anyway, even from the perspective of Windows users, so I really don't
think that's much of a selling point.
> so they perceive no difference.
In this case, the benefits of familiarity are somewhat outweighed by the
disadvantages of using a highly limited version of Windows (without much
possibility of overcoming those limitations) on such a small display.
> While I agree that the factory installed interface makes the Linux
> Netbooks simple for a novice to use, that simplification can also
> give the perception, arguably falsely, that you can't add programs as
> easy as you can with a full distribution
Putting aside your persistent misuse of that phrase "full distribution",
it seems you advocate providing a DE more suited to large displays, as a
default condition, purely to overcome misconceptions held by one segment
of the potential customer-base, whilst simultaneously discouraging sales
from another segment of that potential customer-base who prefer a simple
interface. Which of those two segments represent the majority; I have no
idea, and I suspect that neither do you, but again I would point out the
rather obvious point that the manufacturers must surely have based their
decisions on the most financially prudent choice, so it seems reasonable
to assume the potential market for this "simple" interface is greater.
The market for /Windows/ based Netbooks is determined by the ubiquity of
Windows in general, and since XP only has a single interface, there's no
option available to those who want a Windows Netbook, so arguments which
revolve around the supposed necessity for Linux Netbooks to emulate this
inflexible condition, are somewhat illogical.
> or with XP.
As has been discussed at great lengths before, installing software under
Linux is considerably /easier/ than under any version of Windows, as the
entire OS and all available applications can be downloaded and installed
from just a single source; using a single command (or GUI). In fact, the
only type of software which is "easier" to install under Windows, is the
many variants of Malware which plagues it.
> That perception, accurate or inaccurate, can result in fewer sales.
I suggest you contact the Netbook manufacturers directly, to present the
business case for such a proposal. If you are confident your analysis of
the market is so much more accurate than theirs, then I expect they will
be overjoyed that you provided them with such insightful observations. I
suspect you may be rather disappointed with their response, however, and
(like them) I might be rather curious as to why "fewer sales" would be a
concern to a member of the public. After all, the actual distribution of
demographics for products, only negatively impacts the /availability/ of
those products, if the primary demographic is untenable low. Since sales
of Linux Netbooks are obviously booming, the primary demographic must be
sufficient to ensure the continued availability of such Netbooks, so the
only remaining concern should be how to maximise profits by capitalising
on the so-called "long tail" customers (presumably, like you). It may be
that attempting to cater to such customers incurs the law of diminishing
returns, and is therefore not a viable proposition, in which case you're
out of luck, and must "settle" for Netbooks installed to a specification
that doesn't satisfy your needs. But the fact remains these Netbooks are
available; will continue to be available for the foreseeable future; you
can buy one; and you can customise it to your own exact requirements, so
why you should be so concerned about "lower sales" to just /one/ segment
of the potential customers which (in all probability) only represents an
extremely small demographic, is not entirely clear.
> I think the whole issue here is that you and Terry seem to have
> viewed my criticism of how OEM's are marketing Linux as a slam
> against Linux. It was never intended as one.
If you remember correctly, I actually /defended/ you against claims that
you were a troll spreading FUD, and recognised your arguments were not a
"slam against Linux", but postulated they were simply misguided opinions
spurred by misconceptions.
>> What Megabyte fails to realise is that this Ubuntu deal will not
>> produce Netbooks preinstalled with a "full distro", but just yet
>> another "locked down" interface called "Ubuntu Netbook Remix",
>> which is just Canonical's proprietary (codecs) version of Ubuntu
>> customised for small displays (or what Megabyte calls
>> "locked-down").
>
> The article which was the basis of this thread spoke of "Ubuntu"
> *not* "Ubuntu Netbook Remix."
Hence my assertion that you failed to realise this fact. Those (like me)
who follow developments and trends in the Free Software world, are aware
of the fact that Canonical developed a customised version of Ubuntu, for
the specific purpose of making deals with Netbook vendors, to distribute
this customised version of Ubuntu on those Netbooks, and that version of
Ubuntu is called "Netbook Remix":
http://www.canonical.com/projects/ubuntu/nbr
You may note, presumably with some disappointment, that the interface is
"locked down" as you put it, or to put it more accurately, it is simple.
So, it seems even Canonical thinks such an interface is more appropriate
for these small devices. I wonder how so many different companies in the
industry could misjudge something that you see so clearly.
> Having not used Ubuntu Netbook Remix, does it initially hide the user
> from the ability to install or remove apps or does it have the same
> add\remove options that exist in Ubuntu?
You need to run desktop-switcher, to return from "UME Launcher" to Gnome
and Nautilus, then run "Add/Remove" from there. Of course, just like all
other so-called "easy mode" interfaces, if you open a terminal, then you
can do pretty much anything you want to. But then the kind of users this
interface is targeted at probably won't "want" much more than is already
provided. If and when they ever progress to the point where they do want
more, then by that time I'm sure they'll have figured out the relatively
simple steps required to do so, and hopefully be able to do so /without/
screwing up these systems, which have been carefully preconfigured to be
used by novices.
--
K.
http://slated.org
.----
| "At the time, I thought C was the most elegant language and Java
| the most practical one. That point of view lasted for maybe two
| weeks after initial exposure to Lisp." ~ Constantine Vetoshev
`----
Fedora release 8 (Werewolf) on sky, running kernel 2.6.25.11-60.fc8
18:03:51 up 64 days, 1:46, 4 users, load average: 0.13, 0.16, 0.12
|
|
