Slashdot Log In
Linux To Take Over The Low-End PC Market?
Posted by
Zonk
on Mon Dec 10, 2007 07:17 AM
from the penguins-on-the-loose dept.
from the penguins-on-the-loose dept.
An anonymous reader writes "Desktop Linux has a recent commentary on the inevitable growth of Linux on the cheaper end of the desktop market. According to the article, the availability of under-$500 usable hardware, combined with a free operating system, free desktop office products, and free or cheap 'software as a service' online applications, opens a new market in which Microsoft cannot compete. 'Microsoft will fight this trend tooth and nail. It will cut prices to the point where it'll be bleeding ink on some of its product lines. And Windows XP is going to stick around much longer than Microsoft ever wanted it to. Still, it won't be enough.'"
Related Stories
Submission: Linux is about to take over the low end of PCs by Anonymous Coward
[+]
KDE 4 Uses 40% Less Memory Than 3 Despite Eye-Candy 566 comments
An anonymous reader writes "Pro-Linux reports that KDE 4, scheduled to be released in January 2008, consumes almost 40% less memory than KDE 3.5, despite the fact that version 4 of the Free and Open Source desktop system includes a composited window manager and a revamped menu and applet interface. KDE developer Will Stephenson showcased KDE 4's 3D eye-candy on a 256Mb laptop with 1Ghz CPU and run-of-the-mill integrated graphics, pointing out that mini-optimizations haven't even yet been started." Update: 12/14 22:40 GMT by Z : Or, not so much. An anonymous reader writes "The author of the original KDE 3.5 vs KDE 4.0 memory comparison has come out with a more accurate benchmark. In reality, KDE 4.0 uses 110 MB more memory than KDE 3.5.8.
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
Full
Abbreviated
Hidden
Loading... please wait.
Microsoft will not bleed ink (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Microsoft will not bleed ink (Score:5, Informative)
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
It's funny you can download better operating systems for free than what the richest corporation on earth can sell you. Then again, companies aren't there to make products, they're there to make money.
Re:Microsoft will not bleed ink (Score:5, Insightful)
Linux is a rather high-quality OS used for ultra-high-end applications in HPC. Yet millions of people will now perceive it as the low-end. Strange.
Parent
Re:Microsoft will not bleed ink (Score:4, Insightful)
That's the power, innovation, and advantage of open source -- you have the code, the right to modify and distribute it, so you can adopt it for whatever application suits your needs.
Parent
Nitpicking over analogies (Score:4, Informative)
Not really, no.
A Swiss Army Knife has different blades, tools and utensils for different purposes.
Each platform is a different purpose; a recompiled kernel (and userland) is a different blade/tool/utensil.
It is not users that need to recompile the kernel, which would be putting an edge on each and every blade -- it's the distro maintainers' job. Users just select the blade they need.
Parent
Re:Nitpicking over analogies (Score:5, Funny)
However a better analogy is to imagine the swiss army knife as a giant multi dimensional universal army knife which exists simultaneously at every size imaginable and is always both clasped and unclasped in every dimension and contains every physical tool known to man. In this scenario every distro ( in an unbroken continuum from the very first to the very last their will ever be ) would form a different polyphasic bladeset comprising a separate macro dimension representing each individual developer there ever will be. Crucially each developer is allowed both retrograde and anterograde movement but the blade will still remain both open and closed and ascend forward in the time dimension in phase with the complete amount of work encapsulated by the sum of developer dimensions. In this scenario a computer can be represented as a geometric qualiphat suspended at the binary root position of the blade space. Clearly a user need not necessarily be a user but it can be easily seen that in order for the pardigm to ring true they are for all intents and purposes encapsulated them very selves in the developer fumblrinian work cube. From there it's simple to prove that any particular blade/distro can be installed on any compatible hardware as many times as you like.
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Not all customers think free is better, especially those who are long term Microsoft houses. Not just them though, there are still a lot of proprietary Unix houses out there who are a long way from thinking Linux is what they need.
The OS itself is almost unimportant, it's the service that goes with it that matters. corporations never did just buy site licenses, they bought massive support contracts. Linux needs to convince a lot of companies that are happy with their current arrangement that
Re:So Programmers Should Just Work For Free? (Score:5, Funny)
Please get in touch for implementation details.
sballmer@microsoft.com
Parent
Re:So Programmers Should Just Work For Free? (Score:5, Insightful)
Sun Microsystems
Novell
Mozilla Foundation
Spiceworks(a personal favorite)
Parent
Re:So Programmers Should Just Work For Free? (Score:5, Insightful)
Nobody's hoping to see software engineers starve, it's just easy to get carried away hating Microsoft for all the monopolizing, anti-FOSS, and other damage it's responsible for. Can you really blame the GP for having no sympathy for Microsoft's bottom line?
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:So Programmers Should Just Work For Free? (Score:4, Insightful)
Parent
Re:So Programmers Should Just Work For Free? (Score:5, Insightful)
No. I doubt you will find many of us who object to the idea of having money. It is the methods of getting it and the attitudes that MS have that people here may not be happy with. /. I am unable to speak for others, so I shall speak for myself.
In a place like
I don't like the fact that software is sent out before it is ready, just because some manager types want it to be released now.
If I buy clothes, I assume things are made and they didn't just ship me the cloth and expect me to sew it together myself.
When they release a new product, they will tell us all how fantastic it is.
A couple of years later, when it is about ready for use, they drop it and bring out the next item. They then tell us how this fixes the many shortcomings of its precescessor. I am told how bad it was. I know that in a couple of years, I will be told how rubbish this one is too.
Microsoft bears at least some, and perhaps much, of the blame for the mess we are all in with patents and copyrights.
So they think that GPL is socialism and thus theft? I think that Closed source is protectionist racketeering and thus theft.
When they were small and growing, they relied on the fact that lots of people "borrowed" their software. This enabled them to grow. It was profiting from theft.
Now they are in a position of market dominance, they object to what they once relied on. Stealing is wrong, so when people ask me for a dodgy copy of Office, I point them to a free alternative. I object to their hypocrisy, not the fact that they object to people stealing.
If I buy something, I expect to be able to use what I buy. I expect to be able to sell what I buy, when I no longer want it. I do this with books and cars, so why are MS different?
As I started, I don't object to making money. I just object to some methods of extortion and hypocrisy. I work for money and would love to have more. I will not hit people over the head to get it. My basic objection is that they are no longer a software company. They are a protection racket.
Parent
carrot vs no carrot (Score:4, Interesting)
But there is something riding against commercial vs. free software, and it's a double edged sword: feature creep.
In the commercial world, software has to keep adding features in order to sell the next version and keep the profits rolling in. This might help an otherwise under-featured bit of software gain widely sought-after functionality. However, we all know there comes a time when a software package is "just right," yet continues to add features and functionality that are unwanted and only complicate usability (e.g., winamp, nero, etc.)
With free software, there is no incentive to add unnecessary features. This is why I believe that in the long run, free software will dominate the marketplace, because it can afford to not give users features they don't need. But it can be difficult for a sophisticated package to take on critical functionality without a carrot.
Look at the state of video editing on Linux. Yes I have used Kino and Cinelerra, but anyone who has used them knows how tricky and unstable these tools are compared to, say, iMovie.
Free will win in the end, unless commercial software finds a way to bust the bloat.
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
All those people complaining about 'not being able to run their games' forget one thing: Computers were not designed to be game playing machines, they were designed as productivity tools. That the gaming market was
Re:Microsoft will not bleed ink (Score:5, Informative)
Parent
Microsft Remove Vista's Kill Switch (Score:4, Interesting)
http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=07/12/04/1331246&from=rss [slashdot.org]
Is it any coincidence that Microsoft has done this? Piracy does help them to a certain extent, it pushes their products into markets where people cannot afford them, or just flat out don't want to pay for it, which still ultimatley counts towards their market share.
Piracy & Linux on the desktop (Score:3, Interesting)
But recently with activation & continuous authentication, Microsoft has tried to prevent this.
Has Microsoft finally given up its an extra tier of pricing beyond retail and volume? "You'd never give us a cent for Windows? Well, at least pirate it
News that matters? (Score:3, Insightful)
Since when did this consititute 'news'?
Perceived delay (Score:5, Interesting)
The main problem, IMHO, is not even Joe Newbie who re-formats his GNU PC. It is the mentality of PC vendors itself who do not even configure their GNU/Linuxes correctly on their hardware.
The other day I saw a notebook at a shop with a misconfigured video driver, logged in X11 with a purplish tint and horizontal garbage lines everywhere. Another example: a local LinuxMagazine review a couple of years ago found out that in a Hwlet Packard low end desktop system pre-configured with GNU/Linux (indeed!), OpenOficce would take a full 3 minutes to start!! Because they had configured a 128MB system with a 1GB Swap.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
You didn't really need to add "with a 1GB swap" there.
Sure, Linux will run happily on much older hardware. Doesn't mean you can usefully do any typical desktop-type tasks on it - unless you're prepared to forego GUI-based office applications.
Nicest device at present (Score:3, Interesting)
High resolution touch screen (800*480), hardware keyboard, gps and customisable - ~$450
This looks dreamy (and its on my xmas list)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
http://www.ultramobilegeek.com/2007/11/asus-eee-701-vs-nokia-n810-linux-fight.html [ultramobilegeek.com]
Annoyed (Score:4, Insightful)
Great, we need a vista killer (Score:4, Insightful)
I'm not going to say $100 isn't reasonable for the OS that runs your PC. It's a fair price. But the version game is unacceptable. So hopefully some of the linux based PCs will drive down prices of MS's OS down to reasonable and sane levels.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
But the version game is unacceptable.
Uh, why ? It's not like price discrimination is an uncommon market phenomenon...
Re:Great, we need a vista killer (Score:5, Insightful)
This still works as profit source in the short run, but it annoys the customer base, undermines loyalty, encourages seeking alternatives. And once alternatives are found, you lose in the long run. You squeeze $50 for Home Premium from an user today, and lose the whole sale and the customer entirely tomorrow.
Except the analysis hardly ever takes into account reasons why people switch to other OS, and even if it does, it comes to entirely wrong conclusions (they are cheaper, they have better marketing) while your own faults - trying to squeeze last penny off the customer - are hardly ever taken into account as the 'real evil'. People hate being cheated and perceive this as cheating. And it doesn't matter you don't and your marketing people will explain to your CEO that it really isn't cheating. For people, it is, and people will hate you for that. And will jump the ship at the first opportunity... or steal from the thieves, not a crime to many.
Parent
I'd like this to be true, but ... (Score:3, Interesting)
The arguement... (Score:3, Interesting)
Customers will balk when they realize that they use the computer for just internet and simple word processing and maybe some multimedia.
The problem is, in the real world Linux isn't even on the radar of most individuals. If they did hear about it, it's probably something from a few years ago and not about one of the modern distributions.
The solution: Whoever sells these cheap machines has to advertise. It should be simple enough. A short TV add showing wireless internet and desktop productivity apps for a $200 machine like the OLPC would sell them like hotcakes. Especially when you say that the price includes full versions of all the software. (You can even have two people discuss during the ad about how they hate trial versions that came with their last computer, and comparing it to amarok, k3b, openoffice.org, and digikam. Especially mention seamless integration with mp3 players and digital cameras.)
Tragedy of the Commons (Score:5, Interesting)
I think Linux cannot succeed on price alone. It has to be enough better that people will invest the time needed to change their habits - which today drive them straight to Windows.
Prediction... (Score:4, Interesting)
These devices aren't going to directly hit MS's products - what they could do is cost them mindshare and threaten the future of their monopoly.
Products like the eeePC occupy a precarious niche just below cheap "regular" laptops - put a bigger screen and a CD drive on them and there'll be a cheaper Dell laptop - so while they may be successful for their manufacturers they're not going to make a big dent in PC sales. People will buy them as "extra" machines for kids or as spare "take anywhere" machines (don't buy a £2000 ultra-portable - buy a £1000 desktop or large screen laptop plus an eeePC for when you don't need the power or don't want to risk carrying your main machine). But if they find that, out-of-the-box, they can connect to web and EMAIL and open most of their documents with these things called "Firefox", "Thunderbird" and "Open Office" then they might have their eyes opened to other possibilities.
Remember, MS's real monopoly is Office, not Windows. How many lUsers have you met who, when asked what version of windows they are running, respond with their Office version? However, I was in a school (in England) recently and saw a big (homemade) poster on the wall saying "Haven't got MS Office at home? Have you tried the free alternative from www.OpenOffice.org?" - so there is hope for the world.
If I were MS right now I'd be busily developing something like "Vista Lite Edition" that could be sold on a memory stick alongside eeePCs and the like for about $25, probably including a stripped down office. ISTR they did do something similar in some countries but it was perceived as "Windows - crippled edition". It might be an easier sell if it was linked to built-to-a-price "appropriate technology" hardware.
Cannot or will not? (Score:3, Insightful)
If Microsoft made Windows 2000 Pro available for $20 per copy in 2008, then shuttered it; and Windows XP Pro/64 Pro for $40 in 2008, then 2009, then shuttered it, imagine how easy it would be for many 'cloned' copies to get right. Now imagine how easy it would be for Microsoft to compete against Linux in the low-end market. Microsoft would be able to say -- which Linux cannot -- "Our OS works with Microsoft Office natively, including Exchange". The real cash cow is untouched, i.e. Office, and Microsoft finally gets into the "sell the blades, not the razor" business once and for all.
-BA
Linux as "poor man's operating system"? (Score:3, Interesting)
Eee (Score:4, Interesting)
Big surprise. (Score:3, Funny)
So, a web site dedicated to Linux says that Linux is going to take over a market segment. Big surprise. Expecting anything different would be like expecting Microsoft to say Linux is the best option for a market segment.
This is not news. It is not even opinion. It is propaganda.
Re:After burners are outlawed. (Score:5, Interesting)
Yeah, but they probably aren't the low end, now, are they? I think a lot of people are fed up with virus software updates and other fine Windows features. The high end of the market is moving to Mac, and the low end -- at least the more knowledgeable among them -- are moving to Linux. I live near Howard County, Maryland, which has an award-winning public library system. The free internet access is spectacular there; walk in, sit down, start using, no waiting, no library card required. Guess what operating system and applications it uses? And no one complains about it not being Windows.
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Apples and apples (Score:5, Insightful)
Set of computers that can run all required email and office apps (the latest versions) along with a server to support the mail etc, all based on Linux
Vs
Set of computers that can run all required email and office apps (the latest versions) along with a server to support the mail etc, all based on Vista
The only difference is that the base specs required for one is much higher than the other, which is the whole point of the article.
Okay, so it might not be as viable in a huge company where everyone (especially admins) already have Windows training, but for a ~100 person or less SME (Small/Medium Enterprise) then the huge savings on costs would be a boon.
Parent
SMEs aren't interested in Linux (Score:5, Insightful)
Their costs towards their IT infrastructure simply aren't large enough to worry about license costs. Microsoft already have this market. SMEs simply buy PCs with windows already installed, and use SBS on the back end. Their savings from Linux are in the thousands, not hundreds of thousands or millions. It isn't worth their while to switch. Especially given the fact they can't afford to hire competent admins and so are stuck with whomever is locally available.
Large companies on the other hand, are a completely different kettle of fish. They can save millions by making use of Linux, and that's exactly what they do. The CTO or CIO's may or may not be aware of it but pretty much every large company out there has Linux just about everywhere from file servers to RDBMS servers to web application servers. They can afford to hire competent admins who can run Linux as well as their other Unix systems and who understand the mathematics of I.T. systems.
The market for Linux is not SMEs. I've been there and tried to sell it. The real market for Linux is on the big end. Multinationals, governments etc. They can save vast sums.
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
The question is do they provide satisfactory functionality?
Because actually, 100 sub-$200 PC systems running Win98SE would probably work faster and be cheaper in means of TCO, and quite likely provide all the functionality needed as well (with exception of stability and security).
If I need email, office, file sharing and some, get the work done in acceptable comfort, you ask yourself what you need. You may get Vista and $1000 PCs, you can get XP a
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re:This may not be good for Linux. (Score:5, Insightful)
If I upgrade her to A old thrown away G3 mac and she can do everything she did before, she will STILL be happy.
That is what the $200.00 walmart PC is for... Aunt Gertie, Grandma Fluffles, and creepy uncle Fred. I have supported far more happy low power pc owners than I have seen happy high power pc owners.
Funny part, most "high power" pc owners think sony Vaio = high end. sad reality is that it's low end just trendy.
Low end pc's are for the bulk of the computer users. They do not play games, they don't run bit torrent and watch movies on their computer. They check email, write and print out letters, do online banking and play solitaire.
For them, these computers are typically 300-400% faster than the 10 year old monster they are using now.
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
1. Granny wants email and the web.
2. Granny might use OpenOffice.org to type up a letter if keeping the printer running isn't too challenging. Maybe upload pictures from her camera for processing if she's really hip. Downloading and printing some
3. No way, no how Granny is going to _maintain_ her computer -- Windows OR linux -- so that's a wash and we can just quit agoniz
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Wrong. That's how Windows got its foothold: it started taking the lower-end of the workstation market. In fact that's often how a newcomer wins into any market: by being cheaper.
I think Microsoft should be afraid.
"Linux for the Desktop": a wrong way of thought (Score:4, Insightful)
What is also good for linux in this market, is that Windows seems to not be able to easily adjust to different form factors. They try to put windows XP on the EEE, but everything will be unreadable on the small screen! You can make icons and fonts bigger, but does that help? Making an interface for mobile devices requires a 'paradigm shift' (to put it in managerspeak), the Xandros developers for the EEE got that right with their simple menu. Nokia got that right. But even Windows CE doesn't get it, still thinking to much in the good-ol' "Desktop" idea.
Parent
Re:Linux fanboy hypocrisy (Score:4, Interesting)
That said, the growing success of Linux (and the Mac OS)will ensure that one day--who knows how soon--Microsoft will use the Linux saturation levels as an argument against sanctions it faced (faces) as a monopoly. That's when the OS war will finally reach the point of full engagement.
Parent
More AC BS (Score:3, Insightful)
1) The US and European union have both declared MS to be a monopoly.
2) A monopoly in legal terms is not someone who owns 100% of the market, but owns an overwhelming portion of the market. Windows is at what, 90%? 95%?
3) Worse still, MS has been shown, time and time again, that they use that monopoly influence to bully PC vendors. MS hasn't been able to use that influence as much beca
Re:Linux is shit (Score:4, Funny)
Parent