Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by martyb on Tuesday November 06 2018, @02:20PM   Printer-friendly
from the handy-little-machines dept.

The Linux Journal reminisces about the Asus Eee and considers how close the world came to getting a GNU/Linux Desktop as a result of it being on the market. While the article is a bit light on the machinations that Microsoft carried out behind the scenes to impair their utility and cap the growth of netbook sales, especially any with GNU/Linux pre-installed, it does cover a lot of other important aspects about the netbook phenomenon. The Eee was really one of the first if not the first netbooks available. Being small and relatively inexpensive, the netbooks were not practical to use for running the slow, bloated, legacy operating systems that remain all too common among original equipment manufacturers (OEM) even today. Instead the Eee came with a good distro pre-installed and could accept just about any light 32-bit distro in its place. It is hard to overstate how popular these machines became.

It's almost impossible to believe, a decade later, how popular netbooks were in the wake of the Eee. Way past popular, actually: the netbook was the best-selling computer in the world in 2009, with seven-fold growth from 2008 and some 20 million sold. That accounted for almost 10% of the entire computer market at a time when the recession saw desktop computer sales fall 12%, the worst decline in its history.

[...] Netbooks and the Eee were so successful, in fact, that research analysts who followed Apple—whose top executives had famously called the machines "junk"—warned the company that it had better do something to compete. Mac sales fell in 2008, the first decline in five and a half years, and an analyst told Computerworld: "Vendors are waking up to the fact that people respond to so-called 'good-enough' computing. They don't really need all the power of a Core 2 Duo CPU most of the time."


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 4, Insightful) by Thexalon on Tuesday November 06 2018, @02:43PM (16 children)

    by Thexalon (636) on Tuesday November 06 2018, @02:43PM (#758498)

    Companies that have been specializing in Linux boxes for a while, like System76, are saying "Whaddaya mean, we don't have Linux on a desktop?" Heck, the desktop I'm writing this on was purchased retail from a local shop with Ubuntu on it.

    The main reasons non-Android Linux doesn't dominate the marketplace have to do with marketing, and supply chain management that makes the Linux boxen more expensive than their Windows counterparts. The lack of marketing means that the average Joe thinks Linux is for weird long-haired geeks, and the supply chain problems mean that Joe is now thinking "Why pay more for something harder to use? Plus it can't run $GAME!"

    --
    The only thing that stops a bad guy with a compiler is a good guy with a compiler.
    Starting Score:    1  point
    Moderation   +2  
       Insightful=2, Total=2
    Extra 'Insightful' Modifier   0  
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   4  
  • (Score: 3, Insightful) by hendrikboom on Tuesday November 06 2018, @02:59PM (4 children)

    by hendrikboom (1125) Subscriber Badge on Tuesday November 06 2018, @02:59PM (#758505) Homepage Journal

    There was a time when the preinstalled-Linux desktop computers cost slightly less than the preinstalled-Windows ones. That came to an end because people buying a computer would see that they looked the same and the Linux one was cheaper. Then once they tried it they brought it back because it turned out they really wanted Windows.

    So because of the extra costs of handling refunds, stores balked at selling the Linux machines until the price was raised. Now the rubes saw that Windows was cheaper and ended up with what they thought they wanted and the stores no longer had problems having to take back the Linux machines. Of course, Linux sales also plummeted, and they eventually became rarities.

    • (Score: 5, Insightful) by canopic jug on Tuesday November 06 2018, @03:12PM (3 children)

      by canopic jug (3949) Subscriber Badge on Tuesday November 06 2018, @03:12PM (#758515) Journal

      I disagree but no longer have the supporting citations to back up the claim. The !@#$% search engines do poorly with old news, that the odds of refinding the relevant articles is poor to non-existent, especially once M$ started a misinformation campaign on the topics in the trade press to bury news of their influence on production.

      From what I remember, the diminished sales of the GNU/Linux devices was solely due to M$ forcing the manufacturer to completely stop selling the devices except with Windoze. There were some returns but they mostly had to do with Windoze underperforming on the netbook hardware. There was a lot of analysis on this for a very brief time before it was countered by the disinformation.

      Either way, I had one for a long time and it was great for certain tasks, after I put on a different distro and customized it. Eventually it got old enough that it failed to even turn on, but only after had seen a lot of travel and many, many hours of use. Usually I had OpenBSD on it with a lot of networking utilities. Though one time I even used it as a netboot thin client to demo LTSP.

      --
      Money is not free speech. Elections should not be auctions.
      • (Score: 2) by Nerdfest on Tuesday November 06 2018, @05:18PM

        by Nerdfest (80) on Tuesday November 06 2018, @05:18PM (#758586)

        I still have a couple around. They make great devices for controlling guitar effects, music equipment, as a media centre extension (MPD controller, etc). Quiet, low power, and cheap. Really the only complaint I had about them was the crappy screen resolutions ... which really were not much worse than the average laptop at the time.

      • (Score: 3, Informative) by Nuke on Tuesday November 06 2018, @05:51PM (1 child)

        by Nuke (3162) on Tuesday November 06 2018, @05:51PM (#758601)

        Hendrikboom was talking about desktops, not notebooks. I remember a time when an effort was made to sell desktops with Linux in the high street, and Hendrikboom described exactly what happened - customers returned them as soon as they got home, switched on, and said "WTF is happening? I can't see Windows!".

        But that was never the only factor. I understand that Windows PCs (at least back then) came loaded with adware, crapware, and malware that the retailer or manufacturer was paid to pre-load, and of course that crap only worked with Windows. But those payments were more than the Windows licence cost to the seller, so despite Linux being free they lost money by not shipping with Windows and the crapware.

        A final factor is that (at least back then) MS expects a royalty on every PC sold (unless there are special agreements) and will claim "piracy" and threaten to withdraw the wholesale pricing deal with any vendor who ships PCs without Windows, even if they still pay MS the royalty.

        • (Score: 3, Insightful) by canopic jug on Wednesday November 07 2018, @04:38AM

          by canopic jug (3949) Subscriber Badge on Wednesday November 07 2018, @04:38AM (#758832) Journal

          A final factor is that (at least back then) MS expects a royalty on every PC sold (unless there are special agreements) and will claim "piracy" and threaten to withdraw the wholesale pricing deal with any vendor who ships PCs without Windows, even if they still pay MS the royalty.

          Yes, "piracy" was the official public excuse M$ used to convince politicians and vendors as the reason to stop selling hardware without an OS pre-installed. However, M$ didn't want to bring attention to the fact that GNU/Linux was the reason buyers were asking for whitebox systems. Their marketing arms FAST and BSA do that as well and come down very hard with their audits if they start to find less than 100% M$ in-house. If I recall correctly, for some years M$ had packaged their proof-of-purchase holograms or whatever in such a way that they were not retained by most businesses and never made it into the recordkeeping systems.

          I used to buy servers without pre-installed operating systems * and do remember when the vendors were forced to stop. Later, some got around that prohibition by offering FreeDOS, but I think that too has been stopped also in the name of "piracy". The growth of the whitebox systems was clearly based on the growth in Free and Open Source Software operating systems, and M$ needed to kill off the options without bringing attention to the competition. Blaming "piracy" was a successful ploy from M$ and successfuly distracted from GNU/Linux. Even today it is impossible to get whitebox systems and finding vendors that -- in practice -- will sell with GNU/Linux is very, very difficult. With hardware arriving with Windoze pre-installed, I am sure that many managers, even if they are not active M$ fifth-columnists, still fall victim to the sunk costs fallacy [psychologytoday.com] and continue to throw good money after bad.

          * Some in purchasing at that place were real rats and bought systems with Windoze pre-installed anyway, paying extra for it, even though they were explicitly told not to. The systems were to be used as either devel systems running GNU/Linux or production systems also running GNU/Linux. Shockingly the top management was ok with the unnecessary Windoze purchases even though they otherwise fought against any and all expenditures. I checked up on the place many years later and found that their general IT department was gone, and that the Windoze resellers had gone from a 5 person unit to having over 200 of those flunkies. Needless to say, the actual employees affected got little done and the organization had completely lost its international standing.

          --
          Money is not free speech. Elections should not be auctions.
  • (Score: 4, Informative) by canopic jug on Tuesday November 06 2018, @03:00PM (10 children)

    by canopic jug (3949) Subscriber Badge on Tuesday November 06 2018, @03:00PM (#758506) Journal

    [...] and the supply chain problems mean that Joe is now thinking "Why pay more for something harder to use? Plus it can't run $GAME!"

    Sadly that myth just keeps going. Most distros have been far easier to use than Windows since about the turn of the century. There were some good usability studies posted back then that noted the fact that KDE had surpassed Windoze in ease of use for regular desktop activities. Maintenance has been easier since the Red Hat 5.2 days, in spite of the RPM hell problems. Somewhere along the line around ten years ago ease of installation leapt ahead with Ubuntu. UEFI seems set out to end that but having it preinstalled would render that checkbox moot. System76, Pogolinux, EmperorLinux, Slimbook, and others do well there. However, while their quality is good, shoddy hardware can still appear cheaper if one only compares the list price.

    Now as then it is the OEM that is the largest barrier. So, I agree that it is marketing and missed opportunities with the supply chain blocking wider adoption. The latter is due to a lot of (possibly illegal) horse trading going on in regards to Windoze pricing. Tragically, customization is not a thing any more. It is one of the FOSS desktops' strengths but not one that can be mareted any more due to the public being so subdued into accepting the defaults. Ease of use is a big strong point, as are ease of maintenance, (relative) security, and a wider selection of non-game applications.

    --
    Money is not free speech. Elections should not be auctions.
    • (Score: 2) by acid andy on Tuesday November 06 2018, @03:54PM (5 children)

      by acid andy (1683) on Tuesday November 06 2018, @03:54PM (#758537) Homepage Journal

      Tragically, customization is not a thing any more. It is one of the FOSS desktops' strengths but not one that can be mareted any more due to the public being so subdued into accepting the defaults.

      I know they get brainwashed, but is the public psyche really that pliable? I suppose it's really a case of your own product's marketing needs to align with and feed off the marketing campaigns of the competitors because it's a lot harder to fight the tide that's constantly washing over the collective consciousness.

      --
      If a cat has kittens, does a rat have rittens, a bat bittens and a mat mittens?
      • (Score: 3, Informative) by canopic jug on Tuesday November 06 2018, @04:00PM (3 children)

        by canopic jug (3949) Subscriber Badge on Tuesday November 06 2018, @04:00PM (#758544) Journal

        One of the takeaways from the case between M$ and Netscape, even back then, was that over 60% of people kept the defaults exactly as they are. I have a lot of anecdotes that convince me that the percentage is much higher nowadays. However, those are only anecdotes. It is past time for another proper study if it could get past all the political obstacles in place.

        --
        Money is not free speech. Elections should not be auctions.
        • (Score: 2) by acid andy on Tuesday November 06 2018, @04:23PM (2 children)

          by acid andy (1683) on Tuesday November 06 2018, @04:23PM (#758561) Homepage Journal

          That's sad if it's true, because it suggests we're breeding nations of compliant drones that do not wish to question what is put in front of them or think critically. I'm extrapolating a lot from your example, but if I'm right, that's very bad for democracy.

          I do have to wonder how they got that 60% figure though. The people who say yes to surveys and who used to leave the old "Send details of my experience to Micro$oft" checkbox checked (wow, asking before slurping, THOSE were the days!) probably are the same people that keep all the other defaults.

          --
          If a cat has kittens, does a rat have rittens, a bat bittens and a mat mittens?
          • (Score: 2) by deimtee on Wednesday November 07 2018, @04:06AM (1 child)

            by deimtee (3272) on Wednesday November 07 2018, @04:06AM (#758825) Journal

            Just playing devil's advocate, but it's also possible that the defaults have got much better, and people see no reason to change them.

            --
            If you cough while drinking cheap red wine it really cleans out your sinuses.
            • (Score: 2) by canopic jug on Wednesday November 07 2018, @09:37AM

              by canopic jug (3949) Subscriber Badge on Wednesday November 07 2018, @09:37AM (#758886) Journal

              Just playing devil's advocate, but it's also possible that the defaults have got much better, and people see no reason to change them.

              With GNU/Linux distros and any of the BSDs or BSD distros/forks, I'd agree a little. The defaults have gotten much better and people are getting quite usable defaults. Mostly, however, people nowadays come to GNU/Linux without IT experience and instead have a lot of baggage inflicted from long-term use of legacy systems, sometimes concurrently with GNU/Linux.

              With the legacy systems, the situation with default settings is more difficult. On OSX it is more or less impossible to customize the interface. On the Vista series, particularly Vista10, not only is the interface hard to customize, but the changes get wiped out at arbitrary intervals by "updates", "upgrades", as well as whims of the M$ resellers posing as IT departments. Also, their "reformat, reinstall" mantra which they bleat does equal damage to customizations because they are so damn hard to restore, not just zapping third-party applications. The difficulty grinds people down and they just resign themselves to accepting the defaults. That carries over to all systems they use, good or bad.

              --
              Money is not free speech. Elections should not be auctions.
      • (Score: 2) by urza9814 on Wednesday November 07 2018, @03:10PM

        by urza9814 (3954) on Wednesday November 07 2018, @03:10PM (#758982) Journal

        Tragically, customization is not a thing any more. It is one of the FOSS desktops' strengths but not one that can be mareted any more due to the public being so subdued into accepting the defaults.

        I know they get brainwashed, but is the public psyche really that pliable? I suppose it's really a case of your own product's marketing needs to align with and feed off the marketing campaigns of the competitors because it's a lot harder to fight the tide that's constantly washing over the collective consciousness.

        If you want to understand why non-techies aren't into customization, you need to stop thinking like a techie. Most people actually see retaining defaults as a *good thing*, and they're not necessarily wrong about that either. They don't want to customize, because they don't want to learn how the machine actually works. They want to be able to ask the guy sitting next to them or the neighbor kid or whoever how to accomplish some task, and they want step-by-step picture instructions (any text must be less than one sentence per photo) that they can follow exactly on their own system. If a single icon is different -- even if it's not an icon they need to use for that particular task -- then they assume something is broken. They don't see the computer the way we do; they see the computer like they see a microwave oven. It's an appliance with a certain predefined set of functionality which is activated by pressing a certain predefined sequence of buttons. And they just want to be able to memorize the button sequences that they need. And changing settings away from defaults just means learning new buttons and losing the ability to follow other peoples' instructions.

        Most people don't have any clue what their systems are capable of. And they don't care. And a disturbing number of these people are even "software engineers"....

        Go ask people sometime what they really *want* to do with their computers. In an ideal world, if they could have someone developing some custom software just for them, what would it do? Most people will look at you like you've got two heads; they'll barely even comprehend the question. Or they'll just say they want the software they already have to work faster or crash less. But new software, new interfaces, or even something as simple as a macro seems to be too imaginative for most people.

        On the one hand, I want to say that people shouldn't be using computers if they don't understand them. On the other hand...I don't necessarily know all the inner workings of my microwave, and I don't want to. I look at what the store has and I pick one and I use it as designed. We've all got limited time and energy and we can't dig into every detail of every object we come into contact with.

    • (Score: 5, Interesting) by jmorris on Tuesday November 06 2018, @05:43PM (1 child)

      by jmorris (4844) on Tuesday November 06 2018, @05:43PM (#758599)

      It isn't any of those things, it is just Microsoft. EEE proved that, put ANY non-Windows unit in stores that has minimal fit and finish work and they will sell. The only reason the EEE project was even allowed to occur was as a research project based on the success of OLPC, Asus and Intel were trying to design a similar low spec laptop but based on more "off the shelf" tech. It was only allowed onto the market because it really couldn't run Windows and nobody thought it would sell many units anyway. When they couldn't make enough to meet demand Microsoft took notice.

      The next evolution of EEE was the 9" model and Microsoft was ready. They offered up XP for free and made it clear it was an offer that wasn't going to be refused. Asus was selling a lot of EEE PCs but selling a lot more Windows laptops worldwide and couldn't afford to lose that business so they accepted the offer and sold two versions, stores tended to only stock the Windows one because Microsoft made sure THEY played ball. You could order the Linux version, same as System76 and such. The Linux threat was mostly ended... until distros like Ubuntu adopted the EEE and made sure everything worked "out of the box" on one and people started loading them up since Windows was pretty unusable on one. So next Microsoft leaned on the, now multiple, hardware makers to adopt 10 and 11" screens so Windows would work. The SSDs also faded away in favor of spinning rust, bigger batteries to power it all. They became slightly smaller laptops and neither fish nor foul found few takers. The rise of the tablet ended this sad chapter as people found another way to escape Windows.

      Then Google, seeing these things come to pass and seeing the hunger that existed for a laptop that actually worked, launched the Chromebook. Note that Google has one thing going for it that no other PC vendor has. No business relationship with Microsoft. At all.

      • (Score: 2) by driverless on Wednesday November 07 2018, @09:25AM

        by driverless (4770) on Wednesday November 07 2018, @09:25AM (#758885)

        Just as an add-on comment, I owned both a 7" and 10" EEE. They were cute, but dear God were they an Operation Hairshirt. The 7" model had a barely-usable screen, barely-usable keyboard, and minimal storage space crammed with a Linux distro hacked up to fit into it. It was barely upgradeable/expandable to do anything else, e.g. plugging in a USB device other than a HID or storage device, it took an insane amount of hacking around just to be able to get it to recognise a GPS device. The 10" was less painful, but not by much. I don't think Microsoft had to do much to have it fail except sit back and wait, you needed to be a serious enthusiast to put up with it.

        Having said that, its great success was that it convinced manufacturers that laptops don't have to be expensive boat-anchor clunkers, but can be cheap and light. $whateverBooks wouldn't exist today if the EEE hadn't shown the way.

    • (Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday November 06 2018, @08:46PM (1 child)

      by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday November 06 2018, @08:46PM (#758677)

      Most distros have been far easier to use than Windows since about the turn of the century.

      Why do people always have to exaggerate? This is simply not true. I'm a die-hard Linux fan, but I would never make statements like this.

      The reality is that Windows XP -- not released until after the "turn of the century" -- was widely successful because it actually did a lot of stuff right (for the average user), and people kept using XP because Windows got worse (though Windows 7 wasn't bad).

      Meanwhile, I've been using Linux on and off since the mid-90s, and I can definitely say Linux had significantly more issues for the average computer user until just a few years ago. Sure, Windows would gradually accumulate crap over time, eventually forcing a reinstall if you wanted a functional system. But Linux -- unless you bought a machine specifically tested for Linux and well-supported -- was always a pain in the ass if you weren't familiar with command line and config files.

      I switched over to Linux for all my personal computers in the mid-2000s, but even then Linux would break things on every upgrade. Like major things -- like I sometimes couldn't boot to a GUI (which basically would make the computer useless to most people). After toying with Ubuntu for a few years (and seeing different things break with every install of a new version), I eventually went back to Debian Stable, but then had to deal with out-of-date versions for a lot of stuff.

      Eventually things improved, but that wasn't until somewhere around 2010-2012. After around 2012, I feel like there are several Linux distros I could actually recommend to people who wouldn't be comfortable with a command line to solve random problems that might pop up, and installation was smooth enough that people unfamiliar with Linux could dependably do it on a wide variety of hardware. If you had someone else install the OS for you, you might be able to push back the date of usability by noobs a few years, but definitely not to the "turn of the century."

      Somewhere along the line around ten years ago ease of installation leapt ahead with Ubuntu.

      Disagree there too. It was really Linux Mint that made installation by noobs feasible. Installing Ubuntu on random machines was a crapshot for several years -- as I said, new stuff would break on my system with every new install. Yes, I could fix it, but a noob would be driven away by that sort of crap. Also, for a long time Ubuntu refused to allow enough proprietary stuff (like display drivers) to actually get stuff to work reasonably by default. You had to do the install and then follow some online guide to actually get to a computer that would let you have standard codecs to make the web work "normally."

      Mint fixed all that and made installation and use seamless for noobs. Other distros are now better (and Ubuntu was important in getting stuff set for Mint to come along).

      Bottom line: Linux works really well now with several major distros with little fuss. But that's only been for the past few years. Still, it is about time that the wider public realized Linux is really a viable alternative now.

      • (Score: 2) by urza9814 on Wednesday November 07 2018, @03:37PM

        by urza9814 (3954) on Wednesday November 07 2018, @03:37PM (#758994) Journal

        Meanwhile, I've been using Linux on and off since the mid-90s, and I can definitely say Linux had significantly more issues for the average computer user until just a few years ago. Sure, Windows would gradually accumulate crap over time, eventually forcing a reinstall if you wanted a functional system. But Linux -- unless you bought a machine specifically tested for Linux and well-supported -- was always a pain in the ass if you weren't familiar with command line and config files.

        Man, just within the past year I've had to provide tech support for *professional software developers* who couldn't get Windows 7 installed. Setting up and configuring a new computer is difficult even for people with some technical skill and experience. That's precisely why pre-installs are so important. Without OEM support, installing drivers is *still* a pain in the ass on Windows too. Install stock Windows on a new laptop and you'll likely have no wifi, no ethernet (which confused the hell out of me, but it happened...) no sound, limited display resolutions, maybe even no USB support. Yeah, in 2018, no USB support out of the box. Thank god that particular system still had an optical drive so we could burn the network drivers to a CD-R. The lack of vendor support is the *only* reason Linux appears to be harder here.

        I switched over to Linux for all my personal computers in the mid-2000s, but even then Linux would break things on every upgrade. Like major things -- like I sometimes couldn't boot to a GUI (which basically would make the computer useless to most people). After toying with Ubuntu for a few years (and seeing different things break with every install of a new version), I eventually went back to Debian Stable, but then had to deal with out-of-date versions for a lot of stuff.

        My girlfriend recently bought a new Lenovo. Within a month, Windows update stopped running. We tried to reinstall Windows, and the whole system stopped booting. Lenovo sent a tech to her house to do the reinstall, which lasted maybe two weeks before it stopped updating again. At this point that computer is probably just never going to be getting updates. And hell, just look at Soylent's past articles. If you think Microsoft isn't routinely breaking stuff with updates too, then you aren't paying much attention.

        Disagree there too. It was really Linux Mint that made installation by noobs feasible. Installing Ubuntu on random machines was a crapshot for several years -- as I said, new stuff would break on my system with every new install. Yes, I could fix it, but a noob would be driven away by that sort of crap. Also, for a long time Ubuntu refused to allow enough proprietary stuff (like display drivers) to actually get stuff to work reasonably by default. You had to do the install and then follow some online guide to actually get to a computer that would let you have standard codecs to make the web work "normally."

        100% agree about Ubuntu being nothing special. Every few years I try it again, most recently just this past summer, and never once has it actually installed successfully. I'd say Mandrake/Mandriva did an excellent job at building a user-friendly distro long before Ubuntu, although they did have a number of bad releases too (usually every other one)...but the good releases were *really* good. Even fifteen years ago I was generally able to just run the installer and everything would work. Worst case you've gotta install wifi drivers. Which, at that time, was a pain in the ass on Windows too. On Linux, that situation has improved. On Windows, it hasn't.