The netbook revolution is upon us. Less than a year ago, the cheap, Atom-powered mini-laptops were a novelty. Now they are shaking up the regular laptop industry. Netbooks are taking marketshare and mindshare, thanks in large part to their low prices.
They're shaking up another market, too: Operating systems. Of the three major families of consumer operating systems, it's become increasingly clear that one is positioned to take the lead in the growing netbook market: Windows.
How did this come about? Microsoft appears to have learned a lesson about transformative PC hardware from the One Laptop Per Child project. Interest in the devices prompted Redmond to marshal its resources to provide cheap Windows alternatives in emerging markets where the OLPCs running Linux might have flourished. Early netbooks such as the Asus Eee ran Linux, but manufacturers -- and eventually, Microsoft -- recognized that Linux wasn't going to cut it for many consumers. Selling XP on netbooks didn't fit with Microsoft's original plans for migrating the world to Vista, but that was before it became apparent that many consumers and businesses were having a tough time with the bloated Vista operating system -- if they bothered upgrading at all. Microsoft has moved on to preparing the world for its next OS, and it's very telling that an early demo of Windows 7 was shown on a netbook. The company sees an opportunity in netbooks, even while Apple remains MIA in the low-end notebook market.
As for Linux netbooks, they will continue to be purchased by open-source enthusiasts as well as people who are tempted by price or a casual interest in trying out the open-source operating system. But many more people buying netbooks will stick with XP, and eventually Windows 7, which offer a familiar interface and connections to commonly used software and devices.
Netbooks offer another threat to Linux as well: The attraction of converting an old laptop to Ubuntu or some other distro fades when the cost of getting a brand-new Windows netbook is so cheap. Millions of households have the laptop equivalent of an '83 Cadillac Coupe De Ville with 150,000 miles -- expensive clunkers that are seldom taken out owing to their size and slow speed. At one time, these old Windows 95, 98, and Me machines would be prime targets for Linux overhauls. Considering it's now possible to get a new, Internet-ready netbook with Windows XP for just $350, it's safe to say many people will simply not bother with the hassles associated with putting Linux on an old laptop.
Image: Asus Eee PC
Sources cited, referenced, or consulted: The Wall Street Journal, Ubuntu.com, Gizmodo.com, Wikipedia.
Comments
So what will they strip out of windows for the net book, and will we see soon lightweight anti virus and security software. So far most of the windows net books are bogged down when running a anti virus. Of course some bright spark will say you don't need it, but then I guess on that path you dont want to use the net. For me I'll stick to easy to use linux and only buy clean skin or linux installed net books my self.
Tail waves Happypony
A threat to Linux?... A THREAT to Linux?... Dude, you just don't get it. Linux is a piece of software, not a company. There is no comparison with Microsoft which makes the closed-source software, Windows, and the all the free people who volunteer their time and knowledge to add to the open-source software known as Linux. If people want to adopt Linux as their operating system of choice, more power to them. If they choose the bloated and security threatened Windows as their operating system, however closed the source code is, then that's their decision, too. "You can lead a horse to water, but you cannot make it drink." I know it's cliche, but the premise is still true: you cannot make dumb people choose a smart operating system.
Furthermore, in this economy, it makes so much more sense to convert an older laptop to Linux (which is completely free), than to go out and spend $350 on a another PC that does about the same thing. So what its a tiny machine. That doesn't matter when jobs are getting scarce and the new President-elect doesn't take office until January 2009. Not to mention the environmental aspect of adding to all the e-waste that is already piling up. Might as well just keep what you have a little longer, and recycle that older computer with a lightweight Linux operating system. When the economy is better, then you can donate that older computer to a needy family, who would be pleased to have it already running Linux.
Charles: I understand that Linux is a piece of open-source software. My point is it had a much brighter future when Microsoft wasn't so interested in the low-powered laptop/netbook market.
I also have to disagree with your statement about a netbook and a recycled Linux laptop doing "about the same thing." This may be true for relatively new laptops, but the laptops I was referring are those running Windows 95, 98, and Me -- machines that were made at least six or seven years ago. I actually spent part of the weekend attempting to convert an old ThinkPad i series to Linux. I am anticipating some significant configuration hassles, especially relating to networking -- this machine uses a PCMCIA Ethernet card and doesn't have wireless. In addition, the specs for a 1999-era Pentium II laptop show a lot less horsepower than a current Atom Netbook. This will have a direct impact on using OpenOffice, not to mention the browsing experience.
Ian Lamont
Managing Editor
The Industry Standard
Man...another lame article on Linux vs Windows. They seem to be the trend.
@Ian Lamont : Do your homework properly next time. I give you a F for now.
As commenter Charles B. already noted *nothing* threatens Linux, since Linux is not a company and not competing with Microsoft. The entire article is the ultimate example of a straw man, meant to make Microsoft look good for lagging behind...
The pro-Microsoft bias is clear from the headline to the last sentence: "...the hassles associated with putting Linux on an old laptop". There may be many things to be said against Linux' accesibility for less experienced computer users, but installing Linux on *old* hardware is almost as easy as installing OSX on a brand new Mac. This sentence is not just false, misleading or biased, it's a blatant lie.
Zelrik: You're not the first person to slam my writing (see Why podcasting is failing) but critics usually give some context.
What exactly don't you like, or what do you think I got wrong?
Ian Lamont
Managing Editor
Rick: You said "installing Linux on *old* hardware is almost as easy as installing OSX on a brand new Mac."
Which distro are you referring to, or are all of them almost as easy? I am asking as someone who is getting ready to install Linux on an old laptop (see my comment above), and has installed new versions of OS X many times before. Ubuntu looks like the best bet, but I am open to other suggestions.
Ian Lamont
Managing Editor
The threat is Microsoft preventing Linux from making significant inroads into a market. I don't see how Windows 7 will be any lighter than Vista, except for some kernel memory manager and scheduler optimizations. What Windows 7 has in it's favor is time. By 2009/10, Vista's current system requirements will appear minimal to hardware available--all netbooks of that period will handle Windows Vista and 7 just fine.
Linux has survived just fine with less than 1% consumer desktop marketshare. FreeBSD has survived with 0% marketshare and far less server marketshare than Linux.
Linux fails for consumers because of the lack of the same software choices as Windows. People aren't interested in alternatives nor are aware of Wine and Crossover Windows-compatibility products. There really isn't anything Linux or FOSS developers can do to remedy this except to encourage ISVs to port their software. Linux Standard Base is attempting to appeal to ISVs by unifying Linux and all its distributions in an attempt to make commercial development for that platform easier.
The FOSS world is very much against proprietary Linux drivers (for good reasons) but proprietary and commercial user-mode software isn't opposed, except by freedom purists/hippies.
I wish Lxer's would stop 'shooting the messenger'. Ian merely puts a question forward. Of course MS is going to challenge the netbook market. If you look at market share it's really, can Linux challenge XP?
Anecdotal: I managed to convince some tech savvy friends to give the EEE w/ Xandros a try. Unfortunately, there are still some very annoying bugs w/ the product/software. Can they be fixed? Of course. However, as of right now, people are more familiar w/ XP. And the dizzying array of Linux netbooks hitting the market, really only make people want to choose a standard, XP.
Lets be productive and improve the user experience with Linux. Rather than attack anyone who writes about Linux that we perceive is attacking. He's not, if you read his piece. Improvements need to be made to the Linux netbook offerings, and I'm positive they will. Once they are, they will be a far superior product. Right now there are still pro's and con's, Linux v. XP on a netbook.
Having purchased two netbooks. One with linux one with XP.
The performance of the Linux one was much much better and I will get another for personal use.
To get the XP version to work even with 4 times the amount of hard disk space. You need to remove
the anti virus software, turn off the firewall. Turn off all the eye candy. And even with that I couldn't
get IE or Firefox to work well. So open source comes to the rescue again with k-Meleon browser
based on mozilla code that is light weigh enough to make the netbook usable.
When I started working on trustedones last year, my ThinkPad T61p with WindowsXP Pro was almost one year old, and it took about 5 minutes to boot. Every new piece of development software required a reboot, and I needed to install a lot of things, often.
At the same time, I'd put together a 4 CPU 1U rack unit with 2TB RAID5 and 8GB of memory. For that, I installed Ubuntu 7.10 64bit without a single problem, and realized just how amazing (and how far) Linux has come (not a single unwanted reboot in over a year now). Within days, my ThinkPad was running Ubuntu, and it still does (it's 8.04 now, and it boots in under 1 minute).
It took about a month to get used to a non Windows OS. Before switching to Ubuntu, I was a Windows user since around 1990. Vista was the final blow for me. I looked at Apple, because I like OSX, but their hardware is overpriced junk, so there was only one option left - linux!
Anyhow, with Linux I get things done, and everything just works. It's not perfect, but it's getting there at an amazing rate. So, why would Linux be worried about Microsoft? I think it's the marketing budget. BUT, no matter how much you market junk, people will eventually figure out that you're selling them junk, see what's happening to the US car industry?
Windows wasn't a threat to GNU/Linux before there was ever a single netbook running GNU/Linux.
Now GNU/Linux occupies 20-30% of the netbook market depending on region according to both Asus and Acer.
But Windows is a threat to GNU/Linux ?
I think you've been sniffing the crazy glue.
GNU/Linux and FOSS, free to use, give away, is not about market share, it's about the sharing of knowledge, ideas and respect for the individual's freedom. No matter how much it's users are derided, there are still FOSS users and contributors.
The netbook has it's market targeted. It's not the Acer Ferrari gaming multicore processor world. It's got it's niche and GNU/Linux fills it satisfactorily. Like OLPC, Microsoft didn't need to be in the netbook market. It's current OS offering attests to that. Now they want to shoehorn "vista sp2" into it. They just can't take any competition and want to fight GNU/Linux at all costs.
I also as IT overloaded when producers feel nootebok now integrate their products in Windows XP. whereas, for a professional, preferably Linux instead of Windows.
when I want to buy a UMPC in Indonesia, the Operating System output Microsft dominate the UMPC here. and how to linux? I very rarely complain when Linux in the UMPC found in Indonesia ....
Let's make one thing clear. Windows (95, 98, XP, and Vista) is just plain bad OS. Oh BTW, my wife's VISTA laptop (Pavilion dv9207us) burned through a second disk in a bit over 1 year. It never stops spinning even with most "goodies" of the OS disabled. Finally she conceded she may have to switch to LINUX. The only thing going for Windows is the momentum. Now the momentum is not with them to the same extent and I am pretty certain this will kill them (at least with the notebooks). Really they are trying to muscle their way in by effectively sponsoring the netbooks with Windows, but I don't think this would work for too long.
By the way UBUNTU installs on my wife's Pavilion like charm and everything works. Can't say the same for XP- had to fetch 3 different drivers through linux.
Post new comment