FYI, I did read the article.. and no, I don't have much experience of
Linux, although I did work with IBM AIX and the RS6000 machines during my
time with IBM.. IBM were starting to load Linux onto pizza servers just
before I retired from IBM.. I have no doubt that Linux/Unix has its
place..
IBM may even be loading Linux onto computers designated for sale to home
users, but Linux is probably best used as a 'one task' OS which is what
IBM
were doing with it initially.. the essence was that multi unit pizza
servers
loaded with Linux would be a more cost effective solution for companies
than
an IBM SP, especially the smaller companies.. a well known petro-chemical
company was working in co-operation with IBM on their use for doing
geo-technical research.. all very good stuff.. each array of pizza servers
cost way less than an SP, and it was easy to understand why small
companies
would be attracted by this..
my apologies for making assumptions about your knowledge of linux, that was
unfair. yes, IBM and other OEMs are now pre-loading Linux on their retail
boxes, and it's about time too. linux is coming out of the closet (server
room), so to speak, and into the maintstream... that's definitely a good
thing. the microsoft hegemony absolutely needs shaking up, and maybe the
staleness of Windows will begin to change if microsoft is compelled to
'think different.' and i'm not talking about yet another ridiculous Windows
desktop overhaul, xp theme, skin, whatever they like to call it. you know
what they say about beauty, well the same goes for Windows, and not even
then, considering the ugliness of the XP desktop, but that's just my
opinion. what concerns me more, however, are the operating system's
internals, and that is what separates the men (Linux) from the boys
(Windows).
The article kept mentioning that office software available was as operable
as the average user would need.. this suggests that it is 'adequate' for
most users.. MS Works Suite is probably adequate for most users, but not
for
all.. the Wal-Mart offerings are cheap, making them more cost effective,
but
can people load their favourite games onto them, or Corel WordPerfect
Office, or Lotus SmartSuite?.. when a printer is bought, are there Linux
drivers on the cds or do users haver to look for them on the net?.. bear
in
mind that most can't even type 'spyware' into a Google search to find
Adaware or Spybot for themselves.. and can Wal-Mart personnel answer
technical questions re Linux like the guy at Future Shop or Staples can?
(what am I saying?..
..
good points, and i am not advocating buying equipment from any of these
places, particularly the ones you just mentioned. however, the fact that
there are low-cost alternatives to the microsoft monoculture, and built on
an underlying (linux) technology that has proven itself to be solid, that
can only be good for people who just want an inexpensive, fast and
*reliable* system to get online, e-mail, do research, write and print
documents, chat with friends, yadayadayada, and not have to futz with a
bloated operating system (WindowsXP) that has become feature-laden and
abysmal at multitasking (compared to NT4/2K), prone to anomalies requiring
complete reinstalls (a routine common among many so-called windows
power-users) and is routinely targeted and attacked by hackers. i'd say
anything BUT Windows would be a good place to start.
As Linux is made to look and operate like Windows (not a consideration for
companies as the guys who handle computers rarely rely on a GUI), and the
software approaches the abilities of software ported for Windows, so the
hardware requirements will rise.. at that point, will a Linux Wal-Mart
machine be any more cost effective than a Windows PC loaded with OEM OS
and
MS Office?.. probably not..
well, in the case of these machines, with the Linspire OS pre-loaded, the
user interface is already completely graphical, and some would even say,
more intuitive than Windows', and surely you're not saying linux gurus don't
rely on GUIs like X-Windows?
and let's not forget, microsoft had nothing to do with the original concept
of a GUI, it was invented by xerox, then perfected by Apple, among several
others. there are far better implementations of a GUI environment than MS
Windows, starting with the true object-oriented environments, not
file-oriented, like Windows.
