Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

HP UK pulls Linux from all new netbooks
The Register ^ | 6th February 2009 12:17 GMT | James Sherwood

Posted on 02/08/2009 3:45:31 PM PST by Ernest_at_the_Beach

HP has decided UK consumers don't want Linux-based netbooks. Actually, it appears to believe business buyers don't want the open-source OS either.

It emerged today that the company will not now be bringing its Mini 1000 netbook to the UK - at least not with Linux on board.

Nor will it release the more business-oriented Mini 2140 with Linux.


HP's Mini 1000: no Linux option in the UK

HP already offers the Mini 1000 Vivienne Tam Edition, along with the Compaq 700, which is the Mini 1000 rebadged with the alternative brandname. The various versions of the 700 and the Vivienne Tam 1000 all come with Windows XP pre-loaded.

(Excerpt) Read more at reghardware.co.uk ...


TOPICS: Business/Economy; Computers/Internet
KEYWORDS: hitech
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-60 next last

1 posted on 02/08/2009 3:45:32 PM PST by Ernest_at_the_Beach
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Ernest_at_the_Beach

Big deal. All HP is doing here is, instead of pre-installing Linux, it’s forcing customers to download Linux for free and install it themselves.


2 posted on 02/08/2009 3:49:31 PM PST by MyTwoCopperCoins
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MyTwoCopperCoins

At least they are using XP instead of trying to sell them with ‘Vista Basic’.


3 posted on 02/08/2009 3:51:50 PM PST by PAR35
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Ernest_at_the_Beach

For the most part, they are right.


4 posted on 02/08/2009 3:53:51 PM PST by Brilliant
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MyTwoCopperCoins

Absolutely right, I have been using Linux for 10 years. Installed it on every Linux box I have owned. My first install was an UMSDOS Slackware derivative then Redhat 5.0

I use windows on the computer my company furnishes, but that is all. There are 2 apps I don’t have a replacement for in Linux. Quark and a CAD program, so I cannot completely quit windows, Yet.

BIG DEAL!


5 posted on 02/08/2009 4:02:01 PM PST by Texas Fossil
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Ernest_at_the_Beach
Business is tough all around; even though I like using Linux, and would like to see if offered as a purchase option for installation on any computer, this decision is probably a purely business decision on HP's part, not a strike against the OS per se.

Not that Microsoft isn't celebrating any small victory that comes their way these days.

Not that there's anything wrong with that...

6 posted on 02/08/2009 4:21:04 PM PST by dayglored (Listen, strange women lying in ponds distributing swords is no basis for a system of government!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: PAR35; Ernest_at_the_Beach; ShadowAce
> At least they are using XP instead of trying to sell them with ‘Vista Basic’.

Anything labeled "Vista" is death these days.

You know who I feel sorry for? The software vendor named "Vista" who existed for years and saw their product-line name taken away by Microsoft when MS-Vista came out. Microsoft took it, and sh*t all over it, and now is throwing it on the trash-heap of software history.

The original name Vista is now worthless. That's a drag.

7 posted on 02/08/2009 4:24:26 PM PST by dayglored (Listen, strange women lying in ponds distributing swords is no basis for a system of government!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Ernest_at_the_Beach
.

.

8 posted on 02/08/2009 4:27:54 PM PST by Incorrigible (If I lead, follow me; If I pause, push me; If I retreat, kill me.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Incorrigible

.

9 posted on 02/08/2009 4:30:12 PM PST by Incorrigible (If I lead, follow me; If I pause, push me; If I retreat, kill me.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Incorrigible
.

.

10 posted on 02/08/2009 4:31:48 PM PST by Incorrigible (If I lead, follow me; If I pause, push me; If I retreat, kill me.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Incorrigible
.

.
11 posted on 02/08/2009 4:38:49 PM PST by Incorrigible (If I lead, follow me; If I pause, push me; If I retreat, kill me.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Ernest_at_the_Beach

What?

This CAN’T be correct.

The Linux hounds have been insisting the netbooks were finally where they were finally going to pierce the market, weren’t all of the original models only loaded with Linux?

Yet another “year of the Linux” fails again I guess. Unless you’re in China, where they FORCE you to use it.

http://www.linuxinsider.com/story/Its-Linux-—or-Else-—in-Parts-of-China-65362.html


12 posted on 02/08/2009 4:43:27 PM PST by Golden Eagle (In God We Trust)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Incorrigible

Your sarcasm is dripping all the way down to my post.


13 posted on 02/08/2009 4:44:35 PM PST by Golden Eagle (In God We Trust)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Incorrigible; rdb3
.

.

14 posted on 02/08/2009 4:45:49 PM PST by Incorrigible (If I lead, follow me; If I pause, push me; If I retreat, kill me.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: dayglored
Anything labeled "Vista" is death these days.

It's probably fine for a top of the line machine. Running it on a new, bottom end laptop is a different story. I'd be better off with Win98SE, but the manufacturer (Acer) won't even provide an upgrade to XP, much less 9x. Thus, you are reading this courtesy of Linux on a CD.

15 posted on 02/08/2009 4:45:57 PM PST by PAR35
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Golden Eagle
The Linux hounds have been insisting the netbooks were finally where they were finally going to pierce the market, weren’t all of the original models only loaded with Linux?

Uh, no. Truth is, the Linux loaded machines typically come with a crappy sized hard drive, while the Windows loaded ones come with a big nice HD. Ya gotta buy the Windows model to get the better hardware. So one must pay the Windows tax, THEN download their linux of choice. Or get stuck with the crappy hard drive.

16 posted on 02/08/2009 4:46:19 PM PST by Big Giant Head (I should change my tagline to "Big Giant penguin on my Head")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Golden Eagle; rdb3

LOL! It’s been a long, long while since I’ve tweeked the slash/dotters!

I couldn’t help myself.

I’ve been nice to rdb3 for quite a few bumps the past few months. I needed to get an elbow in!


17 posted on 02/08/2009 4:47:54 PM PST by Incorrigible (If I lead, follow me; If I pause, push me; If I retreat, kill me.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Ernest_at_the_Beach

The last thing I would want to run on an under powered netbook is Windows of any flavor. The antivirus software would slow the machine to an utter crawl-—just like many Win XP and Vista on more powerful machines.


18 posted on 02/08/2009 4:48:43 PM PST by comps4spice
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ernest_at_the_Beach

MicroSoft “persuaded” them to make the MS-preferred choice.

These Linux notebooks were on the verge of causing a sea change in OS use, as myself and many experts feel, and MS needed to stomp it out before it happened.


19 posted on 02/08/2009 4:50:19 PM PST by LifeComesFirst (Until the unborn are free, nobody is free)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Big Giant Head
Uh, no. Truth is, the Linux loaded machines typically come with a crappy sized hard drive, while the Windows loaded ones come with a big nice HD.

That's now, not originally. Initially, they all came with Linux. Here's an example:

First Atom-based notebook runs Linux

Now, based on articles like the parent Linux is being reduced from even being an option. Which is great as far as I'm concerned, as "utopian software welfare for the world" isn't something I'm interested in from a political standpoint.

20 posted on 02/08/2009 4:53:45 PM PST by Golden Eagle (In God We Trust)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Incorrigible

I’m trying to be nice too, some of these guys might not have any other option than free software handouts ya know.


21 posted on 02/08/2009 4:58:18 PM PST by Golden Eagle (In God We Trust)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Golden Eagle
I had a choice. New laptop came with Vista Business. Geez what a piece of crap vista is.

But I do have this Sun software running on the openSuSE I installed on the system: Virtual Box, that runs Win2K just fine. So on the rare occasion I need to run a windows app, I don't have to dual boot. Just click and open a window for windows. And the nice thing is, it's sandboxed. The way windows should be run.

But hey, the article is about HP and the UK. HP has a lot to make up for from the Carly years, and the UK, land of my ancestors, went all Orwellian about the time their native son said they would. So independence, is not of their strong suits.

22 posted on 02/08/2009 5:13:18 PM PST by AFreeBird
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: AFreeBird

If people want to waste their time reinstalling Windows every year, they can be my guest.

I’ve used Linux primarily for 12 years, and am satisfied with my choice.


23 posted on 02/08/2009 5:18:32 PM PST by B Knotts (Worst economy since the Third Punic War)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: AFreeBird
Sun software running on the openSuSE

Enjoy them while you can, Sun and Novell, two companies who are dying trying to make money off giving their software away. But since the utopian vision is everyone running the same free crap it won't really matter I suppose.

24 posted on 02/08/2009 5:27:40 PM PST by Golden Eagle (In God We Trust)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: B Knotts
If people want to waste their time reinstalling Windows every year, they can be my guest.

Huh? If anything requires constant new version upgrades it's Linux. As another poster mentioned SuSE, despite being much younger product it's already up to version 11 while version 7 of Windows isn't even out yet.

25 posted on 02/08/2009 5:29:43 PM PST by Golden Eagle (In God We Trust)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Big Giant Head

Linux Netbooks have a return rate that is 4x higher than XP netbooks. That simply goes beyond hard drive size, that means people saw it, purchased and decided they prefer XP over Linux.


26 posted on 02/08/2009 5:33:54 PM PST by aft_lizard (One animal actually eats its own brains to conserve energy, we call them liberals.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Ernest_at_the_Beach

Oh no!, the penguin is the next victim of gloBULL warming!

/sarc


27 posted on 02/08/2009 5:33:57 PM PST by AussieJoe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Incorrigible

Uh, the Linux guy looks like he’s heading for a gay day parade in SF. Is the whole porky guy in spandex with the camel-toe thing really the best Linux image?


28 posted on 02/08/2009 5:34:10 PM PST by Richard Kimball (We're all criminals. They just haven't figured out what some of us have done yet.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: B Knotts
it's already up to version 11

Meant to say 10, versions are changing so fast it's hard to keep up (plus watching a good replay of CSI Miami).

29 posted on 02/08/2009 5:39:15 PM PST by Golden Eagle (In God We Trust)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Richard Kimball

Sometimes stereotypes exist for good reason!


30 posted on 02/08/2009 5:45:16 PM PST by Incorrigible (If I lead, follow me; If I pause, push me; If I retreat, kill me.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: Incorrigible

Otay! I use Macs, and I think I’m probably closer to the slacker than the other two, so...


31 posted on 02/08/2009 5:51:58 PM PST by Richard Kimball (We're all criminals. They just haven't figured out what some of us have done yet.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: Golden Eagle; B Knotts; Ernest_at_the_Beach
> If anything requires constant new version upgrades it's Linux. As another poster mentioned SuSE, despite being much younger product it's already up to version 11 while version 7 of Windows isn't even out yet.

Hi GE, good to see you again.

Really, though, you DO know that "Windows 7" is just a marketing name, no different from "Windows Foo", right? Allow me to pick a nit for a moment here and ask you what you meant.

There have been well over a dozen released versions of Windows. Not seven as you state.

OTOH if you want to look at the internal "NT codebase version" (I'm sure you know what that is), you find that Vista is "6.0" and Win7 is "6.1". So you're wrong on that angle too, should have said 6.

Except that even THAT is just a marketing name, since NT started at "3.1" to align with the current DOS-based version. There was no NT1 or NT2. You can't "count" the number of Windows versions based on the names.

So I assume you're just joshing around, tongue planted firmly in cheek, about there being seven versions of Windows because the one coming out is called "Windows 7". Right?

32 posted on 02/08/2009 6:01:37 PM PST by dayglored (Listen, strange women lying in ponds distributing swords is no basis for a system of government!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Golden Eagle

I’m using Debian 4.0 on most of my machines. Your silly argument fails.


33 posted on 02/08/2009 6:06:11 PM PST by B Knotts (Worst economy since the Third Punic War)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Golden Eagle

Also, please note that I did not mention upgrades. I was referring to the unfortunate feature of Windows which results in having to occasionally reinstall it to get it to run right again.


34 posted on 02/08/2009 6:07:55 PM PST by B Knotts (Worst economy since the Third Punic War)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: dayglored
if you want to look at the internal "NT codebase version" (I'm sure you know what that is), you find that Vista is "6.0" and Win7 is "6.1"

I didn't realize that, thanks. As for NT 3, it was named that because it's desktop O/S equivalent was still Windows 3, 95 wasn't out yet.

SuSE still has had significantly more version upgrades (only been out since 1994) than Windows which was the point. Actually according to Wikipedia version 11 is already out too, so while I was wrong about that (when I retracted it) my main point that there are many more version upgrades of SuSE remains correct, does it not?

35 posted on 02/08/2009 6:17:22 PM PST by Golden Eagle (In God We Trust)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: LifeComesFirst

That’s the way I see it.


36 posted on 02/08/2009 6:17:56 PM PST by Ernest_at_the_Beach (No Burkas for my Grandaughters!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: B Knotts
I’m using Debian 4.0 on most of my machines.

You should have stated that then, since few if anyone actually uses that. Most popular versions of Linux upgrade their versions faster than Windows, and significanty faster than Debian which is more of a core O/S.

37 posted on 02/08/2009 6:22:33 PM PST by Golden Eagle (In God We Trust)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: aft_lizard
that means people saw it, purchased and decided they prefer XP over Linux.

This is also a testament to Windows marketing. When 75-85% or what-have-you have never had anything but a Windows OS, they'll see this weird interface they don't understand. Rather than learn it, they return it.

Another point, Windows machines outsell Linux machines, but no one can ever say how many are intentionally purchased to replace Windows. If I purchase one of these machines, the purchasing decision will be based on hardware, not operating system. I know what'll happen with it when it's in my house. Consequently, I'd most likely buy a Windows version, because it'll have the better hardware. If it'll run Vista, it'll scream Linux.

38 posted on 02/08/2009 6:44:39 PM PST by Big Giant Head (I should change my tagline to "Big Giant penguin on my Head")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: Golden Eagle
>> ...if you want to look at the internal "NT codebase version" (I'm sure you know what that is), you find that Vista is "6.0" and Win7 is "6.1"

> I didn't realize that, thanks.

No prob. I was actually rather disappointed to see that the original Win7 development (which would have been codebase 7.0, meaning a significant re-write), was being scrapped in favor of a mere bunch of "fixes" to Vista to salvage it. The project codename "Windows 7" had been out for a while, but Microsoft must have had some interesting meetings figuring out how to come out with a name for this update to Vista.

Likewise, I wonder if the next Windows ("Windows 8") will have codebase 7.0 under the hood? *sigh*

> As for NT 3, it was named that because it's desktop O/S equivalent was still Windows 3, 95 wasn't out yet.

Correct (that's what I meant by saying it was to align with the DOS-based version at that time).

> SuSE still has had significantly more version upgrades (only been out since 1994) than Windows which was the point.

Well-l-l-l.....

> Actually according to Wikipedia version 11 is already out too, so while I was wrong about that (when I retracted it) my main point that there are many more version upgrades of SuSE remains correct, does it not?

Depends on how you want to break up the Windows versions. According to Wikipedia's List of Microsoft Windows versions, we have seen at least than a dozen. Here's my own take, as a Windows user of every version from 2.x onward.

Windows 1.x
Windows 2.x
Windows 3.0
Windows 3.11WfW (very different from 3.0)
Windows NT 3.1 (first NT release)
Windows NT 3.5 (first stable NT release)
Windows 4.0 (Win95)
Windows 4.1 (Win98)
Windows 4.9 (WinME)
Windows NT 4
Windows NT 5 (Win2000 Workstation)
Windows NT 5 (Win2000 Server)
Windows NT 5.1 (WinXP)
Windows NT 5.? (Win2003 Server)
Windows NT 6.0 (WinVista)
Windows NT 6.? (Win2008 Server)
Windows NT 6.1 (Win7)

That's 17 versions, the way I count versions. Even if you argue that 2000 server and 2000 workstation should be considered a single version, that's still 16. Like I said, it's arguable depending on your view of what constitutes a "version". My view is to ignore the marketing and concentrate on significant release changes to functionality and codebase. Which as one who has worked on, with, or used Windows for nearly 20 years, I think I get to do.

That said, Windows had a few years headstart on SuSE.

39 posted on 02/08/2009 6:49:08 PM PST by dayglored (Listen, strange women lying in ponds distributing swords is no basis for a system of government!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: dayglored
That's 17 versions, the way I count versions.

No one ever migrated through all those dissimilar verions, you're getting farther and farther off point. What we had was a (now admitted) Debian user complaining about all the versions that Windows users had to migrate through, which really isn't that many when compared to SuSE Linux another poster had already specificaly mentioned. If the Debian user wants to complain about multiple versions that users have to migrate through, the SuSE user would have been the appropriate target, not Windows users none of which have been migrated through 11 versions since 94. If you can't see that I can't help you.

40 posted on 02/08/2009 7:16:28 PM PST by Golden Eagle (In God We Trust)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: Ernest_at_the_Beach

We had server running novell in the back corner of the sever room. I guess the department that used it had left and never shut it down. It had been running for over 7 years with out a boot when a electrical worker took out all power to the server room.


41 posted on 02/08/2009 7:28:06 PM PST by ThomasThomas ( Accept it, there is no except after in math.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Golden Eagle
> No one ever migrated through all those dissimilar verions, you're getting farther and farther off point.

Valid criticism, granted -- not EVERY version. Okay, here's my personal (not counting work) history of migration with Windows, with the versions I didn't migrate to marked with an 'X':

X Windows 1.x (never used it myself)
Windows 2.x (I forget, might have been 2.1)
Windows 3.0
Windows 3.11WfW (very different from 3.0)
Windows NT 3.1 (first NT release)
Windows NT 3.5 (first stable NT release)
Windows 4.0 (Win95)
Windows 4.1 (Win98)
Windows 4.9 (WinME)
X Windows NT 4 (only used at work)
Windows NT 5 (Win2000 Workstation)
X Windows NT 5 (Win2000 Server) (only at work)
Windows NT 5.1 (WinXP)
X Windows NT 5.? (Win2003 Server) (only at work)
Windows NT 6.0 (WinVista)
X Windows NT 6.? (Win2008 Server) (only at work)
Windows NT 6.1 (Win7)

That's ummm, a clean dozen, if you count Win7 (which I'm experimenting with -- my main machines still run 2000, XP, and Vista). Without Win7, call it 11.

Of course these migrations often included upgrades or replacements of hardware platforms. But I guarantee you I've used and migrated my personal data and programs to/from every one of those above without an 'X', except Win7.

I don't think I'm going off-point. I think you're trying to salvage your original statement, which might apply to a lot of relative newbies, but for us old-timers, no. That's all.

As a peace offering I'll say this: Any Windows user in the past 8 years has only had to deal with one version -- WinXP -- which is arguably the most successful operating system of all time, and one which I personally have come to like and depend on. The only "migrations" within XP's history are the service packs, and even SP2 wasn't -that- bad in my experience.

Compared to that longevity, the Linux distros are chaos. ;-)

42 posted on 02/08/2009 7:43:12 PM PST by dayglored (Listen, strange women lying in ponds distributing swords is no basis for a system of government!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: ThomasThomas

Damn...good story.


43 posted on 02/08/2009 7:51:09 PM PST by Ernest_at_the_Beach (No Burkas for my Grandaughters!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: dayglored

Don’t forget Service packs...


44 posted on 02/08/2009 7:51:41 PM PST by Ernest_at_the_Beach (No Burkas for my Grandaughters!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: Ernest_at_the_Beach
> Don’t forget Service packs...

I don't count service packs as separate versions, although it's fair to say that some (such as XP-SP2) contained considerable new features and technology, and perhaps should be considered their own version. I try not to open that can-o'-worms argument.

For instance, was Win98SE a different version from Win98, because it included the first real working support for USB, arguably the most important technology to come to Windows since networking? Opinions differ, and YMMV.

On the other hand, some folks are calling Win7 "Vista-SP2" which I think is kinda funny, since compared to what Windows 7 was originally supposed to be, is pretty much true. Even Steve Ballmer described Win7 as merely an upgrade of Vista, rather than something significantly different (he was trying to deflect the incompatibility problems, and managed to admit that Win7 was Vista with a few things fixed, "Vista" crossed out, and "Win7" written in crayon).

So I don't get into whether service packs are versions. In this context, I don't count them.

45 posted on 02/08/2009 8:01:37 PM PST by dayglored (Listen, strange women lying in ponds distributing swords is no basis for a system of government!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: rdb3; Calvinist_Dark_Lord; GodGunsandGuts; CyberCowboy777; Salo; Bobsat; JosephW; ...

46 posted on 02/09/2009 5:26:29 AM PST by ShadowAce (Linux -- The Ultimate Windows Service Pack)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ernest_at_the_Beach

That’s a load of crap.

HP doesn’t want to support .nix for the masses.


47 posted on 02/09/2009 5:29:07 AM PST by papasmurf (Impeach the illegal bastard!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Golden Eagle
Meant to say 10, versions are changing so fast it's hard to keep up (plus watching a good replay of CSI Miami).

You were right the first time OpenSuSE 11.1. It's their Enterprise Linux that is at version 10.2.

When you start factoring in all the different flavours of Vista, (which all taste like dirt), it evens out.

48 posted on 02/09/2009 5:38:07 AM PST by Calvinist_Dark_Lord ((I have come here to kick @$$ and chew bubblegum...and I'm all outta bubblegum! ~Roddy Piper))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Golden Eagle

BTW, i’m waiting anxiously for Windows 7 to come out. My understanding is that it is everything that Longhorn promised to be (before it got castrated and turned into Vista). Much as i love Windows XP, my understanding is that Windows 7 is so far more stable and faster.


49 posted on 02/09/2009 5:42:23 AM PST by Calvinist_Dark_Lord ((I have come here to kick @$$ and chew bubblegum...and I'm all outta bubblegum! ~Roddy Piper))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]

To: Golden Eagle

Your argument is technically correct, .nix distros do have more rapid and numerous version upgrades. However, consider the upgrade process compared to Windows.

With most .nix distros when an upgrade or update is offered, you merely click the “OK” button, type in your password, and {maybe} reboot. All done. All of your data and programs are right where you left them, and still, fully functional.

Can’t say that about any Windows version I’ve ever used. Or Mac.

Just for the benefit of anyone reading this...
(I know you know this-LOL)
Ubuntu has LTS versions. LTS stands Long Term Support. That means a Desktop version will not be upgraded or changed and it will be fully supported for FREE for three years, and a server version for five.

Can’t say that about any Windows version I’ve ever used. Or Mac.

Ubuntu also has an upgrade version every 6 months, if you like to have the bleeding edge versions and capabilities that go with it.

Can’t say that about any Windows version I’ve ever used. Or Mac.

Most .nix distros have a software installer package, in Ubuntu it’s called the Synaptic Package Manager, that you simply click to place a check mark in the box next to the software package you’d like, then click ok, and it installs all by itself.

And it’s FREE, as in FREE beer, too.

Can’t say that about any Windows version I’ve ever used. Or Mac.

Really, it’s all about choices. Windows, Mac or .nix. But the point is, it’s great to have so many, and fun to learn with each experience.


50 posted on 02/09/2009 5:57:56 AM PST by papasmurf (Impeach the illegal bastard!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-60 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson