3 ms·

I love this answer. Yes, it is true that you can solve the problem with light weight linux distro, but the mass consumer market has rejected linux on netbooks.

blasdel 17y ago
Don't you at least fancy yourself cleverer than the mass consumer? EDIT: Oh duh, you work for Microsoft!
- BrandonWatson 17y ago
  I love that answer even more! :) My profile makes it pretty clear I work for MSFT. I spent 9 of the last 10 years doing LAMP development. My home machine is a MBP 13". So yes, I am more clever than a mass consumer. However, I am not a fan of Linux for desktop. I will take free-bsd based OS X over any linux distro, but that's a personal preference.
  - aaronblohowiak 17y ago
    What about tiling window managers?
  - berntb 17y ago
    I doubt the GP wanted to insult your intelligence, he just noted that your opinion was in line with your employer's position ("Linux is a cancer" a few years ago, iirc?). If it was just a consumer choice that Linux died on the netbooks, then I should be able to at least order a new (not used) one with Linux from Amazon.co.uk. I had problems finding one a few weeks ago. Edit: It was in 2001 Linux was named a cancer. Edit 2: The last few years, articles/blogs have been discussing pressure on netbook manufacturers to not ship Linux. A random Google: http://blogs.computerworld.com/microsoft_strikes_back_at_linux_netbook_push http://blogs.computerworld.com/microsoft_strikes_back_at_lin... >> ... PC World, Britain's self-professed largest specialist chain of computing superstores, announced that, regardless of what was coming with Linux netbooks, it would only be selling Windows netbooks.
    - blasdel 17y ago
      You're right, "rejected linux on netbooks" was one of Microsoft's PR pushes, and I was simply noting that Brandon did not internalize that opinion in a vacuum. It used to be that Linux netbook models cost less and/or had higher specs than the XP versions. Then Microsoft offered deep discounts for XP licenses, and added draconian restrictions on what specs you can ship. Why the hell else do you think every goddamn netbook ships with a 1.6ghz Atom, 160gb HD, and 1gb ram?
      - berntb 17y ago
        >>I was simply noting that Brandon did not internalize that opinion in a vacuum. Ah, you are right. Brandon wouldn't quote marketing that would get his wrist slapped on HN. That means he really believed the quite obvious company propaganda. Fascinating.
  - blasdel 17y ago
    I will take free-bsd based OS X over any linux distro, but that's a personal preference. Are you saying you don't like Linux on the desktop because you don't like the GNU userland (coreutils, et. al.), and prefer OS X's hybrid bsd-forked set? What do you mean by calling OS X 'freebsd-based'?

blasdel 17y ago

Don't you at least fancy yourself cleverer than the mass consumer? EDIT: Oh duh, you work for Microsoft!

BrandonWatson 17y ago
I love that answer even more! :) My profile makes it pretty clear I work for MSFT. I spent 9 of the last 10 years doing LAMP development. My home machine is a MBP 13". So yes, I am more clever than a mass consumer. However, I am not a fan of Linux for desktop. I will take free-bsd based OS X over any linux distro, but that's a personal preference.
- aaronblohowiak 17y ago
  What about tiling window managers?
- berntb 17y ago
  I doubt the GP wanted to insult your intelligence, he just noted that your opinion was in line with your employer's position ("Linux is a cancer" a few years ago, iirc?). If it was just a consumer choice that Linux died on the netbooks, then I should be able to at least order a new (not used) one with Linux from Amazon.co.uk. I had problems finding one a few weeks ago. Edit: It was in 2001 Linux was named a cancer. Edit 2: The last few years, articles/blogs have been discussing pressure on netbook manufacturers to not ship Linux. A random Google: http://blogs.computerworld.com/microsoft_strikes_back_at_linux_netbook_push http://blogs.computerworld.com/microsoft_strikes_back_at_lin... >> ... PC World, Britain's self-professed largest specialist chain of computing superstores, announced that, regardless of what was coming with Linux netbooks, it would only be selling Windows netbooks.
  - blasdel 17y ago
    You're right, "rejected linux on netbooks" was one of Microsoft's PR pushes, and I was simply noting that Brandon did not internalize that opinion in a vacuum. It used to be that Linux netbook models cost less and/or had higher specs than the XP versions. Then Microsoft offered deep discounts for XP licenses, and added draconian restrictions on what specs you can ship. Why the hell else do you think every goddamn netbook ships with a 1.6ghz Atom, 160gb HD, and 1gb ram?
    - berntb 17y ago
      >>I was simply noting that Brandon did not internalize that opinion in a vacuum. Ah, you are right. Brandon wouldn't quote marketing that would get his wrist slapped on HN. That means he really believed the quite obvious company propaganda. Fascinating.
- blasdel 17y ago
  I will take free-bsd based OS X over any linux distro, but that's a personal preference. Are you saying you don't like Linux on the desktop because you don't like the GNU userland (coreutils, et. al.), and prefer OS X's hybrid bsd-forked set? What do you mean by calling OS X 'freebsd-based'?