News 96 percent of netbooks use Windows, says Microsoft

Of course Windows is going to be the OS of choice for the majority of the public. The simple reason is that we are very much in the minority in terms of our computer knowledge, the average home user will have started out using Windows so tat is what they know. Now they go looking at a netbook and see a familiar OS on one and an unfamiliar one on another, which one do you think they are likely to go for?

Linux is a great OS, I did all my programming at uni on pcs using command line only versions of Red Hat 6 and managed fine but the majority of average people just don't want the bother of learning another OS, they just want to do the things they know already.

 

LordPyrnic, you almost nailed Ubuntu with that description. Exept games (made for windows) wich are a bit of a hassle. I would personally love to have both Linux and Windows running at the same time with equal access to the hardware on my nonluggable computer to reap the benefits of both OS's.. but sadly there is no such solution so I dualboot.

 

Who's choosing? I haven't seen a linux based netbook on offer in a retail store since before christmas.
Netbooks are sold with wireless contracts now. and it makes sence (for the store) to sell the more expensive model (which is the windows one).

I wouldn't mind a Linux variant with an SSD...but they're not offered unless you specifically order them and they cost the same as a windows one with a 160GB harddisk

 

nobody has mentioned that as of 14th april you have to pay for security updates and patches on XP, that would be my main reason NOT to have XP on anything

 

Security updates will be free until 8th April, 2014

Other non-critical updates or hotfixes will be chargeable from 14th April, 2009.

/ninja edit
<-- Post count, fifty five? Shvifty vive!

 

What anyone posting here has to remember is that practically by reading the articles on this site and signing up and registering on the forums we've become almost more literate in technology then the average user.

If you can name a flavor of Linux other then Ubuntu, RedHat, and Fedora-- you're probably more technically savvy then the average user.

Windows is bloated, yes. This is obvious by the fact that they can't even properly support Vista on a netbook because of the overhead. However, its convenient. Almost every general program out there is programmed for Windows. Recently there has been a lot of cross-support thanks in no small part to Ubuntu, but like people said-- Windows just works.

Sure, Linux is free. Sure, Windows licenses seem expensive. But here's the thing. If Linux and Windows notebooks cost the same price, you aren't be screwed for by "M$" for XP. And if average Joe Consumer wants a new computer, I'm sure they're going to pick "Windows" over "Ubuntu" / "Linux". Heck, honestly, I believe they would pick Apple over Ubuntu if the prices were competitive.

There is no apt-get, no wifi headbanging, (and not that you should be using a netbook for this purpose but) no hoop-jumping to play a good game. You can argue that Wine eases this transition a bit, and it does. But that's still one more program to install and run where in Windows its just... run.

We look at the technical specs. We compare a slip-streamed XP-pro to a fully configured Ubuntu / Linux-Flavor and scream: "OMGZ WTF! LOOKZ!" I honestly don't know if the extra bit of battery life or $1 off the monthly electric bill is enough to make someone learn a new operating system.

I'm not saying Linux is hard to learn. On the contrary if you never had Windows most operating systems can be equally accessible. The flavors of Linux that are CLI only, or similar, KNOW they aren't for Joe Consumer, they don't pretend to be. Linux is generally self-aware in that respect.

However, the people buying netbooks, are college students and older generations. The college student might understand Linux, might have it for fiddling with on his desktop even. But, if you're worried about your term papers, or just want to log on to Facebook, you probably don't want to worry about apt-get, wine, and wifi issues. Here Mac or Windows would be both equally logical choices. But since price would be a decisive factor, Windows would again win out.

For the older generations, if they know computers, they most likely know Windows. Most people wouldn't WANT to learn something new when something familiar is readily available at a similar or same price.

TL;DR
Ubuntu is a very friendly OS, but it still has a way to go to win over Joe Consumer from their Apples and Windows. Remember, we are NOT Joe Consumer.

 

Learn to read and understand, than write.

If someone doesn't know anything about the stuff they use, they are ignorant. If you don't know crap about OS you use (95% of users), you are technically ignorant. The same goes to music listeners, car owners, you name it.

The point is that Linux is for the 5% that are interested in the technology behind the gadgets they use (sociology studies show that only around 4-6% people express active interest in the world around them, rest are just passive grey mass).

Basically, there are two choices of OS if you want to work efficiently - Linux (or *BSD for some) and Windows XP. Vista, Seven and OSX are for the rest that want their "computer" to have shiny windows and nice icons, without any kind of in-depth knowledge.

If you call that fanboyism than you sir are an idiot, sorry.

 

I'd be interested in stats based on usage rather than sales. My eeepc 1000he was only available with xp, which I quickly replaced with gentoo. I know gentoo isn't a distro for joe public, but ubuntu worked perfectly, no driver issues at all. I got my family to switch to ubuntu, far fewer complaints and free.

 

I'd rather have a command line that makes it work than a wizards that leads me nowhere. Besides, I love a command line, it's a very efficient piece of software. The best of it: you can go completely without it. Try finding your currept IP in windows. I still need cmd for it.
In linux, you don't need the command line, I just find it handy. MS thinks linux is still in the command line age. They aren't so quick in understanding.

And who could ever be suprised that THEY say THEIR product is better?