This can't be good - "XP Cheaper Than Linux On Eee 900" - Linux

This is a discussion on This can't be good - "XP Cheaper Than Linux On Eee 900" - Linux ; On 9 May, 10:52, Hadron wrote: > seani writes: > > On 9 May, 10:22, Hadron wrote: > >> seani writes: > >> > On 9 May, 01:53, Hadron wrote: > >> >> Sean Inglis writes: > >> >> > ...

+ Reply to Thread
Page 2 of 5 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 40 of 97

Thread: This can't be good - "XP Cheaper Than Linux On Eee 900"

  1. Re: This can't be good - "XP Cheaper Than Linux On Eee 900"

    On 9 May, 10:52, Hadron wrote:
    > seani writes:
    > > On 9 May, 10:22, Hadron wrote:
    > >> seani writes:
    > >> > On 9 May, 01:53, Hadron wrote:
    > >> >> Sean Inglis writes:
    > >> >> > Ezekiel wrote:

    >
    > >> >> >>http://hardware.slashdot.org/article.../05/08/1247238

    >
    > >> >> >>
    > >> >> >> "It sounds crazy to say this, but the XP-based version of theEeePC 900
    > >> >> >> (the new version with the 8.9" screen) will actually be considerably
    > >> >> >> cheaper than the Linux-based version. At the official launch today, the
    > >> >> >> company told journalists that 'Microsoft has been a longstanding supporter
    > >> >> >> of Asus' to explain the price discrepancy. And - get this - only the
    > >> >> >> XP-based machine will be sold at mass-market retailers, while the
    > >> >> >> Linux-based model will be consigned to computer stores."
    > >> >> >>

    >
    > >> >> > What it shows, despite protestations to the contrary, is that Linux has MS
    > >> >> > ****ting themselves.

    >
    > >> >> Please explain how?

    >
    > >> > Tell me Hadron, why *would* the XP based version of the 900 be cheaper
    > >> > than the Linux version?

    >
    > >> > What *possible* motivation and mechanism could there that would allow
    > >> > the XP version to be offered more cheaply? Charity?

    >
    > >> To get it out there and to encourage
    > >> people to buy other MS SW. What else? How is this ****ting
    > >> themselves. Here's a hint : Selling <> ****ting themselves.

    >
    > > If they were selling XP, you might have a case (and I stress *might*)
    > > but in this case, it appears they are prepared to not only give it
    > > away, but to subsidise it. Oh dear.

    >
    > Can you source your claims?
    >
    > if they are subsidising it then this is wrong. Anything higher than 0
    > cents is still business.
    >


    This is why I say "appears" of course - neither one of us is privy to
    that knowledge, unless you have anything to confess?

    What would your explanation be for the difference in price? Is ASUS
    prepared to accept less for a PC in order to foster the relationship
    with Microsoft? Do you find that a likely state of affairs?

  2. Re: This can't be good - "XP Cheaper Than Linux On Eee 900"

    On Fri, 09 May 2008 03:17:04 -0700, seani wrote:

    > On 9 May, 10:52, Hadron wrote:
    >> seani writes:
    >> > On 9 May, 10:22, Hadron wrote:
    >> >> seani writes:
    >> >> > On 9 May, 01:53, Hadron wrote:
    >> >> >> Sean Inglis writes:
    >> >> >> > Ezekiel wrote:

    >>
    >> >> >> >>http://hardware.slashdot.org/article.../05/08/1247238

    >>
    >> >> >> >>
    >> >> >> >> "It sounds crazy to say this, but the XP-based version of
    >> >> >> >> theEeePC 900 (the new version with the 8.9" screen) will
    >> >> >> >> actually be considerably cheaper than the Linux-based version.
    >> >> >> >> At the official launch today, the company told journalists that
    >> >> >> >> 'Microsoft has been a longstanding supporter of Asus' to
    >> >> >> >> explain the price discrepancy. And - get this - only the
    >> >> >> >> XP-based machine will be sold at mass-market retailers, while
    >> >> >> >> the Linux-based model will be consigned to computer stores."
    >> >> >> >>

    >>
    >> >> >> > What it shows, despite protestations to the contrary, is that
    >> >> >> > Linux has MS ****ting themselves.

    >>
    >> >> >> Please explain how?

    >>
    >> >> > Tell me Hadron, why *would* the XP based version of the 900 be
    >> >> > cheaper than the Linux version?

    >>
    >> >> > What *possible* motivation and mechanism could there that would
    >> >> > allow the XP version to be offered more cheaply? Charity?

    >>
    >> >> To get it out there and to encourage
    >> >> people to buy other MS SW. What else? How is this ****ting
    >> >> themselves. Here's a hint : Selling <> ****ting themselves.

    >>
    >> > If they were selling XP, you might have a case (and I stress *might*)
    >> > but in this case, it appears they are prepared to not only give it
    >> > away, but to subsidise it. Oh dear.

    >>
    >> Can you source your claims?
    >>
    >> if they are subsidising it then this is wrong. Anything higher than 0
    >> cents is still business.
    >>
    >>

    > This is why I say "appears" of course - neither one of us is privy to that
    > knowledge, unless you have anything to confess?
    >
    > What would your explanation be for the difference in price? Is ASUS
    > prepared to accept less for a PC in order to foster the relationship with
    > Microsoft? Do you find that a likely state of affairs?


    The main reason why PCs with windoze installed are cheaper than ones with
    Linux installed, is because the ones with windoze have all sorts of
    *trial* & *demo* software preloaded which their makers *pay* to have installed.
    The idea being that users are much more likely to buy copies of apps which
    have cut-down or demo versions already installed. After teh trial period,
    the user is expected to buy the software. Without these demo applications,
    windoze would be more costly & pretty useless as it only comes with
    Notepad etc..

    Linux has no such problems, as every distro comes with a complete set of
    OSS applications, & choice of office suits too!

    --
    Mandriva 2008.1 64-bit.
    This message was sent from a
    computer which is guaranteed
    100% free of the M$ Windoze virus.

  3. Re: This can't be good - "XP Cheaper Than Linux On Eee 900"

    seani writes:

    > On 9 May, 10:52, Hadron wrote:
    >> seani writes:
    >> > On 9 May, 10:22, Hadron wrote:
    >> >> seani writes:
    >> >> > On 9 May, 01:53, Hadron wrote:
    >> >> >> Sean Inglis writes:
    >> >> >> > Ezekiel wrote:

    >>
    >> >> >> >>http://hardware.slashdot.org/article.../05/08/1247238

    >>
    >> >> >> >>
    >> >> >> >> "It sounds crazy to say this, but the XP-based version of theEeePC 900
    >> >> >> >> (the new version with the 8.9" screen) will actually be considerably
    >> >> >> >> cheaper than the Linux-based version. At the official launch today, the
    >> >> >> >> company told journalists that 'Microsoft has been a longstanding supporter
    >> >> >> >> of Asus' to explain the price discrepancy. And - get this - only the
    >> >> >> >> XP-based machine will be sold at mass-market retailers, while the
    >> >> >> >> Linux-based model will be consigned to computer stores."
    >> >> >> >>

    >>
    >> >> >> > What it shows, despite protestations to the contrary, is that Linux has MS
    >> >> >> > ****ting themselves.

    >>
    >> >> >> Please explain how?

    >>
    >> >> > Tell me Hadron, why *would* the XP based version of the 900 be cheaper
    >> >> > than the Linux version?

    >>
    >> >> > What *possible* motivation and mechanism could there that would allow
    >> >> > the XP version to be offered more cheaply? Charity?

    >>
    >> >> To get it out there and to encourage
    >> >> people to buy other MS SW. What else? How is this ****ting
    >> >> themselves. Here's a hint : Selling <> ****ting themselves.

    >>
    >> > If they were selling XP, you might have a case (and I stress *might*)
    >> > but in this case, it appears they are prepared to not only give it
    >> > away, but to subsidise it. Oh dear.

    >>
    >> Can you source your claims?
    >>
    >> if they are subsidising it then this is wrong. Anything higher than 0
    >> cents is still business.
    >>

    >
    > This is why I say "appears" of course - neither one of us is privy to
    > that knowledge, unless you have anything to confess?


    Aha. So you made it up. OK.

    >
    > What would your explanation be for the difference in price? Is ASUS
    > prepared to accept less for a PC in order to foster the relationship
    > with Microsoft? Do you find that a likely state of affairs?


    Well, for a start thy then dont have to worry about supporting
    Linux!

    But in fairness, I think it's bad and it's bad for Linux and MS win
    again. My friend who has one was around the other day and, once again,
    it is an awesome little beast. AND it remembered the WPA key from his
    last visit. It "just worked".

  4. Re: This can't be good - "XP Cheaper Than Linux On Eee 900"

    On 9 May, 12:25, Hadron wrote:
    > seani writes:
    > > On 9 May, 10:52, Hadron wrote:
    > >> seani writes:
    > >> > On 9 May, 10:22, Hadron wrote:
    > >> >> seani writes:
    > >> >> > On 9 May, 01:53, Hadron wrote:
    > >> >> >> Sean Inglis writes:
    > >> >> >> > Ezekiel wrote:

    >
    > >> >> >> >>http://hardware.slashdot.org/article.../05/08/1247238

    >
    > >> >> >> >>
    > >> >> >> >> "It sounds crazy to say this, but the XP-based version of theEeePC 900
    > >> >> >> >> (the new version with the 8.9" screen) will actually be considerably
    > >> >> >> >> cheaper than the Linux-based version. At the official launch today, the
    > >> >> >> >> company told journalists that 'Microsoft has been a longstanding supporter
    > >> >> >> >> of Asus' to explain the price discrepancy. And - get this - only the
    > >> >> >> >> XP-based machine will be sold at mass-market retailers, while the
    > >> >> >> >> Linux-based model will be consigned to computer stores."
    > >> >> >> >>

    >
    > >> >> >> > What it shows, despite protestations to the contrary, is that Linux has MS
    > >> >> >> > ****ting themselves.

    >
    > >> >> >> Please explain how?

    >
    > >> >> > Tell me Hadron, why *would* the XP based version of the 900 be cheaper
    > >> >> > than the Linux version?

    >
    > >> >> > What *possible* motivation and mechanism could there that would allow
    > >> >> > the XP version to be offered more cheaply? Charity?

    >
    > >> >> To get it out there and to encourage
    > >> >> people to buy other MS SW. What else? How is this ****ting
    > >> >> themselves. Here's a hint : Selling <> ****ting themselves.

    >
    > >> > If they were selling XP, you might have a case (and I stress *might*)
    > >> > but in this case, it appears they are prepared to not only give it
    > >> > away, but to subsidise it. Oh dear.

    >
    > >> Can you source your claims?

    >
    > >> if they are subsidising it then this is wrong. Anything higher than 0
    > >> cents is still business.

    >
    > > This is why I say "appears" of course - neither one of us is privy to
    > > that knowledge, unless you have anything to confess?

    >
    > Aha. So you made it up. OK.
    >



    Yes, in the sense that any clearly stated matter of opinion or
    judgement is "made up".


    >
    >
    > > What would your explanation be for the difference in price? Is ASUS
    > > prepared to accept less for a PC in order to foster the relationship
    > > with Microsoft? Do you find that a likely state of affairs?

    >
    > Well, for a start thy then dont have to worry about supporting
    > Linux!


    That's true whether XP is supported or not.

    >
    > But in fairness, I think it's bad and it's bad for Linux and MS win
    > again. My friend who has one was around the other day and, once again,
    > it is an awesome little beast. AND it remembered the WPA key from his
    > last visit. It "just worked".


    Quite like one, not sure if I can really justify it yet.

  5. Re: This can't be good - "XP Cheaper Than Linux On Eee 900"

    On Fri, 9 May 2008 03:17:04 -0700 (PDT), seani wrote:

    > On 9 May, 10:52, Hadron wrote:
    >> seani writes:
    >>> On 9 May, 10:22, Hadron wrote:
    >>>> seani writes:
    >>>> > On 9 May, 01:53, Hadron wrote:
    >>>> >> Sean Inglis writes:
    >>>> >> > Ezekiel wrote:

    >>
    >>>> >> >>http://hardware.slashdot.org/article.../05/08/1247238

    >>
    >>>> >> >>
    >>>> >> >> "It sounds crazy to say this, but the XP-based version of theEeePC 900
    >>>> >> >> (the new version with the 8.9" screen) will actually be considerably
    >>>> >> >> cheaper than the Linux-based version. At the official launch today, the
    >>>> >> >> company told journalists that 'Microsoft has been a longstanding supporter
    >>>> >> >> of Asus' to explain the price discrepancy. And - get this - only the
    >>>> >> >> XP-based machine will be sold at mass-market retailers, while the
    >>>> >> >> Linux-based model will be consigned to computer stores."
    >>>> >> >>

    >>
    >>>> >> > What it shows, despite protestations to the contrary, is that Linux has MS
    >>>> >> > ****ting themselves.

    >>
    >>>> >> Please explain how?

    >>
    >>>> > Tell me Hadron, why *would* the XP based version of the 900 be cheaper
    >>>> > than the Linux version?

    >>
    >>>> > What *possible* motivation and mechanism could there that would allow
    >>>> > the XP version to be offered more cheaply? Charity?

    >>
    >>>> To get it out there and to encourage
    >>>> people to buy other MS SW. What else? How is this ****ting
    >>>> themselves. Here's a hint : Selling <> ****ting themselves.

    >>
    >>> If they were selling XP, you might have a case (and I stress *might*)
    >>> but in this case, it appears they are prepared to not only give it
    >>> away, but to subsidise it. Oh dear.

    >>
    >> Can you source your claims?
    >>
    >> if they are subsidising it then this is wrong. Anything higher than 0
    >> cents is still business.
    >>

    >
    > This is why I say "appears" of course - neither one of us is privy to
    > that knowledge, unless you have anything to confess?
    >
    > What would your explanation be for the difference in price? Is ASUS
    > prepared to accept less for a PC in order to foster the relationship
    > with Microsoft? Do you find that a likely state of affairs?


    Is that you Roy Schestowitz?

    --
    Moshe Goldfarb
    Collector of soaps from around the globe.
    Please visit The Hall of Linux Idiots:
    http://linuxidiots.blogspot.com/

  6. Re: This can't be good - "XP Cheaper Than Linux On Eee 900"

    On Thu, 8 May 2008 10:36:26 -0400, Ezekiel wrote:

    > http://hardware.slashdot.org/article.../05/08/1247238
    >
    >
    >
    > "It sounds crazy to say this, but the XP-based version of the Eee PC 900
    > (the new version with the 8.9" screen) will actually be considerably cheaper
    > than the Linux-based version. At the official launch today, the company told
    > journalists that 'Microsoft has been a longstanding supporter of Asus' to
    > explain the price discrepancy. And - get this - only the XP-based machine
    > will be sold at mass-market retailers, while the Linux-based model will be
    > consigned to computer stores."
    >


    Yet another nail in the Linux coffin......

    Let's see how the Linux loons try and spin this one.



    --
    Moshe Goldfarb
    Collector of soaps from around the globe.
    Please visit The Hall of Linux Idiots:
    http://linuxidiots.blogspot.com/

  7. Re: This can't be good - "XP Cheaper Than Linux On Eee 900"

    Moshe Goldfarb is flatfish (in real life Gary Stewart)

    http://colatrolls.blogspot.com/2008/...arb-troll.html
    http://colatrolls.blogspot.com/2007/...ish-troll.html

    Traits:

    * Nym shifting (see below)
    * Self confessed thief and proud of it
    * Homophobic
    * Racist
    * Habitual liar
    * Frequently cross posts replies to other non-Linux related newsgroups
    * Frequently cross posts articles originally not posted to COLA

  8. Re: This can't be good - "XP Cheaper Than Linux On Eee 900"

    Moshe Goldfarb is flatfish (in real life Gary Stewart)

    http://colatrolls.blogspot.com/2008/...arb-troll.html
    http://colatrolls.blogspot.com/2007/...ish-troll.html

    Traits:

    * Nym shifting (see below)
    * Self confessed thief and proud of it
    * Homophobic
    * Racist
    * Habitual liar
    * Frequently cross posts replies to other non-Linux related newsgroups
    * Frequently cross posts articles originally not posted to COLA

  9. Re: This can't be good - "XP Cheaper Than Linux On Eee 900"

    In article
    ,
    seani wrote:
    > > > What it shows, despite protestations to the contrary, is that Linux has
    > > > MS
    > > > ****ting themselves.

    > >
    > > Please explain how?
    > >

    >
    > Tell me Hadron, why *would* the XP based version of the 900 be cheaper
    > than the Linux version?
    >
    > What *possible* motivation and mechanism could there that would allow
    > the XP version to be offered more cheaply? Charity?


    How about the fact that the XP version has only 60% of the non-volatile
    storage that the Linux version has?

    --
    --Tim Smith

  10. Re: This can't be good - "XP Cheaper Than Linux On Eee 900"

    Moshe Goldfarb wrote:

    >> http://hardware.slashdot.org/article.../05/08/1247238
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >> "It sounds crazy to say this, but the XP-based version of the Eee PC 900
    >> (the new version with the 8.9" screen) will actually be considerably
    >> cheaper than the Linux-based version. At the official launch today, the
    >> company told journalists that 'Microsoft has been a longstanding
    >> supporter of Asus' to explain the price discrepancy. And - get this -
    >> only the XP-based machine will be sold at mass-market retailers, while
    >> the Linux-based model will be consigned to computer stores."
    >>

    >
    > Yet another nail in the Linux coffin......
    >
    > Let's see how the Linux loons try and spin this one.


    winXP is 7 years old, the used distro is ........ years/months/days old
    I won't compair this two OS!
    --
    EOS
    www.photo-memories.be
    Running KDE 3.5.9 / openSUSE 10.3

  11. Re: This can't be good - "XP Cheaper Than Linux On Eee 900"

    On Fri, 9 May 2008 19:48:05 +0100, dennis@home wrote:

    > "EOS" wrote in message
    > news:eK%Uj.2524$JK4.1733@newsfe30.ams2...
    >> Moshe Goldfarb wrote:
    >>
    >>>> http://hardware.slashdot.org/article.../05/08/1247238
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>> "It sounds crazy to say this, but the XP-based version of the Eee PC 900
    >>>> (the new version with the 8.9" screen) will actually be considerably
    >>>> cheaper than the Linux-based version. At the official launch today, the
    >>>> company told journalists that 'Microsoft has been a longstanding
    >>>> supporter of Asus' to explain the price discrepancy. And - get this -
    >>>> only the XP-based machine will be sold at mass-market retailers, while
    >>>> the Linux-based model will be consigned to computer stores."
    >>>>

    >>>
    >>> Yet another nail in the Linux coffin......
    >>>
    >>> Let's see how the Linux loons try and spin this one.

    >>
    >> winXP is 7 years old, the used distro is ........ years/months/days old
    >> I won't compair this two OS!

    >
    > Who cares what the OS is?
    > What applications come with the two?
    > The OS is of no consequence to the user.
    >


    Correct Dennis, except in COLA where the OS is worshipped and the
    applications end of the debate is minimized.


    --
    Moshe Goldfarb
    Collector of soaps from around the globe.
    Please visit The Hall of Linux Idiots:
    http://linuxidiots.blogspot.com/

  12. Re: This can't be good - "XP Cheaper Than Linux On Eee 900"

    Moshe Goldfarb is flatfish (in real life Gary Stewart)

    http://colatrolls.blogspot.com/2008/...arb-troll.html
    http://colatrolls.blogspot.com/2007/...ish-troll.html

    Traits:

    * Nym shifting (see below)
    * Self confessed thief and proud of it
    * Homophobic
    * Racist
    * Habitual liar
    * Frequently cross posts replies to other non-Linux related newsgroups
    * Frequently cross posts articles originally not posted to COLA

  13. Re: This can't be good - "XP Cheaper Than Linux On Eee 900"



    "Moshe Goldfarb" wrote in message
    news:126ilaigxn3ut.w60ebrvl5oc5.dlg@40tude.net...
    > On Thu, 8 May 2008 10:36:26 -0400, Ezekiel wrote:
    >
    >> http://hardware.slashdot.org/article.../05/08/1247238
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >> "It sounds crazy to say this, but the XP-based version of the Eee PC 900
    >> (the new version with the 8.9" screen) will actually be considerably
    >> cheaper
    >> than the Linux-based version. At the official launch today, the company
    >> told
    >> journalists that 'Microsoft has been a longstanding supporter of Asus' to
    >> explain the price discrepancy. And - get this - only the XP-based machine
    >> will be sold at mass-market retailers, while the Linux-based model will
    >> be
    >> consigned to computer stores."
    >>

    >
    > Yet another nail in the Linux coffin......
    >
    > Let's see how the Linux loons try and spin this one.


    Its easy to see why.. the XP one has 12G of FLASH the linux one needs 20G of
    FLASH.
    The FLASH is the cost difference.
    Buy an XP one and install a smaller linux without the bloatware.


  14. Re: This can't be good - "XP Cheaper Than Linux On Eee 900"



    "EOS" wrote in message
    news:eK%Uj.2524$JK4.1733@newsfe30.ams2...
    > Moshe Goldfarb wrote:
    >
    >>> http://hardware.slashdot.org/article.../05/08/1247238
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>> "It sounds crazy to say this, but the XP-based version of the Eee PC 900
    >>> (the new version with the 8.9" screen) will actually be considerably
    >>> cheaper than the Linux-based version. At the official launch today, the
    >>> company told journalists that 'Microsoft has been a longstanding
    >>> supporter of Asus' to explain the price discrepancy. And - get this -
    >>> only the XP-based machine will be sold at mass-market retailers, while
    >>> the Linux-based model will be consigned to computer stores."
    >>>

    >>
    >> Yet another nail in the Linux coffin......
    >>
    >> Let's see how the Linux loons try and spin this one.

    >
    > winXP is 7 years old, the used distro is ........ years/months/days old
    > I won't compair this two OS!


    Who cares what the OS is?
    What applications come with the two?
    The OS is of no consequence to the user.




  15. Re: This can't be good - "XP Cheaper Than Linux On Eee 900"

    On 05/09/08 02:41, Rick wrote:
    > Moshe Goldfarb wrote:
    >> On Thu, 8 May 2008 10:36:26 -0400, Ezekiel wrote:
    >>
    >>> http://hardware.slashdot.org/article.../05/08/1247238
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>> "It sounds crazy to say this, but the XP-based version of the Eee PC
    >>> 900 (the new version with the 8.9" screen) will actually be
    >>> considerably cheaper than the Linux-based version. At the official
    >>> launch today, the company told journalists that 'Microsoft has been a
    >>> longstanding supporter of Asus' to explain the price discrepancy. And
    >>> - get this - only the XP-based machine will be sold at mass-market
    >>> retailers, while the Linux-based model will be consigned to computer
    >>> stores."
    >>>

    >>
    >> Yet another nail in the Linux coffin......
    >>
    >> Let's see how the Linux loons try and spin this one.
    >>
    >>
    >>

    > ... as opposed to your FUD, bigot?
    >
    > AGAIN, how can an Eee with Windows and MS software, which costs $ be
    > cheaper than the an Eee with software that costs $0?
    >


    Try reading the link. The Eee with Windows has 12GB of storage and the
    linux model has 8GB. So for an extra $50 ($650 vs. $600) you increase
    your storage by 50%.

  16. Re: This can't be good - "XP Cheaper Than Linux On Eee 900"

    On Fri, 09 May 2008 02:41:24 -0400, Rick wrote:
    >Moshe Goldfarb wrote:
    >> On Thu, 8 May 2008 10:36:26 -0400, Ezekiel wrote:
    >>
    >>> http://hardware.slashdot.org/article.../05/08/1247238
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>> "It sounds crazy to say this, but the XP-based version of the Eee PC 900
    >>> (the new version with the 8.9" screen) will actually be considerably cheaper
    >>> than the Linux-based version. At the official launch today, the company told
    >>> journalists that 'Microsoft has been a longstanding supporter of Asus' to
    >>> explain the price discrepancy. And - get this - only the XP-based machine
    >>> will be sold at mass-market retailers, while the Linux-based model will be
    >>> consigned to computer stores."
    >>>

    >>
    >> Yet another nail in the Linux coffin......
    >>
    >> Let's see how the Linux loons try and spin this one.
    >>
    >>
    >>

    >... as opposed to your FUD, bigot?


    >AGAIN, how can an Eee with Windows and MS software, which costs $ be
    >cheaper than the an Eee with software that costs $0?


    Simple: Microsoft has to pay company's like assu to use their software.

    Get the EeePC w/ windows XP and wipe it off. Problem solved.
    I notice that microsoft isn't trying to run vista on it.

  17. Re: This can't be good - "XP Cheaper Than Linux On Eee 900"

    On Fri, 9 May 2008 22:19:19 +0100, dennis@home wrote:


    >"AZ Nomad" wrote in message
    >news:slrng29c0c.tg0.aznomad.3@ip70-176-155-130.ph.ph.cox.net...
    >> On Fri, 09 May 2008 02:41:24 -0400, Rick wrote:
    >>>Moshe Goldfarb wrote:
    >>>> On Thu, 8 May 2008 10:36:26 -0400, Ezekiel wrote:
    >>>>
    >>>>> http://hardware.slashdot.org/article.../05/08/1247238
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>> "It sounds crazy to say this, but the XP-based version of the Eee PC
    >>>>> 900
    >>>>> (the new version with the 8.9" screen) will actually be considerably
    >>>>> cheaper
    >>>>> than the Linux-based version. At the official launch today, the company
    >>>>> told
    >>>>> journalists that 'Microsoft has been a longstanding supporter of Asus'
    >>>>> to
    >>>>> explain the price discrepancy. And - get this - only the XP-based
    >>>>> machine
    >>>>> will be sold at mass-market retailers, while the Linux-based model will
    >>>>> be
    >>>>> consigned to computer stores."
    >>>>>

    >>>>
    >>>> Yet another nail in the Linux coffin......
    >>>>
    >>>> Let's see how the Linux loons try and spin this one.
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>... as opposed to your FUD, bigot?

    >>
    >>>AGAIN, how can an Eee with Windows and MS software, which costs $ be
    >>>cheaper than the an Eee with software that costs $0?

    >>
    >> Simple: Microsoft has to pay company's like assu to use their software.


    >Evidence?


    >>
    >> Get the EeePC w/ windows XP and wipe it off. Problem solved.
    >> I notice that microsoft isn't trying to run vista on it.


    >It isn't exactly a powerful machine.
    >Let me know if it will run Ubuntu 8.04 with all the whizzy bits, I might buy
    >one if its that powerful.


    It is trivial to make ubuntu work just fine on that machine.

    The same can't be said for vista. The insane flab of vista can't be turned
    off.



  18. Re: This can't be good - "XP Cheaper Than Linux On Eee 900"

    On Fri, 09 May 2008 15:05:57 -0400, Douglas O'Neal wrote:

    > On 05/09/08 02:41, Rick wrote:
    >> Moshe Goldfarb wrote:
    >>> On Thu, 8 May 2008 10:36:26 -0400, Ezekiel wrote:
    >>>
    >>>> http://hardware.slashdot.org/article.../05/08/1247238
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>> "It sounds crazy to say this, but the XP-based version of the Eee PC
    >>>> 900 (the new version with the 8.9" screen) will actually be
    >>>> considerably cheaper than the Linux-based version. At the official
    >>>> launch today, the company told journalists that 'Microsoft has been a
    >>>> longstanding supporter of Asus' to explain the price discrepancy. And
    >>>> - get this - only the XP-based machine will be sold at mass-market
    >>>> retailers, while the Linux-based model will be consigned to computer
    >>>> stores."
    >>>>

    >>>
    >>> Yet another nail in the Linux coffin......
    >>>
    >>> Let's see how the Linux loons try and spin this one.
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>

    >> ... as opposed to your FUD, bigot?
    >>
    >> AGAIN, how can an Eee with Windows and MS software, which costs $ be
    >> cheaper than the an Eee with software that costs $0?
    >>
    >>

    > Try reading the link. The Eee with Windows has 12GB of storage and the
    > linux model has 8GB. So for an extra $50 ($650 vs. $600) you increase
    > your storage by 50%.


    "To cover the licence cost associated with Windows XP Home and Microsoft
    Works ... the XP model has just 12GB of storage, while the Linux version
    has 20GB".

    Supposedly, they cut the RAM to pay for Windows and Works... so the price
    of the Linux machine should still be at least the same.

    --
    Rick

  19. Re: This can't be good - "XP Cheaper Than Linux On Eee 900"

    On Fri, 09 May 2008 13:57:50 -0400, Moshe Goldfarb wrote:

    > On Fri, 9 May 2008 19:48:05 +0100, dennis@home wrote:
    >
    >> "EOS" wrote in message
    >> news:eK%Uj.2524$JK4.1733@newsfe30.ams2...
    >>> Moshe Goldfarb wrote:
    >>>
    >>>>> http://hardware.slashdot.org/article.../05/08/1247238
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>> "It sounds crazy to say this, but the XP-based version of the Eee PC
    >>>>> 900 (the new version with the 8.9" screen) will actually be
    >>>>> considerably cheaper than the Linux-based version. At the official
    >>>>> launch today, the company told journalists that 'Microsoft has been
    >>>>> a longstanding supporter of Asus' to explain the price discrepancy.
    >>>>> And - get this - only the XP-based machine will be sold at
    >>>>> mass-market retailers, while the Linux-based model will be consigned
    >>>>> to computer stores."

    >>>>
    >>>> Yet another nail in the Linux coffin......
    >>>>
    >>>> Let's see how the Linux loons try and spin this one.
    >>>
    >>> winXP is 7 years old, the used distro is ........ years/months/days
    >>> old I won't compair this two OS!

    >>
    >> Who cares what the OS is?
    >> What applications come with the two?
    >> The OS is of no consequence to the user.
    >>
    >>

    > Correct Dennis, except in COLA where the OS is worshipped and the
    > applications end of the debate is minimized.


    More lies from flatfish.

    --
    Rick

  20. Re: This can't be good - "XP Cheaper Than Linux On Eee 900"

    Rick wrote:
    > On Fri, 09 May 2008 15:05:57 -0400, Douglas O'Neal wrote:
    >
    >> On 05/09/08 02:41, Rick wrote:
    >>> Moshe Goldfarb wrote:
    >>>> On Thu, 8 May 2008 10:36:26 -0400, Ezekiel wrote:
    >>>>
    >>>>> http://hardware.slashdot.org/article.../05/08/1247238
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>> "It sounds crazy to say this, but the XP-based version of the Eee
    >>>>> PC 900 (the new version with the 8.9" screen) will actually be
    >>>>> considerably cheaper than the Linux-based version. At the official
    >>>>> launch today, the company told journalists that 'Microsoft has
    >>>>> been a longstanding supporter of Asus' to explain the price
    >>>>> discrepancy. And - get this - only the XP-based machine will be
    >>>>> sold at mass-market retailers, while the Linux-based model will
    >>>>> be consigned to computer stores."
    >>>>>

    >>>>
    >>>> Yet another nail in the Linux coffin......
    >>>>
    >>>> Let's see how the Linux loons try and spin this one.
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>> ... as opposed to your FUD, bigot?
    >>>
    >>> AGAIN, how can an Eee with Windows and MS software, which costs $ be
    >>> cheaper than the an Eee with software that costs $0?
    >>>
    >>>

    >> Try reading the link. The Eee with Windows has 12GB of storage and
    >> the linux model has 8GB. So for an extra $50 ($650 vs. $600) you
    >> increase your storage by 50%.

    >
    > "To cover the licence cost associated with Windows XP Home and
    > Microsoft Works ... the XP model has just 12GB of storage, while the
    > Linux version has 20GB".
    >
    > Supposedly, they cut the RAM to pay for Windows and Works... so the
    > price of the Linux machine should still be at least the same.


    They're charging more for all the Linux support calls they will have to
    handle. There's not a support issue with the Windows machines.



+ Reply to Thread
Page 2 of 5 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 ... LastLast