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 ; 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 ...

+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 5 1 2 3 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 97

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

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


    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."



    ** Posted from http://www.teranews.com **

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

    "Ezekiel" writes:

    > 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."
    >

    >
    >
    > ** Posted from http://www.teranews.com **


    Give MS their due - they sure know how to annoy COLA "advocates".

    --
    Whoever asked if the debian organization was dead isn't reading
    debian-devel. 66 messages in one day, and it's not over. I find it
    difficult to keep up.
    -- Bruce Perens

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


    "Hadron" wrote in message
    news:fvv3fr$43o$1@registered.motzarella.org...
    > "Ezekiel" writes:
    >
    >> 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."
    >>

    >>
    >>
    >> ** Posted from http://www.teranews.com **

    >
    > Give MS their due - they sure know how to annoy COLA "advocates".


    They are damn good at running a business. The difference is that COLA
    "advocates" bitch, whine and complain but in the end it all adds up to
    absolutely nothing. All the crying and complaining adds up to absolutely
    nothing in the end. Companies like Microsoft on the other hand are out there
    actually doing things that matter and things that help them get ahead.

    If the COLA "advocates" spent half as much time actually doing something to
    advance linux as they do whining then perhaps something would result from
    it.






    ** Posted from http://www.teranews.com **

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

    On Thu, 08 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."
    >

    >
    >
    > ** Posted from http://www.teranews.com **


    Maybe someone can tell us how it is cheaper to install an OS that costs
    any $, rather than one that costs $0.



    --
    Rick

  5. Re: This is good - "Linux Cheaper Than WINDUMMY OSen On Eee 900"

    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.


    Its missing 8Gb amount in HD so that micoshaft may live.

    The prices of both PCs (WINDUMMY PC with 8Gb missing and Linux with 8Gb
    memory added) are the same - which does raise some anti-trust
    issues.

    You should be able to buy ANY PC and buy it with any choice of your OS and
    have to only pay the difference in the price with and without OS.
    It is a market distortion to price entirely different products
    through a marketing conspiracy so that one product can appear to be
    competitive when one of them is actually ripping the punter off.
    In any case, the new offering is not price wise competitive
    AT ALL compared to normal laptops!!!!!

    It seems to suggest the Linux PC version has been hiked in price
    so that secret payments on behalf of Linux can be dontated by
    Ausus$ to micoshaft again.

    I think the EU anti-trust and competition commisioner
    needs to investigate this thorougly. There is ample
    evidence other companies who have ties to big corporations
    based out of america are overcharging Linux customers
    so that micoshaft may live through price fixing arrangements
    instituted between Micoshfat Corporation and the harware sellers.

    Someone inside a company or micoshaft needs to snitch on this
    story me thinks.




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

    "Rick" stated in post
    j8GdnfLO_r0j8r7VnZ2dnUVZ_oLinZ2d@supernews.com on 5/8/08 2:25 PM:

    > On Thu, 08 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."
    >>

    >>
    >>
    >> ** Posted from http://www.teranews.com **

    >
    > Maybe someone can tell us how it is cheaper to install an OS that costs
    > any $, rather than one that costs $0.


    Cost of the OS is not the on only cost associated with use of it... not even
    installation.


    --
    Computers are incredibly fast, accurate, and stupid: humans are incredibly
    slow, inaccurate and brilliant; together they are powerful beyond
    imagination. - attributed to Albert Einstein, likely apocryphal


  7. Re: This is good - "Linux Cheaper Than WINDUMMY OSen On Eee 900"


    "7" wrote in message
    news:3sKUj.355$DZ6.174@text.news.virginmedia.com.. .
    > 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.

    >
    >
    > It seems to suggest the Linux PC version has been hiked in price
    > so that secret payments on behalf of Linux can be dontated by
    > Ausus$ to micoshaft again.
    >


    Pay no attention to "7" - he is mentally deranged because he misses
    CLIPPY!!!!

    If he only had CLIPPY he would be a normal person but he is going through
    CLIPPY withdrawl!!!!



    ** Posted from http://www.teranews.com **

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

    In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Rick

    wrote
    on Thu, 08 May 2008 16:25:18 -0500
    :
    > On Thu, 08 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."
    >>

    >>
    >>
    >> ** Posted from http://www.teranews.com **

    >
    > Maybe someone can tell us how it is cheaper to install an OS that costs
    > any $, rather than one that costs $0.
    >


    Best I can do is transfer the cost to someone else.
    Briefly put, one has (at least) the following scenarios:

    [1] Buy box, plug it in, you're online with Windows
    [2] Buy empty box, buy consultant's time (30min @ $200/hr),
    to install Linux, plug it in, you're online but $100 poorer,
    assuming empty box is same price as preloaded Windows box
    (which isn't always the case).

    (The cost transference in [1] is because some intelligent
    sort within the OEM installed Windows Vista -- or XP --
    on a single box, then the apps, then imaged the result
    onto a disc to install on all the (other?) boxes.)

    Contrived? You bet your sweet bippy. However, businesses
    and their IT departments may be forced to contend with
    slightly less contrived scenarios. There are also issues
    with customer support, and that's a bit like comparing
    apples and hamster balls -- both are vaguely round and
    might look waxy, but from a similarities standpoint that's
    about it. I highly doubt a CS person handling Linux-based
    products is going to get the same sort of questions as
    his cubemate handling Windows-based products.

    I can tell you that Dell plays a few games in their "N"
    series; one has to exercise care in comparisons, lest one
    end up with a different configuration hardware-wise and
    therefore compare apples with hamster balls, as opposed
    to apples and apples, or at least apples and kumquats.
    Caveat emptor in their case.

    And of course there is the possibility that there's more
    demand (or less supply) for the Linux products, therefore
    the OEM justifies thereby the higher price.

    For the Eee's part the official announcement is at
    http://eeepc.asus.com/global/news03042008.htm
    and a website is at
    http://eeepc.asus.com/global/900.htm
    (The US variant does not offer this yet, apparently.)

    The OS is interesting: "Windows(R) XP Home / Linux". The
    slash probably should be replaced with "or", and my pedantic
    side once again mentions that Linux cannot possibly be an OS
    in this context, as it's merely the kernel. For its part the
    US site states "Linux" followed by "Windows XP compatible".
    The actual GUI shots are less than clear as to GUI environment
    and/or distro.

    --
    #191, ewill3@earthlink.net
    Useless C/C++ Programming Idea #1123133:
    void f(FILE * fptr, char *p) { fgets(p, sizeof(p), fptr); }
    ** Posted from http://www.teranews.com **

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

    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."
    >

    >


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

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

    Rick wrote:

    > Maybe someone can tell us how it is cheaper to install an OS that
    > costs any $, rather than one that costs $0.


    It's not - though I've no doubt that MS has done a great deal of work on
    this, and is probably pretty-well giving the XP away. Remember, this
    unit has been mooted for use in schools, and we know how MS like to
    look after the kids....

    In fact, it would appear that there is an anomaly in the Australian
    pricing. In the UK, the prices for XP/Linux versions are the same, but
    the XP version has 12GB, the Linux version 20GB.
    http://www.eee-900.co.uk/

    Also, worth going to the bottom of this page, and reading the comments:-
    http://apcmag.com/windowsbased_eeepc..._linux_one.htm

    One of the Aussies seems to think they get them cheaper than in the UK,
    but I don't know what their sales tax (if any) is. Here (UK) the
    quoted prices include 17.5% tax.

    I love this bit (from Asus):-
    "the Linux version is suited to users who desire an icon-driven and
    easy point-and-click interface – well suited for children or users with
    limited computer experience".
    Sheesh! Have the Windows Enthusiasts in this group been lying to me?
    They always seem to say the complete opposite!


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

    Sean Inglis wrote:

    > 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."

    >>

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


    ROFL! Thank you - that's probably the most succinct and accurate
    comment I've yet seen on this issue:-)
    This whole range of very small (and inexpensive) laptops seems to have
    caught MS with trousers-round-ankles, doesn't it? XP withdrawn June
    2008....????:-):-)


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

    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 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."
    >>

    >>

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


    Please explain how?

    --
    Bwahahahahahahahah - Anyone else think that this announcement from the MS
    marketing machine was anything other than a last ditch attempt to try and
    foster *some* interest in XP ?
    comp.os.linux.advocacy - where they put the lunacy in advocacy

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

    In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Hadron

    wrote
    on Fri, 09 May 2008 02:53:57 +0200
    :
    > 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 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."
    >>>

    >>>

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

    >
    > Please explain how?
    >


    I strongly suspect MS is no longer all that worried, but
    http://www.catb.org/~esr/halloween/
    showed some concern in 1998.

    --
    #191, ewill3@earthlink.net
    New Technology? Not There. No Thanks.
    ** Posted from http://www.teranews.com **

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

    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?

    --
    Rick

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

    bbgruff wrote:
    > Also, worth going to the bottom of this page, and reading the comments:-
    > http://apcmag.com/windowsbased_eeepc..._linux_one.htm
    >
    > One of the Aussies seems to think they get them cheaper than in the UK,
    > but I don't know what their sales tax (if any) is. Here (UK) the
    > quoted prices include 17.5% tax.


    10% GST.

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

    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?
    After all it seems that XP (an OS that MS is trying to position as
    outdated) has been amended to allow it to run on the 900. At the very
    least there are development and QA costs that need to be recovered,
    but apparently not so.

    If the OS is no threat, why not just let the 900 fail for that reason
    and point out the fact?

    But the problem is that experiencing a rival OS that is so obviously a
    better fit for the platform is a real risk. It breaks the dependency
    and continuous update cycle in favour of successfully addressing user
    requirements. Far better for MS to spend and try to mitigate the risk
    by ensuring that the man in the street has less incentive to make the
    unflattering comparison in the first place.

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

    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.


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

    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.

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

    On Thu, 08 May 2008 15:10:23 -0700, The Ghost In The Machine wrote:

    > In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Rick
    >
    > wrote
    > on Thu, 08 May 2008 16:25:18 -0500
    > :
    >> On Thu, 08 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."

    >>>
    >>>
    >>> ** Posted from http://www.teranews.com **

    >>
    >> Maybe someone can tell us how it is cheaper to install an OS that costs
    >> any $, rather than one that costs $0.
    >>
    >>

    > Best I can do is transfer the cost to someone else. Briefly put, one has
    > (at least) the following scenarios:
    >
    > [1] Buy box, plug it in, you're online with Windows [2] Buy empty box,
    > buy consultant's time (30min @ $200/hr), to install Linux, plug it in,
    > you're online but $100 poorer, assuming empty box is same price as
    > preloaded Windows box (which isn't always the case).


    Buy Eee with Linux ($ 0) for Linux. Ausu installs Linux.

    Buy Eee with Windows and MS software. Windows and software cost $. Asus
    installs software.

    How can the second scenario be cheaper? Is MS not charging Asus AND
    subsiding the machines with XP?


    --
    Rick

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

    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.

    --
    (It is an old Debian tradition to leave at least twice a year ...)
    -- Sven Rudolph

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