ASUS starts to suck severly

[Adarion]

http://itsbetterwithwindows.com/

Incredibly cheesy flash vid. Why does ASUS do such a thing and goes to bed with MS? I think I have to vote with my wallet again and tell ASUS about that.

[deanjo]

http://itsbetterwithwindows.com/

Incredibly cheesy flash vid. Why does ASUS do such a thing and goes to bed with MS? I think I have to vote with my wallet again and tell ASUS about that.


Money incentives, better compatibility, less returns.

[RealNC]

Money incentives, better compatibility, less returns.

Let's not forget that Asus does not need Linux. Linux needs Asus. Like every good company, they place their own well being above the few geeks using Linux. Linux has to give companies an incentive to support it, NOT the other way around. Asus is doing just fine. Linux isn't.

[deanjo]

Let's not forget that Asus does not need Linux. Linux needs Asus. Like every good company, they place their own well being above the few geeks using Linux. Linux has to give companies an incentive to support it, NOT the other way around. Asus is doing just fine. Linux isn't.

Yup cater to your target audience. You don't dump millions of dollars into marketing and R&D, for ~1-2% of the marketshare when you can market to 90+% of the market. Doing otherwise is called financial suicide.

[deanjo]

I think I have to vote with my wallet again and tell ASUS about that.

Whose wallet do you they think they care about? Your 1 wallet or the other 90+ people's wallet that in a group of 100.

[L33F3R]

Microsoft sponsors this ridiculous shit all the time. Anyone who actually fallows this is a stupid consumer to begin with. Look at the target audience for example. This wont be beneficial for microsoft at all. Asus is getting free money. I guess they figured everyone was buying windows netbooks anyway. I cant blame them when these netbook manufactures put retarded distributions on them.

Look at them type on the eeepc in the vid. I could do a better job smashing my face on it. Anyone who knows what a "linux" is would at least have the typing ability of a 3rd grader. This,, for the 2 seconds of typing in the whole video. Netbooks and the eeepc especially are simply not made for anyone over the 3rd grade because any grown person cant use proper hand positioning due to the compact size.

This vid tells me 1 thing. The eee pc with windows xp.
For people who dont know how to type.;)

[krazy]

http://itsbetterwithwindows.com/

Incredibly cheesy flash vid. Why does ASUS do such a thing and goes to bed with MS? I think I have to vote with my wallet again and tell ASUS about that.
This is sad I agree, but to be honest: who is surprised? We already know that Microsoft offers incentives to OEMs. This is just a more in-your-face example of that.

On a brighter note, I think it's amazing that microsoft has felt this site was even necessary. I mean, considering linux has an infinitesimal marketing clout compared to microsoft (have you ever seen a Xandros ad?), to have them set up a PR campaign just to fight linux means that someone at redmond sees a threat. And that's a pretty amazing achievement in the face of the microsoft monopoly.

[Melcar]

The chick is hot thought.

[krazy]

The chick is hot thought.
You can tell what she's thinking?!

[StringCheesian]

You'd think that Asus's decision to ever use Linux in the first place was a calculated one. Probably they did focus groups and the people not willing to buy a linux netbook because it's unfamiliar etc were outweighed by all the people who were much more likely to buy a linux netbook simple because it would be cheaper.

So somebody just needs to make the argument to Asus that findings like that (findings that have an impact on Asus's bottom line) are not to be thrown out the window just because the CEO played a round of golf with some Microsoft guy (or whatever).

[deanjo]

You'd think that Asus's decision to ever use Linux in the first place was a calculated one. Probably they did focus groups and the people not willing to buy a linux netbook because it's unfamiliar etc were outweighed by all the people who were much more likely to buy a linux netbook simple because it would be cheaper.

So somebody just needs to make the argument to Asus that findings like that (findings that have an impact on Asus's bottom line) are not to be thrown out the window just because the CEO played a round of golf with some Microsoft guy (or whatever).


I don't think they really needed a focus group to figure out that most of the world is familiar and comfortable with windows. One of the biggest reasons you saw linux on the first ones is probably more of a case of Asus slapping linux in a hot product to force MS to lower the price of Windows for netbooks. Mission accomplished. If a company can charge $100 more for the same hardware because of a piece of software that they bought for $30 then that's another $70 in their pockets (which probably is close to as much profit they made on the hardware alone).

[StringCheesian]

I don't think they really needed a focus group to figure out that most of the world is familiar and comfortable with windows. One of the biggest reasons you saw linux on the first ones is probably more of a case of Asus slapping linux in a hot product to force MS to lower the price of Windows for netbooks. Mission accomplished. If a company can charge $100 more for the same hardware because of a piece of software that they bought for $30 then that's another $70 in their pockets (which probably is close to as much profit they made on the hardware alone).

That can't be what Asus is thinking.

Employee: I've got a idea, lets flirt with linux to get a better deal from MS!
CEO: Flirt how, release some products with linux?
Employee: Sure, why not?
CEO: Well, shouldn't we at least investigate the potential for losses or for profits? Will these linux products sell?
Employee: Naw, it doesn't matter how well the linux products do, we'll be ok. Don't bother investigating.
CEO: Ok, I'm sold - lets do it!

See how unrealistic that is? Getting a better deal from MS would not have been enough of a reason all by it self to start with Linux in the first place.

More likely, Asus projected higher profits (due to greater volume) from a range of OSs (from the cheap to the familiar) and then later MS offered them a deal for dropping linux guaranteeing even higher profits due to paying less for Windows.

And all I'm saying is that if we had more info, there would probably be lots of arguments to persuade Asus that such a deal with MS isn't smart. The MS deal is temporary while their previous strategy was long term potential, issues with antitrust law, etc.

What's with the us vs them attitude where Asus is ether a one of the good guys or one of the bad guys? Why are you so quick to give up on Asus?

[deanjo]

That can't be what Asus is thinking.

Employee: I've got a idea, lets flirt with linux to get a better deal from MS!
CEO: Flirt how, release some products with linux?
Employee: Sure, why not?
CEO: Well, shouldn't we at least investigate the potential for losses or for profits? Will these linux products sell?
Employee: Naw, it doesn't matter how well the linux products do, we'll be ok. Don't bother investigating.
CEO: Ok, I'm sold - lets do it!

See how unrealistic that is? Getting a better deal from MS would not have been enough of a reason all by it self to start with Linux in the first place.

More likely, Asus projected higher profits (due to greater volume) from a range of OSs (from the cheap to the familiar) and then later MS offered them a deal for dropping linux guaranteeing even higher profits due to paying less for Windows.

And all I'm saying is that if we had more info, there would probably be lots of arguments to persuade Asus that such a deal with MS isn't smart. The MS deal is temporary while their previous strategy was long term potential, issues with antitrust law, etc.

What's with the us vs them attitude where Asus is ether a one of the good guys or one of the bad guys? Why are you so quick to give up on Asus?


It is a very realistic deal, one only has to take a look at how intel was refusing at first to allow the atom to be sold without a intel chipset and then Nvidia announces ION 2 for the nano and all of a sudden wow you can purchase atoms individually. It happens all the time in the IT industry. Same thing happened with classmate PC's. Sometimes it never gets past the sabre rattling bit other times such as with windows in EEE pc it took them to install linux to send a wakeup call to MS to give better, more profitable prices on windows. This scenario also rolled out in OLPC as well.

[Blue Beard]

Yup cater to your target audience. You don't dump millions of dollars into marketing and R&D, for ~1-2% of the marketshare when you can market to 90+% of the market. Doing otherwise is called financial suicide.

It has taken the last 3 years for Microsoft to lose about 3-4 % of the market based on numbers captured by Internet website traffic surveys.

The last one I saw placed Microsoft at 87.9 % and Linux at 1.02%. Three years ago Microsoft was always 92 to 93+%.

Intel like many profit oriented companies flirts with Linux most likely to make Microsoft more competitive.

If the rumors are true that Microsoft is OEMing XP at $15 for netbooks instead of the previous $50, the ASUS, Intel, etc strategy worked.

The important observation is that Linux is being considered as a serious commercial alternative.

[L33F3R]

The important observation is that Linux is being considered as a serious commercial alternative.


the age old tale that nothing in life is free. proven false.

[deanjo]

It has taken the last 3 years for Microsoft to lose about 3-4 % of the market based on numbers captured by Internet website traffic surveys.

The last one I saw placed Microsoft at 87.9 % and Linux at 1.02%. Three years ago Microsoft was always 92 to 93+%.


True, couple things to consider. Most of that marketshare was not lost to linux but to Apple. Also it would not be surprising at all to see MS to gain a large chunk of that back with Win 7 and the push they are giving on making Windows dirt ass cheap in markets where piracy is rampant and income is low.

BTW, Asus is hardly the first to offer linux as an alternative. Many companies over the years have "toyed" with it and then later reverted back.

[AdrenalineJunky]

You'd think that Asus's decision to ever use Linux in the first place was a calculated one. Probably they did focus groups and the people not willing to buy a linux netbook because it's unfamiliar etc were outweighed by all the people who were much more likely to buy a linux netbook simple because it would be cheaper.

So somebody just needs to make the argument to Asus that findings like that (findings that have an impact on Asus's bottom line) are not to be thrown out the window just because the CEO played a round of golf with some Microsoft guy (or whatever).

i would like to point out that the state of the market now is drastically different then when they introduced the eeepc.

back then a windows liscense would have represented almost a third of the cost of the device.

now on the other hand is a different story, microsoft cut the royaltees for netbooks drastically, they now sell for pretty much the same price with windows or linux.

due to that fact, it does make windows netbooks far more appealing to alot of people then they would have been when the eeepc was introduced.

asus is going where the money is, while i love to see companies supporting OSS, you can't really blame them for that.

[Dosfish]

Personally every asus product I've brought and my friends have brought has died within around 2-3 years, I (and my firends) refuse to buy asus products for the past 5 years. Point being if asus and microsoft want to jerk off in each others pockets, let them. Neither of them will be getting my money.

[krazy]

http://www.pcworld.com/article/160047/netbooks_are_taking_a_toll_on_microsoft.html?tk=re l_news

http://www.itworld.com/microsoft-windows-on-lowcost-pcs-080512

^^ a couple of interesting reads. especially about microsoft segmenting the market with their licensing hardware limits..

[curaga]

The recent news about how MS now calls netbooks "low cost small notebook pc"s, and how the thin-and-light category of laptops is going to be "entirely different", it's fun to watch.

The thins will likely only see the higher cost version of 7, home premium or something like that, and that alone will make them at least 100$ more expensive than netbooks.

Segmentation, or, divide and conquer..

[energyman]

Let's not forget that Asus does not need Linux. Linux needs Asus. Like every good company, they place their own well being above the few geeks using Linux. Linux has to give companies an incentive to support it, NOT the other way around. Asus is doing just fine. Linux isn't.

Asus has a long history of licking Microsofts and Intel's boots. Remember when they did not advertise their athlon boards to suck up to Intel?

Combine that with the fact that Asus quality went down a lot in the last couple of years (and asus mobos killed more than one pci device with their overclocked-by-default policy they once had). Why buy asus? There are better mobos out there.

[djack]

I'm annoyed that the only passively cooled dual-DVI GeForce 9x00 series card that I could actually find to buy anywhere was an Asus one.

[MetalheadGautham]

As long as ASUS ensures that the EEE PC is 100% Compatible with Linux I am not complaining.

[deanjo]

(and asus mobos killed more than one pci device with their overclocked-by-default policy they once had). Why buy asus? There are better mobos out there.

Seeing that even on their hi-end series of motherboards the PCI bus is locked at default I have to call BS on that. You have to force the override. For the record I've owned many of their performance series systems "which overcock by default" which as well isn't true. Those boards are set to auto and the only time it overclocks is a) you specify the percentage of overclock in the bios b) it's left on auto and you install their OC'ing software which of course doesn't work in linux anyways. You will of course see occasionally slight bus speed variations which is because of spread spectrum being enabled by default to help adhere to FCC regulations.

[energyman]

just google. It is not so long that Asus overclocked all busses in their system by a small margin. And back in those days it killed more than one pci card. Google before attacking me. Thank you.

[deanjo]

just google. It is not so long that Asus overclocked all busses in their system by a small margin. And back in those days it killed more than one pci card. Google before attacking me. Thank you.

Google Spread Spectrum yourself. Talk to any tech. They will confirm that your spreading unsubstantiated FUD. I guarantee you that shitty power supplys are to blame for frying any one piece of hardware. But hey, I've only oned a shitload of Asus systems past and present with every single one with nearly every slot filled and have NEVER fried a pci card.

[Ant P.]

As long as ASUS ensures that the EEE PC is 100% Compatible with Linux I am not complaining.

Has there actually been an eee that could run from day 1 without binary blobs?

[energyman]

Google Spread Spectrum yourself. Talk to any tech. They will confirm that your spreading unsubstantiated FUD. I guarantee you that shitty power supplys are to blame for frying any one piece of hardware. But hey, I've only oned a shitload of Asus systems past and present with every single one with nearly every slot filled and have NEVER fried a pci card.


I am not talking about spread spectrum. I am talking about overclocking system busses. Asus did it for a long time.

And they killed cards doing so.

You don't even know what you (or I) are talking about, since you brought up SS. So please shut up.

I have seen PCI cards malfunction in Asus boards. Cards working fine in boards with clock speeds adhering to the standards.

[deanjo]

I am not talking about spread spectrum. I am talking about overclocking system busses. Asus did it for a long time.

And they killed cards doing so.

You don't even know what you (or I) are talking about, since you brought up SS. So please shut up.

I have seen PCI cards malfunction in Asus boards. Cards working fine in boards with clock speeds adhering to the standards.
The "factory overclocking" your seeing is because of spread spectrum, seriously. You even admit you don't know what spread spectrum is so how the hell can you make any comment on it? So here let me enlighten you on the subject.

http://zone.ni.com/devzone/cda/tut/p/id/4154

I have seen PCI cards malfunction as well, most notably in VIA chipset boards where PCI lock is not available. It has nothing to do with make of board. I would suggest you follow your own advice and "shut up". Until you have a device such as a PCI diagnostic card or a pci monitoring device such as the PC Gieger which is acurate down to the tenth of the MHZ as I have, I would suggest you stick to making comments you actually have a sniff about.

Seriously if you don't even know what spread spectrum is then you shouldn't be commenting on being able to diagnose as to why a card works or not.

[energyman]

I admitted nothing. Read again. And I really know, what spread spectrum is. The link is very unneeded. You still confuse Spread Spectrum with overclocking....

Just go to sites like tomshardware and read old reviews. You will find enough instances where Asus overclocked the mobo's busses to have the small edge in benchmarks to put them over their competitors, even when the margin was very, very low.

[stevea]

How silly to blame Asus. It's a makreting decision. Is it Asus fault that Linux doesn't have the level of driver/device support and Windows ? Is it Asus fault that all sorts of widely used s/w is Windows only ?

When someone goes to a PC shop and picks up any random software or some deviant hardware with some necessary driver CD, there is a 99% probability it won't run on Linux without a struggle.

You can't blame the hardware and s/w mfgrs for catering to 95% of the end-user market first either.

The problem is that *we* Linux advocates have failed. We haven't convinced enough ppl to give up MS products. I belong to a local Linux user's group and I am ALWAYS stunned at how many users still use Windows, and try to be Win compatible. We aren't we all comlplaining when the government has non-competitive bids for systems with OS, or when they distribute and keep information in proprietary formats.

Another problem ... in recent years I se a lot of "me too" packages with Linux trying to keep up with Win products, but not so many differentiating packages or features. Why switch to Linux if it's similar but not compatible. We need a killer app that doesn't run on Win ... but that's hard to come by.

[Ex-Cyber]

You can't blame the hardware and s/w mfgrs for catering to 95% of the end-user market first either.I don't blame hardware manufacturers for supporting Windows first. I blame many of them for providing a Windows driver instead of documentation, or otherwise locking up the documentation under such ridiculously restrictive nondisclosure agreements that an open-source driver is impossible without reverse engineering.

[Ant P.]

Is it Asus fault that Linux doesn't have the level of driver/device support and Windows?

Is it a hardware manufacturer's fault that their laptops use parts that don't work correctly in the OS they preinstall on them? Or is it the fault of the Invisible Marketshare Unicorn?

[Adarion]

Is it Asus fault that Linux doesn't have the level of driver/device support and Windows? Is it Asus fault that all sorts of widely used s/w is Windows only?
For the 1st part: partially yes. All these HW vendors could make sure and pressurize the chip people to deliver some specs. One cannot blame Linux(kernel team, SANE, CUPS,... development) for not havin reverse engineered these billions of different chips out there. You see the Noveau free 3d driver? I followed that when I still used my Geforce 3 hoping that this one would bring me grace and joy. Huh, I have ATIs now running here nicely with a free driver while those poor guys still have to celebrate a first HW rendered triangle. With no pushes from nvidia itself this will take many more years.

The problem is, and you can see that when you follow GregKH or Harald Welte for example that some HW vendors just do not understand free software. Somewhere either must be a lack of communication or some stupid folks in the decider level of an enterprise (latter is more often the case I guess).
Some enterprises fear to release a single spec. Either cause they think everybody else then would copy their HW - which ain't true or they violated *tada* some obsure patent *tada*.

But this is slowly changing after some large vendors gave specs or GPLed/free drivers. You can really have a system work out of box with Linux when there are specs for the machine.

Besides - I have enough experience with MS Windows to see that it also has a lot of driver issues. Be it crappy drivers bluescreening it, lack of support for older windows or newer windows versions for quite a bunch of HW.
Also driver installation ain't easy often, or vendors pack them with tons of useless stuff. Ever saw a download for Creative's soundcards? 200M package, while a driver should be at max 500K and maybe some userland prog to adjust this and that which is supported by default in windows sound volume manager.
So they had all sorts of buggy, useless and whatever badware along with the driver and one had a hard time to fuddle the pure driver out of that package.

For the 2nd part:
The argutment with the software is partially sadly true. But if you have a look around you'll find a lot of
* system independent software
* an equivalent part on Linux for a Windows software
* Wine/Cedega
Of course the lack of some special fields software is a p.i.t.a. and the lack of games. But then I hate most modern games also on Windows cause they have no real game design (same shit over and over again, no play-fun, just graphics) and a horrible copy... no... play protection which prevents the paying customer from playing.
The average user should be able to find something to fit his needs, besides the game side if one's into gaming.

But then it is a matter of Software vendors to port their stuff to Linux or make it at least more WINE friendly. Strangely they're not so picky when it comes to MacOS.


You can't blame the hardware and s/w mfgrs for catering to 95% of the end-user market first either.
Well, yes. But it wouldn't cost them to release some specs. As GregKH promised they will care for everything when given the specs. What can you want more?
Give them the specs, have them make and care for the driver in all eternity and have a whole platform supported and being seen as a Linux (BSD/...) friendly enterprise.

Well, heh, the only "con" would be that you cannot just stop supporting a hardware and fore people to buy your newest cards/whatever.


We haven't convinced enough ppl to give up MS products.
Yes and no.
I think it is not "our" fault. Didn't we cry loud enough? Nah. Really, when I ask if I can buy a laptop without windows I get to hear the strangest explanations why I can not.
Do some research and you'll quickly find out about MS and their contracts.

The average user sometimes does not even know about the alternatives. Their computer is running an OS called "Word" and such. Y'know. Even the minist...ress (?) for schools and science from Poland once said "no we don't use the text processor Linux".
Gah!

When you look at large towns like Munich in Germany for example, they give reports on the LinuxDays often about their state of migration. And (no) surprise the baddest problem often was just the people crying all the time when something new is being introduced.
Like: OMG. I cannot work. The button there is green instead of blue. And the internet is gone cause the blue "e" ist not visible. And so on.
It's a matter of high tolerance to suffering the Windows EULA and all W32 related weaknesses, a matter of inflexibility (and yes, it took me some time to get used with Linux when I had years of DOS/W32 experience) and these solid concrete walls Microsoft has built in the market (using FUD, evil contracts and sueing people for FAT patent stuff, see TomTom e.g.).

We aren't we all comlplaining when the government has non-competitive bids for systems with OS, or when they distribute and keep information in proprietary formats.
Because a lot of people think of Word DOC format as being a "standard". Every computer's OS is "word", you remember, right?
At least esp. in this public sector most visible change is happening today.

And I do complain. :)


Still I can blame Asus and have the right to dislike that behavior of going to bed with MS. And for threatening MS with this "we go Linux" just to lower the prices and then return gladly to MS and give Linux a slap in the face.
I'm also not fond of all these "enterprise X recommends Windows Vista business for its laptops" stuff you can read sometimes even when they give you the free choice. Of course they all receive a lot of money for this single sentence from MS.
Well I wouldn't be so upset if they really give you a choice. I mean everybody to his/her liking but I definitely want to buy my machines without Windows (and you can't build laptops from parts yet).
But see what happend in case of the EEEpc. Suddenly no Linux versions available anymore and the hardware often far inferior the the Windows version. Then whole model series without a Linux version. Nah, not nice.
(and besides I'm very picky with all these things havin that horrible mirror above the keyboard so there's barely a choice)

And some of the heard complaints that more Linux devices would be returned instead of the Windows ones is false rumor or due to the fact of shipping an inappropriate, misconfigured distribution with the HW. I mean, hey, if I'd put a plain windows without cfg and additional driver installation on a netbook I'm sure people would come complaining, too.

[bridgman]

Well, yes. But it wouldn't cost them to release some specs.

With respect, releasing specs is not inexpensive. Trust me on this. I'm not saying it shouldn't happen, but I don't think we help the cause by claiming that releasing specs is free or cheap. The winning argument is that on balance the benefits outweigh the costs.

[hdas]

Wow, I am so impressed. Very nice music btw :D.

Sarcasm aside, you don't do down so low and so cheap - looks like they want to give MS a stiff competition in that area too :D.

[Apopas]

Excellent post Adarion, very well written. Congrats!

The average user sometimes does not even know about the alternatives. Their computer is running an OS called "Word" and such. Y'know. Even the minist...ress (?) for schools and science from Poland once said "no we don't use the text processor Linux".
Gah!
That's so true... Along with a hundredof examples I remember one similar with this. I read a couple of years ago in a newspaper, a small article about Linux. WOW! I said. Linux article in greek newspaper... hadn't happen before... anyway the conclusion and what the journalist had comprehended was that "Linux is a computer company which makes a free version windows...":confused: I'm not kidding and it was in one of country's most popular newspapers. The positive is that a lot of people read at least the word Linux for once in their life...

[Adarion]

"Linux is a computer company which makes a free version windows..."
LOL. Ouch. Yes, but that's normal on standard newspapers. They mix up such a lot of things.

I am a chemist and when I see the (local or not) newspapers and they write anything about computers or nature sciences or about Demonstrations against surveillance for example (remember Europeans here, today is election!) or even LARP (live action roleplaying) it is very often a horrible messup in information. No research/investigation done on the topic. The just catch a single word or phrase, sometimes out of context and build up on that. Or they tear facts til they break.
When my chemistry feeling hurts to read the mess (you know like that good old dihydrogenmonoxide being poisenous like hell :) ) ... whoa. I get sometimes really angry about the shit they write and which probably many people will believe without further asking.

I don't blame one for not having studied physics, chemistry or something or not being a kernel hacker. Of course everyone has his profession and that's good and fine. But if you talk about something one should have at least a little knowledge, esp. when you are going to publically speak, write or tube something.

So I wonder if the politics and economics and local events part is of the same quality like these columns about science or computers.
There's one comedian in Germany who made up a sentece which translates like: "if you don't have a clue then just and simply STFU".


But then under/misinformation seems to make a big deal in this world. On many things (e.g. the famous weapons of mass destruction).
And to get back on topic with that sentece I think MS/random-company is doing so again and again and against every kind of competitor, be it free or commercial.

[Adarion]

With respect, releasing specs is not inexpensive. Trust me on this. I'm not saying it shouldn't happen, but I don't think we help the cause by claiming that releasing specs is free or cheap. The winning argument is that on balance the benefits outweigh the costs.

Can you shed some light upon this? I mean I'd believe you, since you're sitting at the source but what makes a specs release expensive?
I assume that putting specs just together is some manwork but being done anyway since the company needs it anyway for e.g. the case of ATI-AMD fglrx/Catalyst. Is it more the rechereche for possible patent issues? Or something else?

[bridgman]

Can you shed some light upon this? I mean I'd believe you, since you're sitting at the source but what makes a specs release expensive?

I guess the main ones are :

- competitive issues; each vendor has strengths and weaknesses that balance out, but if you open up your strengths to competitors without having access to theirs in return then a couple of years later you can lose in the marketplace

- third party IP; there is some technology we have a right to use but not a right to publish

- DRM; we need to make sure we don't release information which could be used to attack the DRM implementations on other OSes -- this is probably the single most expensive part of the process since we have to model each of the likely attacks and determine the viability of each one

- patent litigation is a big expense for any technology company, particularly the "greenmail" type where a law firm will buy up a patent portfolio and then accuse companies of infringement in the hope that those companies will pay them to go away rather than incur the costs of a legal battle - if releasing specs triggers even one more case that's a huge cost

- the preparation and processing of patent applications takes a long time; while those are in the pipe you need to be really careful about what you document and publish

- preparing and reviewing the specs to consider all of the above factors takes a lot of time from our most senior technical people

I assume that putting specs just together is some manwork but being done anyway since the company needs it anyway for e.g. the case of ATI-AMD fglrx/Catalyst. Is it more the rechereche for possible patent issues? Or something else?

Remember that we colocate hardware and software developers so we can design and document the HW and SW at the same time; the kind of specs we use internally are perhaps 100x as detailed as the ones we publish. The internal design docs are also written years before the chip is actually released.

A big part of the spec-writing job is sifting through literally thousands of pages of hardware design documentation, picking out the portions which are relevent to outside driver developers, and distilling that down to something we can actually release to the public.

[ssmaxss]

A big part of the spec-writing job is sifting through literally thousands of pages of hardware design documentation, picking out the portions which are relevant to driver developers, and distilling that down to something we can actually release to the public.
And after this work, fglrx developers use old thousand-page mess or new specs, distilled specifically for driver developers? Would it make sense to make such spec right away for fglrx devs and then just remove chapters about drm/3rdparty IP stuff for public release?

[bridgman]

And after this work, fglrx developers use old thousand-page mess or new specs, distilled specifically for driver developers? Would it make sense to make such spec right away for fglrx devs and then just remove chapters about drm/3rdparty IP stuff for public release?

Most of the code in the proprietary driver is designed long before the chip is launched, working directly with the hardware designers so that issues raised by the driver devs can feed back into the hardware design.

The new docs rarely have anything the driver developers didn't already know -- in fact we normally go to the driver developers for clarification when writing the docs.

[ssmaxss]

Yes, the question was about next chips (something like r8xx or even r9xx), is it going to be similar gap before oss spec release?

[bridgman]

The gap should be shorter on future chips; we have already started work on public docs for the next generation of GPUs.

[Adarion]

third party IP
Thanks a lot for the explanations.
Well I thought that would be the case in drivers. Didn't really expect this to be so much in the pure HW.

>DRM
Argh! Yeah. HDCP, Macrovision and so on. Yes, I remember. Still some day someone will have to write some kind of libdvd... I mean libblueraycss or something. Can't go on for long that I can't watch my paid for stuff where and whenever I want. (Until now I purely own DVDs, exactly because of that issue).

I guess Macrovision or so would sue you if you gave out any specs. But security by obscurity won't last too long.

>patent litigation
Don't we all love Sisvel & Co? The produce nothing, they made nothing woth of but have the patents and sue the hell out of everyone. Hopefully that will change in the future.

>takes a lot of time from our most senior technical people
Yeah. Like science. More time running around collecting money for research insted of doing research/development itself. Sad thing.

>and distilling that down to something we can actually release
>to the public.
I see. Well, of course prolly nobody would need or want to read these thousands of pages again and try to do some driver development on possibly redundant specs.

On the first point of competitive issues tough... well I understand that Nvidia and ATI would have to lose something to the competitor but S3, XGI,...? Their chips are probably quite inferior, so what do they fear in that point?

Anyway I think it's a grand step by ATI-AMD to have given specs and continuing to do so. And that is the reason why I switched from my AMD/Nvidia combination(s) to AMD/ATI (also with ATI chipsets onboard) and tell everybody who's asking me for advice how great these ATI chips are. :)
And thanks again for the insights.

[stevea]

Is it a hardware manufacturer's fault that their laptops use parts that don't work correctly in the OS they preinstall on them? Or is it the fault of the Invisible Marketshare Unicorn?

PLZ re-read my comment (RIF). I said that most users will try to install 3rd party hardware or software and a great deal of this does not work under Linux w/o a good struggle. If Asus failed to have support for their full nettop - shame on them. If some user plugs his Xyzzy brand USB TV tumer or some advanced webcam into the nettop and it fails - that is a Linux shortcoming.

You're "unicorn" sarcasm is ridiculous and ignores business reality. Do you expect a steakhouse to make a vegan meal to satisfy an extra 0.02% of their potential market too ? Get a clue - these decisions are based on real world estimates of cost/benefit.

Linux has exactly the same marketing problem as every "me too" product ever introduced. We have a viable replacement for the leading desktop brand, and now we need to find a "compelling event" for people to overcome the costly hurdle and switch from Win to Lin. If JoeEnduser buys a new laptop it obviously comes with Windows, it's compatible w/ all the potential hardware, and software for PCs. If he needs a better browser or cheap Office software he can use the same Firefox, T'bird and OpenOffice as we do. What exactly is his motivation to expend a lot of effort to change and learn new things that are peripheral to his main task ? Since he already paid for Win license with the laptop, the "we're cheaper" argument has no legs. "We're incompatible with 94% of systems" is a negative. "We don't support most hardware out of the box" is another negative.

Personally I hate the MS monopolisitc policies and the what they've attempted to avoid modify and destroy standard repeatedly. OTOH most sheeple absolutely don't care.


---
It would be nice if mfgrs would release full hardware documentation, but still someone has to write a Linux driver and that takes time and real effort. After all these years look at the ridiculous state of vid drivers, for ATI & Nvidea on Linux - this despite the fact that nearly every system uses one.

It is not an obligation of any company or person to release full design documentation. If you don't like a vendors policy you are free to negotiate, find another vendor, or start your own company. The fact is that the 94% of Windows PC users don't need or want this design info. Apple uses a mostly closed hardware solutions so the 5% of Mac PC users don't need this either. It's only the 1% of Linux/BSD users who want this, and I can't greatly blame the vendors for ignoring us.


I've complained to ATI & AMD/Nvidea and also Tax-Prep software vendors others about their policies. If YOU haven't then YOU are part of the problem. Make your voice heard. Whining that companies should do something special for our benefit is a dead-end victimhood attitude.

[Hephasteus]

The motherboard wars are boiling down to 2 people. Asus and Gigabyte. Always sort of ends up that way.

[stevea]

Asus sells about 5 times as many mobos as Gigabyte. Big difference in company size too.

[energyman]

PLZ re-read my comment (RIF). I said that most users will try to install 3rd party hardware or software and a great deal of this does not work under Linux w/o a good struggle. If Asus failed to have support for their full nettop - shame on them. If some user plugs his Xyzzy brand USB TV tumer or some advanced webcam into the nettop and it fails - that is a Linux shortcoming.

You're "unicorn" sarcasm is ridiculous and ignores business reality. Do you expect a steakhouse to make a vegan meal to satisfy an extra 0.02% of their potential market too ? Get a clue - these decisions are based on real world estimates of cost/benefit.

Linux has exactly the same marketing problem as every "me too" product ever introduced. We have a viable replacement for the leading desktop brand, and now we need to find a "compelling event" for people to overcome the costly hurdle and switch from Win to Lin. If JoeEnduser buys a new laptop it obviously comes with Windows, it's compatible w/ all the potential hardware, and software for PCs. If he needs a better browser or cheap Office software he can use the same Firefox, T'bird and OpenOffice as we do. What exactly is his motivation to expend a lot of effort to change and learn new things that are peripheral to his main task ? Since he already paid for Win license with the laptop, the "we're cheaper" argument has no legs. "We're incompatible with 94% of systems" is a negative. "We don't support most hardware out of the box" is another negative.

Personally I hate the MS monopolisitc policies and the what they've attempted to avoid modify and destroy standard repeatedly. OTOH most sheeple absolutely don't care.


---
It would be nice if mfgrs would release full hardware documentation, but still someone has to write a Linux driver and that takes time and real effort. After all these years look at the ridiculous state of vid drivers, for ATI & Nvidea on Linux - this despite the fact that nearly every system uses one.

It is not an obligation of any company or person to release full design documentation. If you don't like a vendors policy you are free to negotiate, find another vendor, or start your own company. The fact is that the 94% of Windows PC users don't need or want this design info. Apple uses a mostly closed hardware solutions so the 5% of Mac PC users don't need this either. It's only the 1% of Linux/BSD users who want this, and I can't greatly blame the vendors for ignoring us.


I've complained to ATI & AMD/Nvidea and also Tax-Prep software vendors others about their policies. If YOU haven't then YOU are part of the problem. Make your voice heard. Whining that companies should do something special for our benefit is a dead-end victimhood attitude.

you realize that linux supports more hardware than windows?

you realize that MS pressured companies to not sell nettops with linux?

you realize that ASUS OEM just lost its contract with Intel?

funny times lie ahead.

[stevea]

you realize that linux supports more hardware than windows?

you realize that MS pressured companies to not sell nettops with linux?

you realize that ASUS OEM just lost its contract with Intel?

funny times lie ahead.

You realize that aside from a bunch of ancient legacy drivers (anyone seen a baycom x25 modem or a seimens gigaset isdn in the past decade ?) that Linux has driver availability and quality problems ? If you buy a new vid card, TV receiver usb part, any random RAID card, a new laptop w/ some new wifi part, or a bluetooth part there is an excellent chance there is no Linux support, but there will be Win support. A friend just sent me this ....
http://lkml.indiana.edu/hypermail/linux/kernel/0907.2/01128.html
The upshot is that the most popular GigE enet chip on mobos today the Realtek 8169 driver - has major breakage.

Linux driver/hardware support situation is decidedly inferior to Windows for the typical end-user.

--

If you have evidence that M$ used anything other than lawful market pressure to convert nettop companies you should be talking to the FTC lawyers. Otherwise it's just more cheap-shot speculation, anti big company paranoia and ill-will. I think you have what Linus Torvalds recently referred to, "I may make jokes about Microsoft at times, but at the same time, I think the Microsoft hatred is a disease".

--

Are you aware that no news source reports any Asus/Intel fallingout ? The idea that Intel would walk away from the company that makes 35% of all mobos and a load of other Intel products is koo-koo. What contract ? Where is the news source ?

Beware energyman, funnyfarms may lay ahead for you !

[energyman]

if you buy a raid card, you are pretty much guaranteed that it works in linux.

The link about the realtek chip: read that again, will you?

http://www.semiaccurate.com/2009/06/12/ms-steps-snapdragon/

If you have a soundcard that was not made in the last 2 years, you have a good chance it will not work in Vista. Same for vid cards.

http://www.theinquirer.net/inquirer/opinion/1405863/intel-foxconn-alliance-cripple-asus
http://www.theinquirer.net/inquirer/news/1406101/asus-intel-relationship-hits-rocky-patch
http://www.theinquirer.net/inquirer/news/1406084/asus-isn-worried-intel-foxconn-dea

As always, I do have sources. And unlike you, I don't insult people.

[Adarion]

Steve, do you know the difference between Linux and Windows from the driver side? Apparently not. There is a difference when there is a driver that is written by the HW manufracturer and these guys having full access to 100% of the specs and the hardware-bugs. Then, there are the Kernel driver hackers (or userland if you want to) and these guys often have not all specs, and sometimes no, zero specs at all. And, furthermore they do not yet know the HW bugs. But the Linux people are the ones to find out. And there is quite a number of faulty chips around. And it is not only CPUs that have a good number of smaller or larger bugs.
Really.
The manufracturer's driver, and they always provide drivers for the Windows that is recent on the market (so often no older Windows support), can ship carefully around these bugs, not triggering them.
The free hackers have to find these bugs by themselves. And fix them in their drivers. Do reverse engineering stuff. Testing. All that time consuming and sometimes frustrating stuff.

I hope I could make the problems visible. That is the reason why often a lot of Linux drivers for new HW come late or do not have full access to the HW they are made for. But once there are specs, once the chips is really known, the drivers becomes better and better. And once a firm decides to say: Oh, well, we will only support next gen windows, and not support older Windows anymore (or the other way round) Windows users are the ones who have to live with an old (and maybe also buggy) driver - and yes I have seen a lot of buggy drivers under Windows. The people who have a free driver can have it til eternity or til their piece of HW fails or til they just want to upgrade their HW. And that is the good side.
Remember it was a faulty printer driver that caused rms to start all his work.

On topic with ASUS: I was quite font to read exactly my thoughts in the last issue of a German linux mag, they also took up that topic with ASUS' "it's better with Windows". Apparently ASUS might have used Linux only to pressurize MS to lower the prices. (But then still there are the ridiculus rules about max. storage space, display res. etc. for these Windows on Netbook licenses)

Nice read, that on smiaccurate.com, but that is typical MS behaviour. And that is also the reason why I dislike MS, despite Linus being the pragmatic tech guy and telling us not to hate MS on slashdot. Yes, I read that yesterday.
And if MS provides free code and it is usable code, okay, why not. But still I see them f*ucking their competitors in all evil ways possible. Competitors, free or commecial, business partners (Logitech once nearly went bankrupt due to MS), customers.

[nanonyme]

Imo an interesting thing to ponder about would also be why Asus laptops costed more with Linux on them than with a full Microsoft suite including Windows, Office utilities etc. You can easily calculate a price of several hundred euros for that set of utilities when you go buy it from a shop. Yet the Linux version costed more, not less than the Windows version.
I guess it's possible Microsoft takes a loss on all software sales on OEM or that OEM prices are based on some bizarre predicted overall sales vs cost of each machine manufactured that doesn't get sold for the market segment analysis. (and they are expecting most of the computers actually wouldn't get sold)

[stevea]

if you buy a raid card, you are pretty much guaranteed that it works in linux.

Not quite, but I'll admit RAID is a poor example on my part. A few years ago the support for the less expensive non-enterprise ATA/SATA cards was pretty spotty. I scanned today and perhaps it's 80-90% of cards. Still short of the near 100% rate for Win.

The link about the realtek chip: read that again, will you?

You read it again friend. It says the r8169 Linux under 2.6 driver has major problems. This link ...
http://git.kernel.org/?p=linux/kernel/git/stable/linux-2.6.30.y.git;a=commit;h=fdd7b4c3302c93f6833e338903 ea77245eb510b4
might be clearer if you have comprehension difficulties. Between 2.6.10 and the ~6/9/09 patch large packets to the r8169 driver can corrupt the kernel. Crashes are clearly possible and there is a possibility of exploit. This driver handles the RTL8111xx chips which are certainly the most popular GigE interface on production mobos today, and also appears in laptops.

The Linux driver situation is a hodge-podge. Some are stable and great, but often support older hardware. Some work but perform poorly. The current crop of wifi drivers is certainly better than in 2007, but far short of the Win situation. Do you somehow think everyone is happy w/ Linux ATI or even the basket of Nvidea drivers ?


http://www.semiaccurate.com/2009/06/12/ms-steps-snapdragon/

If you have a soundcard that was not made in the last 2 years, you have a good chance it will not work in Vista. Same for vid cards.

http://www.theinquirer.net/inquirer/opinion/1405863/intel-foxconn-alliance-cripple-asus
http://www.theinquirer.net/inquirer/news/1406101/asus-intel-relationship-hits-rocky-patch
http://www.theinquirer.net/inquirer/news/1406084/asus-isn-worried-intel-foxconn-dea


You appear to NOT understand what "rumor", "rumours" and "unconfirmed" mean in these articles. There is no doubt that Intel (and MS too) isn't happy with Asus, but there is NO intimation that Asus "lost it's contract" with Intel.

Intel is, (unconfirmed), outsourcing mobo design & devel to Foxconn. I've worked for semi companies that competed with their customers and it's a bad situation. Intel using Foxconn which only supplies EOMs and therefore isn't a competitor is a smart move. It may tweak Asus, but there is no contract being pulled and zero chance that Intel is walking away from one of it's major customers. News-flash - early access to parts and design info isn't subject to any long-term contract.

========

Steve, do you know the difference between Linux and Windows from the driver side? Apparently not....

I've written many Linux and BSD drivers in my career - so I think I know a little about it. I FULLY AND IN DETAIL understand that it's hard to get chip specs. A lot of chipmakers like Marvell will not distribute specs except under NDA - and they won't talk to a customer who only needs say 10k chips per year. The Vid guys make all the info proprietary. Getting errata sheets is another headache. Your comment isn't telling me anything I don't already know firsthand.

I stated that Linux drivers are often shoddy. You have pinpointed one of several reasons why. This isn't news.

You miss my point entirely. The end-user doesn't care if the driver comes from the M$ or the board mfgr or the kernel.org. They want a driver for every bit of hardware and they want it to work 100%. Windows certainly isn't 100%/100%, but Linux is a lot worse, lacking some drivers and having poor quality drivers in other cases. The end-user wants the "just works" experience and Windows generally comes a lot closer.

Detailing why this is the case amounts to making excuses for Linux. End-users don't care that Linux s/w quality is generally superior or that we have a harder time getting specs and errata. Irrelevant to my point.

=========

On topic with ASUS: I was quite font to read exactly my thoughts in the last issue of a German linux mag, they also took up that topic with ASUS' "it's better with Windows". Apparently ASUS might have used Linux only to pressurize MS to lower the prices. (But then still there are the ridiculus rules about max. storage space, display res. etc. for these Windows on Netbook licenses)

I tend to agree abou t the "pressure MS" point, but it's market pressure. The "rules" also involve Intel, as they want to position their CPU parts in certain ways.

Nice read, that on smiaccurate.com, but that is typical MS behaviour. And that is also the reason why I dislike MS, despite Linus being the pragmatic tech guy and telling us not to hate MS on slashdot. Yes, I read that yesterday.
And if MS provides free code and it is usable code, okay, why not. But still I see them f*ucking their competitors in all evil ways possible. Competitors, free or commecial, business partners (Logitech once nearly went bankrupt due to MS), customers.

Yes I dislike MS biz practices in many ways. SunMS sued MS to prevent them from embrace/extend/exterminate-ing Java. Now SunMS is part of the Novell MS collaborator schema. Also note this subsumes OpenOffice under Novell. When M$ said they wanted to collaborate w/ Novell I didn't understand they meant collaborate in exterminating M$ competition. They exterminated Netscape, tho' they lost the lawsuit. They aren't exactly helping TomTom.

Still there is a huge difference between the idea that MS is a near-monopoly that throws it's weight around - hard - in a mostly legal manner and does not act in it's customer's interests VS energyman spreading unlabelled rumors of grossly illegal actions by MS. The market, which includes Asus caused MS to lower it's price structure for nettop OS'. The statement "Mirosoft pressured Asus" implies restraint of trade. Other comments imply collusion for price-fixing. If you have real evidence - contact the Atty Generals office. If you don't label it "rumor".

[Adarion]

Imo an interesting thing to ponder about would also be why Asus laptops costed more with Linux on them than with a full Microsoft suite including Windows

That was also the case with some DELL machines, it was due to the lots of bundeled advertisement software on the W32 laptops. All these 10 day trial stuff, toolbars, ... and maybe even spyware. That is a possible reason for these price differences.

[Adarion]

I've written many Linux and BSD drivers
Okay. Fine. But then you know the issues.
But please feel free to make a suggestion how to improve the situation then.

On the other hand, well, when a driver is really released as stable I'm ok with most Linux drivers. (yes, some take really long in development but I'll have to bear with that)
And there are many closed drivers which are shoddy as well (when you say that a lot of Linux drivers would be).

The end-user wants the "just works" experience and Windows generally comes a lot closer.
*sigh* Yes. The end user. I know. But end user will also end up having problems with Windows as well. Guess how often I was called to fix this or that and sometimes they also just had problems finding and installing or configuring a (3rd party) driver.
I some cases a Linux with a recent kernel will work completely out of the box without having to install any drivers at all. Sometimes it is better here than Windows.
Okay, yes, when it comes to certain classes of equipment you have a chance that there is no support at all. But you can't really blame Linux/L.developers for that and you know why.
I think we're still dependent on HW manufracturer's mercy with the specs.

On a second thought: I think the out of the box experience for the end user... that often also is a thing of Software. Buying any cheapo software in the general market (shareware games collection or such) and making it run. (Though I've seen a lot of horrible stuff that would really endanger/damage the Windows installation.)
But that is a matter of SW authors to have a Linux/Mac/BSD version.
But then Software is something highly related to a getting used to something over years. You see noobs working quicker with Linux than some users who are long term Windows users switching.


End-users don't care that Linux s/w quality is generally superior or that we have a harder time getting specs and errata.
Well, that's why I don't get tired to tell them the reasons. :)
But I think that depends on the individual user. I see a lot of people complaining about Windows, may it be a problem with 3rd party software, MSW itself or sometimes just their own lack of knowledge... and some want to switch. And with enough precaution for a migration they are well off (unless they do gaming or something like that)
There are many groups of users and the one that is using a computer like a coffee machine that "just has to work when I press the red button" is only one of them.

And then we have a cuddly penguin to charm the users with. ;)

[energyman]

Not quite, but I'll admit RAID is a poor example on my part. A few years ago the support for the less expensive non-enterprise ATA/SATA cards was pretty spotty. I scanned today and perhaps it's 80-90% of cards. Still short of the near 100% rate for Win.



You read it again friend. It says the r8169 Linux under 2.6 driver has major problems. This link ...
http://git.kernel.org/?p=linux/kernel/git/stable/linux-2.6.30.y.git;a=commit;h=fdd7b4c3302c93f6833e338903 ea77245eb510b4
might be clearer if you have comprehension difficulties. Between 2.6.10 and the ~6/9/09 patch large packets to the r8169 driver can corrupt the kernel. Crashes are clearly possible and there is a possibility of exploit. This driver handles the RTL8111xx chips which are certainly the most popular GigE interface on production mobos today, and also appears in laptops.



yes, and when they found out about the bug it was instantly fixed. So what is your problem? Bug found, bug fixed. Unlike windows drivers where you have to live with bugs for a long time.

I have a Terratec TV+. Its windows software was bad and the driver wasn't great either. Every snapshot had to be saved manually, for example. In 99 they stopped supporting Win95 with driver updates. Win95 was the only windows version I had, because I don't pirate software. Or buy computers with OS pre-installed.
Linux software for the card was A LOT better. So where the drivers.



no, but the WIFI mess is mostly caused by dickheaded manufacturrers - and distirbutions enabling fucking crap like ndiswrapper. Similar with nvidia or ati drivers. Are the drivers perfect? No. But at least with ATI/AMD the release of documentation will make it easier to create good drivers in the future. And hey, nvidia drivers are responsible for most blue screens of death in windows. So it is not like their windows drivers are perfect either.

[QUOTE=stevea;83981
[QUOTE=stevea;83981
You appear to NOT understand what "rumor", "rumours" and "unconfirmed" mean in these articles. There is no doubt that Intel (and MS too) isn't happy with Asus, but there is NO intimation that Asus "lost it's contract" with Intel.

Intel is, (unconfirmed), outsourcing mobo design & devel to Foxconn. I've worked for semi companies that competed with their customers and it's a bad situation. Intel using Foxconn which only supplies EOMs and therefore isn't a competitor is a smart move. It may tweak Asus, but there is no contract being pulled and zero chance that Intel is walking away from one of it's major customers. News-flash - early access to parts and design info isn't subject to any long-term contract.

========



I've written many Linux and BSD drivers in my career - so I think I know a little about it. I FULLY AND IN DETAIL understand that it's hard to get chip specs. A lot of chipmakers like Marvell will not distribute specs except under NDA - and they won't talk to a customer who only needs say 10k chips per year. The Vid guys make all the info proprietary. Getting errata sheets is another headache. Your comment isn't telling me anything I don't already know firsthand.

I stated that Linux drivers are often shoddy. You have pinpointed one of several reasons why. This isn't news.

You miss my point entirely. The end-user doesn't care if the driver comes from the M$ or the board mfgr or the kernel.org. They want a driver for every bit of hardware and they want it to work 100%. Windows certainly isn't 100%/100%, but Linux is a lot worse, lacking some drivers and having poor quality drivers in other cases. The end-user wants the "just works" experience and Windows generally comes a lot closer.

Detailing why this is the case amounts to making excuses for Linux. End-users don't care that Linux s/w quality is generally superior or that we have a harder time getting specs and errata. Irrelevant to my point.

=========



I tend to agree abou t the "pressure MS" point, but it's market pressure. The "rules" also involve Intel, as they want to position their CPU parts in certain ways.



Yes I dislike MS biz practices in many ways. SunMS sued MS to prevent them from embrace/extend/exterminate-ing Java. Now SunMS is part of the Novell MS collaborator schema. Also note this subsumes OpenOffice under Novell. When M$ said they wanted to collaborate w/ Novell I didn't understand they meant collaborate in exterminating M$ competition. They exterminated Netscape, tho' they lost the lawsuit. They aren't exactly helping TomTom.

Still there is a huge difference between the idea that MS is a near-monopoly that throws it's weight around - hard - in a mostly legal manner and does not act in it's customer's interests VS energyman spreading unlabelled rumors of grossly illegal actions by MS. The market, which includes Asus caused MS to lower it's price structure for nettop OS'. The statement "Mirosoft pressured Asus" implies restraint of trade. Other comments imply collusion for price-fixing. If you have real evidence - contact the Atty Generals office. If you don't label it "rumor".

oh - and please have the fun and try to have a SB live working in Windows Vista (or Audigy2). Really. Try it.

for the rest: TL'DR. Sorry, but drowning me in text?

[nanonyme]

That was also the case with some DELL machines, it was due to the lots of bundeled advertisement software on the W32 laptops. All these 10 day trial stuff, toolbars, ... and maybe even spyware. That is a possible reason for these price differences.That's crap, a few advertisements can't be worth several hundred euros per computer. The 10 day trial stuff usually is stuff like antivirus program anyway, Microsoft's software seems to cost less than air on OEM.

[deanjo]

oh - and please have the fun and try to have a SB live working in Windows Vista (or Audigy2). Really. Try it.



Both work fine, even thought they do not have a complete feature set as they did in XP (due to Vista dropping hardware acceleration) they still have far more functionality in Vista then the linux drivers allow.

[deanjo]

l. I think you have what Linus Torvalds recently referred to, "I may make jokes about Microsoft at times, but at the same time, I think the Microsoft hatred is a disease".



I actually he hit it bang on when he said


There are ‘extremists’ in the free software world, but that’s one major reason why I don’t call what I do ‘free software’ any more. I don’t want to be associated with the people for whom it’s about exclusion and hatred.”