Microsoft to stop producing Windows versions

MilesAhead said:

groze said:

Scr,

It is the retailers, OEMs, & printer manufactures that needs to change. I see Ubuntu and Ubuntu derivatives as the easiest to use and is real close Windows 10. We also need to get some cheap low end machine at walmart or other national chains that have computer with Ubuntu that is pre-installed. This is the only way Linux could take over. I find Ubuntu and it derivatives real easy to use and best for novices. After initial setup, you don't see the sudo prompt to often. I do change the read permission on my home folder, to read & write just for me not for others.

Linux preloaded on low end machines has already been done. Except for techies who want to run stuff on a Raspberry Pi nobody likes it. It's too much like those consoles added to TVs so people could do internet email without having a real computer. They should have made the hardware capable of doing everything a Windows PC can do but reduce the price by not having to pay for the Windows preload.

As for the Linux distro, anything Debian derived has a leg up. The apt packaging system is what really simplifies updates and installing new programs. But in any case I think trying to low ball the casual user is the wrong way to go. If anything you want to get people who don't want to become a geek to get the machine to work, but have money, to buy it. Instead of a $1200 Windows desktop sell them a $900 one with the same quad core CPU, memory etc.. :)

I'm a techie running it on a Raspberry Pi and I still don't like it. Endless terminal window app-get commands to do anything constructive. At least on the Pi anyway. The few other times I installed on PC hardware it was endless frustration trying to set stuff up.

I use the Linux Terminal less than the Windows Command Prompt. I have Mint Mate in virtual running under different Windows systems on different PCs and also a USB stick implementation. I think that if you chose the right distro, there is no real need to venture a lot into terminal.

whs said:

I don't call $1200, $900 or $500 low end systems. My low end acquisition cost $99 with a quad core CPU, an eMMC disk (kind of an SSD) and Windows 8.1. It's a beautiful 2 pound little machine that I use on travel and it does everything that I need to do.

Boots in 26 seconds (Event 100) and is quite snappy in running my office type applications. I even run a virtual Linux Mint system from an external SSD on the 8.1 host. That takes a little time to load because I have only USB2 ports, but once loaded, performance is OK.



Attachment 359651

Does nobody read the posts before they contradict them? Please read my response to the other similar comment.

whs said:

I use the Linux Terminal less than the Windows Command Prompt. I have Mint Mate in virtual running under different Windows systems on different PCs and also a USB stick implementation. I think that if you chose the right distro, there is no real need to venture a lot into terminal.

Totally agree. On the Pi I have to use the terminal window to install the packages to use the breakout boards I have connected to the GPIO bus. Likely not a good example. Its embedded Linux on the Pi also.

alphanumeric said:

MilesAhead said:

groze said:

Scr,

It is the retailers, OEMs, & printer manufactures that needs to change. I see Ubuntu and Ubuntu derivatives as the easiest to use and is real close Windows 10. We also need to get some cheap low end machine at walmart or other national chains that have computer with Ubuntu that is pre-installed. This is the only way Linux could take over. I find Ubuntu and it derivatives real easy to use and best for novices. After initial setup, you don't see the sudo prompt to often. I do change the read permission on my home folder, to read & write just for me not for others.

Linux preloaded on low end machines has already been done. Except for techies who want to run stuff on a Raspberry Pi nobody likes it. It's too much like those consoles added to TVs so people could do internet email without having a real computer. They should have made the hardware capable of doing everything a Windows PC can do but reduce the price by not having to pay for the Windows preload.

As for the Linux distro, anything Debian derived has a leg up. The apt packaging system is what really simplifies updates and installing new programs. But in any case I think trying to low ball the casual user is the wrong way to go. If anything you want to get people who don't want to become a geek to get the machine to work, but have money, to buy it. Instead of a $1200 Windows desktop sell them a $900 one with the same quad core CPU, memory etc.. :)

I'm a techie running it on a Raspberry Pi and I still don't like it. Endless terminal window app-get commands to do anything constructive. At least on the Pi anyway. The few other times I installed on PC hardware it was endless frustration trying to set stuff up.

Especially in the old days when PCs had all different kinds of bus and video architecture it was really a nightmare. I used to tell people Linux was "takes 2 weeks to install a program, but once working it never breaks" and Windows was "double click it's intalled, fix the OS forever."

That's part of the fun. I always have to keep tweaking Windows. :)

MilesAhead said:

alphanumeric said:

MilesAhead said:

Linux preloaded on low end machines has already been done. Except for techies who want to run stuff on a Raspberry Pi nobody likes it. It's too much like those consoles added to TVs so people could do internet email without having a real computer. They should have made the hardware capable of doing everything a Windows PC can do but reduce the price by not having to pay for the Windows preload.

As for the Linux distro, anything Debian derived has a leg up. The apt packaging system is what really simplifies updates and installing new programs. But in any case I think trying to low ball the casual user is the wrong way to go. If anything you want to get people who don't want to become a geek to get the machine to work, but have money, to buy it. Instead of a $1200 Windows desktop sell them a $900 one with the same quad core CPU, memory etc.. :)

I'm a techie running it on a Raspberry Pi and I still don't like it. Endless terminal window app-get commands to do anything constructive. At least on the Pi anyway. The few other times I installed on PC hardware it was endless frustration trying to set stuff up.

Especially in the old days when PCs had all different kinds of bus and video architecture it was really a nightmare. I used to tell people Linux was "takes 2 weeks to install a program, but once working it never breaks" and Windows was "double click it's intalled, fix the OS forever."

That's part of the fun. I always have to keep tweaking Windows. :)

The more I do on my Pi the easier it gets. I'm starting to remember the commands now, so not so many typo's. And then wondering WTF did I just do when the command executes anyway. I'm running Raspbian on my B+ and OPENELECT on my 2 B. Anyway, I'll leave it at that so the thread can go back on topic.

MilesAhead said:

whs said:

I don't call $1200, $900 or $500 low end systems. My low end acquisition cost $99 with a quad core CPU, an eMMC disk (kind of an SSD) and Windows 8.1. It's a beautiful 2 pound little machine that I use on travel and it does everything that I need to do.

Boots in 26 seconds (Event 100) and is quite snappy in running my office type applications. I even run a virtual Linux Mint system from an external SSD on the 8.1 host. That takes a little time to load because I have only USB2 ports, but once loaded, performance is OK.



Attachment 359651

Does nobody read the posts before they contradict them? Please read my response to the other similar comment.

I did not want to contradict your posting. This is my independent definition of a low cost system. I realize that 'Low Cost' means different things to different people. But I thought that this is abour as good as it gets.

The market will judge if any future MS strategy is sound. If they are wrong someone will step in and fill the unmet need and the software application developers will jump on board. One of the variants of linux would be a possible starting point. I still think business users will want some form of desktop environment into the foreseeable future. I haven't got a clue what the majority of home users will want anymore.

whs said:

I did not want to contradict your posting. This is my independent definition of a low cost system. I realize that 'Low Cost' means different things to different people. But I thought that this is abour as good as it gets.

If you read my post you would see I said it was a mistake to try to sell low end systems with Linux preloaded. What should be done is sell the same system you find at BestBuy with Windows preloaded, such as a $1200 quad core tower, with Linux loaded instead. This would bring the price down a bit and still provide a kick ass machine.

I compared the low end strategy to trying to sell consoles that stick on the TV for email without a real computer. I never wrote that $900 was a low end system. Quite the contrary. If the only difference was the MS license then we would have a good idea how much that adds to the cost. Which may be one reason it didn't happen. They rolled out these low end low powered machines to quash the comparison.

carwiz said:

MS still has to maintain some order of updates even if there's no real "version". Unless they make updates mandatory (automatic with no choice), some may choose not to update and that state of the OS would have to be known.

I just hope MS doesn't move to animal, fruit or vegetable versions instead of numbers. It's too easy to loose track.

Hmm, makes me think one reason for all these Update Tuesdays is to get users expecting to constantly update their systems. It's like MP3. To get people to buy music not on any medium you had to let them steal it first. Free Windows 10 even for pirates sounds like similar strategy.