
Windows 7: "The Linux Killer" - adnam
http://www.computerworld.com/action/article.do?command=printArticleBasic&taxonomyName=Operating+Systems&articleId=330846&taxonomyId=89
======
old-gregg
Windows job is to occupy about 128MB of RAM sitting in an invisible VMWare
window, assisting Linux and OSX users at launching Microsoft Word to prepare
that stupid TPS report every Friday.

------
KevBurnsJr
_"Windows Senior Vice President Steve Sinofsky showed off Windows 7 on his
Lenovo S10 and said it used less than half of the netbook's 1GB of RAM."_

o rly? Only half the system's resources to sit and do nothing?

~~~
andreyf
_Windows Senior Vice President Steve Sinofsky..._

What do you expect from a guys with a title four words long? _snicker_

~~~
hello_moto
This guy is 4 times smarter than you. You should definitely check out his
resume and his work. And perhaps if you're lucky, have a conversation with him
to actually know how smart he is.

~~~
mnemonicsloth
_This guy is 4 times smarter than you._

I'm sure he'd be awesome if it was ever actually necessary to move Mt. Fuji.
The fact remains, he works for Microsoft in this day and age. How smart can he
be?

(Maybe he just really likes their corporate culture?)

~~~
brentb
Whether you'd like to believe it or not, there are a bunch of smart guys who
still work for Microsoft. Some really smart computer scientists actually
prefer a steady, high salary in a company that's treated them well for a
decade over the chance to make it big or go bust trying.

I've never worked for Microsoft and I doubt I ever will, but I have interacted
with some really smart folks who do.

All I'm really getting at is the fact that you dislike the business tactics,
operating systems, office applications, or corporate culture of Microsoft
doesn't mean you should assume they don't have anyone smart working for them.

~~~
StrawberryFrog
Some techies consider the possibility shipping thier software to millions of
people "the chance to make it big". Microsoft offers that.

------
rufius
I'd rather be running something not Linux on a laptop... and I do. I use it on
the desktop, but its shite on the laptop. Awful wireless and less than stellar
performance as far as battery life goes compared to Vista (and likely Win 7).

Meh. All the OS's suck, its just a matter of choosing one that sucks the least
for your use case.

~~~
cosmo7
The point that _Linux enthusiasts_ become _Linux realists_ is when they
realize they are afraid to put their laptop to sleep by closing the lid.

~~~
icefox
Bingo! That is why for the past few years every laptop I have bought has OS X
on it. The hardware works, in particular sleep suspend. Close the lid and it
goes to sleep, open the lid and it wakes up in moments, not thirty seconds. On
the desktop I run Linux, but for a laptop it is all OS X. Everything I do is
c/c++, unix, or web related so working in OS X doesn't matter.

~~~
parbo
My Eee Pc 901 works fine with suspend/resume, both take just a couple of
seconds. The only thing that sometimes fail is audio, but that is easily
recovered.

EDIT: With Ubuntu 8.10

~~~
zack
"Easily recovered" translates to "minor pain in the ass"

Lot of build up for the pain body, bro.

------
iamdave
So the argument here is that Windows 7 is a Linux "killer" because it's got
high yield possibilities for netbooks. Is that what we're supposed to believe?

~~~
astine
Maybe it should have been "Linux for the masses killer." I don't think there
is anyone who thinks it will be kicked from the server realm any time soon.

~~~
sdurkin
But if the article was named that, I doubt it would be front page on HN right
now.

~~~
astine
Which is a rather bad sign.

~~~
sdurkin
Very true.

------
yan
I am so tired of the "X killer" meme, it really is the time to put it to rest.
Has it ever proved true? _Ever_?

What does it even me? Taking over market dominance? Completely eradicating
from existence?

~~~
nailer
It means X is really strong.

I feel good about Linux right now.

~~~
zack
Oh man, this is great.

------
imgabe
It seems like the Windows tax would have an even greater effect on the netbook
market. People will pay a lot more attention to the difference between a $350
and $400 netbook than they will between a $1950 and $2000 laptop. Why spend
12.5% more when you can get Linux for free and still do everything you want?

~~~
grouchyOldGuy
I also think that netbooks appeal to a different buyer too. Windows still has
strong appeal to hardcore gamers, but no serious gamer is going to use a
netbook for gaming. Firefox on Linux looks and feels like Firefox on Windows,
so if all you want is web browsing, why not Linux? Why pay the Microsoft tax
just to get IE instead? I'm sure Windows 7 will find willing buyers on
netbooks, but a "Linux killer"? I don't see that. Netbook buyers are more
utilitarian and value-concious, so Linux will continue to grow in that market.

------
grouchyOldGuy
I have a dual-boot home-built P4 machine at home with a Logitech wireless
multi-media keyboard. Under XP, the device functions as a standard 102-key
keyboard. None of the extra buttons work (mute, volume adjust, etc.) Under
Ubuntu, most of the keys work as designed (and this was autodetected during
installation. I have not done any post-install customisation of the keyboard).
I can mute volume, adjust it up/down, scroll windows with the little scroll
wheel, etc. Nearly all of the extra keys work under Ubuntu that XP ignores. I
could install the special software Logitech shipped with it to make those keys
work, but it's slow enough already under XP without adding extra software to
run. The machine is limited by motherboard design to a max of 2 GB RAM (which
it has). Under Ubuntu, I very rarely see any page file swapping going on, but
XP swaps frequently even with no applications open. Windows 7 better have
superior memory and process management if they want to run in a low-RAM
environment.

------
swombat
_The threat to Windows comes entirely from "netbooks"_

I stopped reading here.

------
mdasen
I'm not the type to say that Linux isn't good. I use it on a daily basis.
However, if you're in a large enough non-tech firm, you know that there are
people who really don't get tech. Any difference (even difference for the
better) is bad. That will prevent Linux adoption.

While I don't work in tech support, I'm the next office over from the ones who
do and they'll face problems as silly as people thinking that their printer
didn't need to be plugged in (to the wall) to print things or that you can un-
send email. For many people you just can't change things without a lot of
retraining even if it should be obvious.

~~~
dcminter
"...they'll face problems as silly as people thinking that their printer
didn't need to be plugged in (to the wall) to print things or that you can un-
send email..."

They're wrong, but there's no law of nature that says they must be wrong, and
in fact I would contend that they are perfectly reasonable assumptions, not
"silly." There's nothing that should be obvious about either of those
examples.

~~~
likpok
Exactly. Iff you understand tech, it it obvious what to do in those cases. If
you don't it is much like magic. You don't have a sensible baseline of how
things should behave. So you make assumptions, and are occasionally wrong.

------
medearis
If the issue is really the resource consumption of the OS, I'll believe it
when I see it -- thus far every iteration of Windows has been more bloated
than the last.

Is XP still shipping on most low-power notebooks though? Not from what I've
seen... From what I've seen, most "email, word and internet explorer" users
are using vista and getting along OK.

------
StrawberryFrog
So Microsoft is planning to make software that's targeted at popular hardware?
And then promote it?

Is that supposed to be surprising?

------
symesc
"The threat to Windows comes entirely from 'netbooks'"

Do I really need to read any more of this reasoned argument?

~~~
nailer
Article already pointed out this is the biggest growth area in computing. But
I gather you didn't read that.

