Another Look At Linux Netbook Return Statistics (bMighty.com) [LWN.net]

Matthew McKenzie questions statistics on Linux netbook returns. "Last year, for example, the director of U.S. sales for MSI told Laptop Magazine that customers return Linux netbooks four times as often as Windows netbooks. As Computerworld.com contributor Eric Lai pointed out, however, such claims can be misleading. According to Lai, MSI's numbers weren't based on the company's actual netbook return rates. In fact, at the time, MSI wasn't even shipping a Linux-powered netbook model. So, where did MSI get its information? From third-party market research."

to post comments

Another Look At Linux Netbook Return Statistics (bMighty.com)

Posted Apr 9, 2009 18:42 UTC (Thu) by jspaleta (subscriber, #50639) [Link] (7 responses)

That article draws some very interesting conclusions at the end.

"In this case, the supporting data suggests that a satisfying Linux netbook experience depends heavily upon an OEM's willingness to invest in effective, appropriate adjustments to the underlying operating system."

The take away for OEMs is this...they need to actually spend money doing their own QA and customization work to make sure the functionality of linux based devices they are offering meet the expectations of their users. There is no free lunch for OEMs. There is a gap between what a linux enthusiast is willing to tolerate and what a retail consumer is willing to tolerate in terms of expectation. OEMs are only going to cross that gap by spending money funding development work.

Trying to take a general purpose distribution, installing it and shipping it as is isn't going to work. OEMs are going to have to spend money tuning a linux based OS for their device. Once OEMs really take that to heart, the really interesting question is how to most cost-effectively do that work. Is it more effective for OEMs to contract out to linux integrators to do those adjustments or will it be more effective for device OEMs to have their own internal teams in-house? That will be interesting to watch as the value proposition surrounding consumer oriented OEMs services evolves.

-jef

is that a question?

Posted Apr 9, 2009 18:47 UTC (Thu) by eean (subscriber, #50420) [Link] (1 responses)

I've never heard of a netbook OEM not hiring someone else to do the
software.

is that a question?

Posted Apr 9, 2009 19:32 UTC (Thu) by jspaleta (subscriber, #50639) [Link]

Sure, and when the first traditional "mobile" devices started to run linux hardware vendors initially partnered with linux integrators...but things evolve. For example Motorola eventually unveiled its own linux platform for its mobile devices: http://www.motorola.com/content.jsp?globalObjectId=8411
and now things are evolving again as motorola looks at android as a platform.
http://phandroid.com/2008/09/28/motorola-android-team-350...
The point however is, is that over time Motorola has a device manufacturer has made a larger and larger investment in in-house manpower the deeper their commitment to a linux based operating system has become.

The evolution of the OEM netbook experience could take a similar turn as the OEMs in that space become more aware of where the real value lies in going with linux..direct control over what the device experience is for customers.

This could be more true of the upcoming ARM based device OEMs, which are going to end up marketinging their products narrowly as tailored web-centric devices more than general purpose computing devices to differentiate them from the intel atom based devices which can run a full windows desktop. The ARM manufacturers may have more of an incentive to take more control of the software stack and push software where they need it to go to get that tailored experience.

-jef

Another Look At Linux Netbook Return Statistics (bMighty.com)

Posted Apr 9, 2009 19:48 UTC (Thu) by dbruce (guest, #57948) [Link] (3 responses)

I have a Dell Mini 9 Ubuntu netbook (actually it belongs to my fifth-grade daughter) and it is impressive - polished, attractive, fully usable with no previous knowledge of Linux or Free Software.

Our local Best Buy had a Asus eee with Xandros on display that seemed obviously inferior to the adjacent Windows netbooks.

That "last 10%" of tuning is immaterial to anyone who is already a GNU/Linux expert, but makes all the difference in the world to the general public.

I don't think linux netbooks are going away. The progressively lower price points will either drive Windows licensing down to utterly cannibalistic levels, or cede this market to linux, not to mention the possibility of ARM-based netbooks that won't run Windows at all.

It's a one-way street.

Another Look At Linux Netbook Return Statistics (bMighty.com)

Posted Apr 9, 2009 20:27 UTC (Thu) by leoc (guest, #39773) [Link] (2 responses)

the possibility of ARM-based netbooks that won't run Windows at all

They could run Windows CE/PocketPC (or whatever they call it these days). The thing about that is there are not nearly as many applications for this version of Windows as there are for their regular Intel versions, so it would level the playing field quite a bit more.

Another Look At Linux Netbook Return Statistics (bMighty.com)

Posted Apr 10, 2009 13:47 UTC (Fri) by mfuzzey (subscriber, #57966) [Link] (1 responses)

Not only that it would break the Windows consumer "grab this setup.exe and run it" reflex. Suddenly package managers and their associated repositories of already ported software which automatically get the right architecture start to look more interesting to the average joe...

Another Look At Linux Netbook Return Statistics (bMighty.com)

Posted Apr 10, 2009 17:00 UTC (Fri) by jspaleta (subscriber, #50639) [Link]

Maybe, netbooks as a class of devices aren't going to be expected to be as flexible as traditional computers in terms of range of software applications. Maybe netbooks will be a platform for the web browser as middleware with the vast majority of applications will actually be run in the browser interface. Maybe netbooks really will evolve to be more like smartphones than traditional laptops.

http://texvc.com/2009/03/21/sxsw-taught-me-that-netbooks-...

I think its worth noting HP's approach to installable software in their MI interface.

Built on Ubuntu, but by default the gui package updater only exposes HP pre-approved applications, not a full range of available Ubuntu packages.
You have to fire up synaptic manually from a run dialog to get things like gimp installed.

In this way HP takes control of the quality of the experience for the target user by limiting the range of applications that are "easily" installable through the designed interface. But at the same time gives more traditional linux users the ability to install a wider range of software. Are those two distinct audiences with two distinct sets of expectations?

The real question is how good of a job does HP interface do at keeping the target audience inside the walled garden (a very low wall to be sure, more like a raised patio edge than a wall) of pre-approved applications? Are the majority of of HP MI purchasers choosing to live within the functionality HP exposes by default..or in the pre-approved additional applications listing? Or are most consumers of the device hitting synaptic and piling in additional functionality that HP has not vetted? I'm not sure HP has the telemetry to really answer that, but it's an important question. Is the walled garden approach good for the less technically inclined mass audience or is it just an unneeded barrier?

-jef

Another Look At Linux Netbook Return Statistics (bMighty.com)

Posted Apr 10, 2009 19:56 UTC (Fri) by iabervon (subscriber, #722) [Link]

How many distro package maintainers work for any given OEM? I think the most effective system (setting aside cost factors) would be for OEMs to do their own QA and contract out the adjustments. The internal QA is good, because it gives tech support access to people with experience on the quirks of the system, but there's a huge benefit to contracting out the adjustments to the distro, since there's a good chance that you'll benefit from the results of somebody else contracting out similar adjustments. And you also benefit from having the changes go upstream; that is, if you install Ubuntu Hardy on your netbook and tweak it until it works nicely, that'll get good results until your customers decide to install Jaunty on it and have no idea how to make the trackpad feel right. If you pay Ubuntu to detect your trackpad and use defaults that make it nice to use, this carries over to people installing Jaunty or, if those defaults get into upstream projects, even Gentoo.

Another Look At Linux Netbook Return Statistics (bMighty.com)

Posted Apr 10, 2009 1:05 UTC (Fri) by nirik (subscriber, #71) [Link]

>The take away for OEMs is this...they need to actually spend money doing >their own QA and customization work to make sure the functionality of >linux based devices they are offering meet the expectations of their users.

Thats where I think the netbook folks are failing now. They are starting to put some paltry amount of people and money into their customized distros, but thats not the solution they should be trying for. Instead, I think they should work with existing established distros that have a following and active community and get the things they need merged there.

No offense, but all the custom netbook distros I have seen suffer from:
- No support channels at all
- No community support because it's all being made behind closed doors
- No updates or ability for community to participate.

If they would work within existing communities I think they could have something thats better supported, long lasting and something their users would be happy with.

How about Dell?

Posted Apr 10, 2009 13:38 UTC (Fri) by leomilano (guest, #32220) [Link]

Dell is shipping the Mini with Ubuntu installed, customized by them. Acually, they seem to have hired Canonical, given that Canonical is hosting a repo for them: http://dell-mini.archive.canonical.com/ (I may be wrong).

And the thing is: Minis with Ubuntu cost less than with XP (not much less though: $16 less as of today, but it makes sense in terms of the cost of an XP OEM license and the cost of Linux customization). So, this can be done, and it can be done properly.

The upshot for the OEM is not so much how much money they can shave off the price, but how much and and how well they can customize the produce, in my opinion. The downside is always the same, Windows is a familiar product for users. But that didn't prevent Apple from selling millions of iPhones, or Asus from selling millions of Linux based eeepc's at the beginning of the netbook revolution.

What about Vista compared to XP

Posted Apr 11, 2009 16:32 UTC (Sat) by ccyoung (guest, #16340) [Link] (2 responses)

on returning a notebook to Fry's yesterday, I asked the tech how much Vista itself was the cause of the return - "most of the time" - and whether the rate of return under Vista was higher than XP - "hugely"

another huge mess, according to him, was that few people spent the three hours making recovery disks when they buy Vista - so they either rma the machine if less than 15 days or charge $$. but this is consistent with MS strategy over the years - poor design on their part leads to larger profits by their vendors - so who's complaining?

What about Vista compared to XP

Posted Apr 13, 2009 16:37 UTC (Mon) by ringerc (subscriber, #3071) [Link] (1 responses)

The lack of reinstallation media is a choice made by the OEMs, not Microsoft. The OEMs want to save money on printing the media by making the customer do it.

Of course, you can't use customer-burned reinstallation media when they return the laptop anyway, because you don't know what they did to the laptop before they burned the recovery image DVD. How many nice bits of spyware they might've managed to download. So you need to RMA the thing anyway. I'd be *DEEPLY* unhappy to get a machine with Joe Bloggs' RecoveryAndSpyware DVD as the only OS media and a pre-used preinstall. Ick.

Personally, I think failing to ship clean-install recovery media is deeply dodgy, but it's not MS that're being dodgy.

What about Vista compared to XP

Posted Apr 17, 2009 18:55 UTC (Fri) by giraffedata (guest, #1954) [Link]

The OEMs want to save money on printing the media by making the customer do it.

I don't think the OEMs save money by not pressing the media. For the OEMs in question, price is everything. That's how they get market share. So they pass the savings on to the customer. They know that most customers, perhaps out of ignorance, aren't willing to pay for recovery media, whether in purchase price or in personal time and effort.

I don't know the rules and statistics in returns of these things, but I'll bet the various parties have figured out that it's cheaper, to society as a whole, to return a computer to the factory to be remanufactured (reloaded) in the few cases that a customer returns it than for recovery media to be created for every computer sold.

Local Acer Aspires returns were mostly Windows

Posted Apr 14, 2009 16:12 UTC (Tue) by davecb (subscriber, #1574) [Link]

The salesperson had one new Linux system in the
configuration I wanted, but three "reconditioned"
Windows systems. He admitted they were returns
due to poor performance when we asked...

--dave