Indeed. I've been telling people this for some time now. In fact, I absolutely refuse to obtain a machine with
Windows on it at this time unless there's no other choice in the matter (Even now, a new laptop in the class I seek is possible with either NO OS or a Linux pre-install on it...so, why buy, even in the case of the netbooks?). My current laptop was the last machine bought with Windows on it and it never booted into Vista with it in my possession. I bought it because of time constraints- I needed it THEN not in several weeks. Microsoft, falsely counts it as another sale. Microsoft uses those "sales figures", which includes the machine I bought that doesn't even use it, never did, to lie about their marketshare to other people to help propagate their business and the uneven playing field they effectively own.

It's in our laps, gang. Buying with Windows on it unless you've no choice is playing a losing hand. Seriously.

Indeed. I've been telling people this for some time now. In fact, I absolutely refuse to obtain a machine with
Windows on it at this time unless there's no other choice in the matter (Even now, a new laptop in the class I seek is possible with either NO OS or a Linux pre-install on it...so, why buy, even in the case of the netbooks?). My current laptop was the last machine bought with Windows on it and it never booted into Vista with it in my possession. I bought it because of time constraints- I needed it THEN not in several weeks. Microsoft, falsely counts it as another sale. Microsoft uses those "sales figures", which includes the machine I bought that doesn't even use it, never did, to lie about their marketshare to other people to help propagate their business and the uneven playing field they effectively own.

It's in our laps, gang. Buying with Windows on it unless you've no choice is playing a losing hand. Seriously.

We need data. We keep to reverting to calling anything we don't like FUD, but that's not enough. If we think the data's wrong, we need to provide data to counter it. Anecdotally, it seems there are no Linux netbooks to be found at any retail outlets, save Target (they're in the process of liquidating the Linux Eeepcs on hand). They aren't exactly ubiquitous online, either. 94% seems about right, as much as we might not like it.

Linux failed miserably on the netbook & there's no excuse for it. There was no strategy; the OSes installed were sometimes horrendous. There was no basic marketing by any Linux distro to show consumers that Linux OSes have everything they need & are better than Windows on netbooks. Consumers were allowed to define the netbook as a li'l PC, so they wanted Windows. We can't blame MS FUD for that. Heck ASUS didn't advertise the Eeepc in the US.

The return-rate issue is absolutely debatable, but no data has been provided.

The impression we create every time we go for FUD is that Linux and or FOSS just sucks, and we secretly know it, so we're just gonna blame everyone else. Linux & FOSS don't suck, but we need direction & strategy, otherwise this is going to keep happening. Blaming FUD doesn't fix it.

I almost always buy Windows computers, I recently bought an e520 from Dell that was a couple hundred dollars cheaper than the identical spec'd version with free-dos on it.

Looking for laptops the last one I managed to find at a competitive price with Linux preloaded was an HP5000nx with Suse 9.1 on it, cost more than the Windows version but not too much.

As long as Microsoft keeps giving manufacturers money to include a Windows preload computers with Windows are going to be cheaper than ones with Linux on them. Microsoft charges $5.00 for XP, gives more than that back in advertising subsidies and makes their profit on Office and Windows server sales.

Linux can't compete on purchase price when Microsoft can use their near monopoly to shift the costs around like that.

Linux users can throw a monkey wrench in the Microsoft money machine though, get your Windows using friends to look at Windows versions of free software. Every copy of OpenOffice in use hurts the MS bottom line more than buying a Linux box in the first place.

Dell can and do sell Linux netbooks properly. They have publicly stated that 30% of Inspiron Minis sold in the USA are sold with Ubuntu. When you go to purchase one you have to confirm that you understand that it is not a Windows computer before purchase, this is reinforced a couple of times. Dell are selling linux netbooks and ensuring low return rates by making sure there are no customers who think they are buying something to run Windows programs. I just wish Dell would do this outside of the USA as well.

It does get annoying, as Stan has mentioned, when a Windows computer is on special for less than the Linux equivalent or when you can only get a higher specced machine by getting the Windows version. But hey, two years ago that was not an issue because we could not buy a Linux machine at all.

"Linux can't compete on purchase price "

Wrong. Linux can. It does not want to.
Allow binary only drivers and profit making adware to be present, and there you go...
But I guess you value "purity" of your source code more than anything else. So don't blame the world. Having a good product is not enough to be successful in competitive market place. You need to be flexible, bend over if you have to. Create business partnerships, show your partners profit making opportunities...

"Every copy of OpenOffice in use hurts the MS bottom "
Good idea, but. If a job requirement says "MS Office", HR reps will not care much for your impressive Open Office skills.

Microsoft has tremendous leverage with retailers because of Microsoft's monopolies and the large amounts of business the retailers do with Microsoft.

Retailers will have trouble pushing Linux to mainstreamers until they have a good plan in place. A plan will mean updating their employees' skill sets (won't be a big deal when the time comes) and tapping into the service model more carefully. Until then, Linux represents lost sales in other areas (eg, software purchases) and lost *very* important discounts from Microsoft.

Retailers will come around in time. The faster ones will be the ones that will publish the good/better numbers for Linux. These will be the ones sitting pretty tomorrow.

The bad news for Microsoft is that it is not getting better for them. Their costs subsidizing and marketing against Linux keep going up year after year. Linux can't be put out of business. Unfortunately for users of Microsoft software who need to get online, Microsoft can go out of business (even if you see older Windows installations everywhere) and that will do wonders for the malware situation (what? no update!! ..ever again???!!!!!!!).

Hate to break this to you, but this Microsoft is evil incarnate and teh Devil is actually a negative and will marginalize Linux even more. I realize the statement is a bit overblown, but if Linux was unable to get much traction during the Vista fiasco, while Apple was able to triple it's share with an expensive hardware barrier, a big lack of native OSX software and a less than open policy, the current strategy is unlikely to be successful.

Microsoft had record revenues while the press had a field day bludgeoning Vista as the worst OS in the history of mankind and Apple was wooing with shiny and a POSIX compliant BSD base and a very proud group of users who loved the drool cup GUI and couldn't raise a terminal session if the life of their first born was at stake.

How did they gain this revenue?
http://www.winplanet.com/article/3923-.htm

It wasn't from 15 year old anti-trust violations. See Microsoft doesn't just have the retail market sowed up, they have the corporate one as well.

http://www.usatoday.com/money/companies/earnings/2007-07-19-microsoft_N.htm

While Apple was smugging out going from minuscule to tiny with no server line or way to support the enterprise, and Linux was scattershooting all manner of GUIs in Netbooks and machines on the shelves in WalMart, Microsoft saw it's client software sales drop 8% and Server product sales grow 28% and annual income from service agreements and seat licensing grow to historic highs. Apple is zero threat to Microsoft unless they go Amelio insane again.

Linux struck fear into Redmond because it was making headway into the heart of their marketing and profits. Windows is a platform to run Office and access Exchange, SharePoint, SQL and Dynamics. The FUD "Get the facts" website, the blustering and the threats of suing for IP infringment and buying chunks of Linux Distro companies ended when? While everyone was ooohing over the improved desktop, Microsoft was quietly shoring up the base of it's wealth.

I am an enthusiastic Linux supporter. It's my OS of choice and many of my friends and family are now running it on their own machines. But I will continue to purchase my machines for the hardware and price and not a doomed gesture of 'anti'. However, I have been deploying Samba and Squirrel mailservers, SQL and Apache and an Asterisk PBX solution because the Controllers and CFO understand saved $$$ and not being a hostage. I'm in my 30th year of mucking up IT and have used just about every OS at some point. The very saddest part of laying out my opinion in a blog comment is the people who pop up and call me a Microsoft shill when I've probably cost MS more money than any of them.

There is another way you can send people who must run Windows. Have them buy a used machine and provide the technical selection so they get a box that meets their needs. There is a glut of off-lease and replaced machines on the market and they can be had for a song _with_the_Windows_on_them. As an example, I bought a Dell GX270 2.8Ghz machine for the princely sum of $80 with shipping. It has a full legal version of XP Pro on it. It will become a Fedora 10 box for my use, but for a Windows user it would be great for any use but all out gaming. It's a win-win They get an adequate machine really cheap, we recycle a bit, and Microsoft doesn't sell a new license. I'm sure enough licenses are thrown away to make a real dent in Windows sales if they aren't. And not too many people want the new stuff anyway:^)

I see all these comments about "Linux competing with Windows". To be honest, I just don't care. Linux does what I need it to and it lets me do what I want with it. Why does it need to compete? It will continue to do whatever us users want it too regardless of what MS says or does.

Does a tree compete with a flower? Only in the sense that they are both on the same planet and are both a vaguely similar form of thing. So it is with Linux and Windows.

@Shawn, I wish you were right and I want to work as if you were. But - there really are plants that compete with other nearby plants by killing them - and that's what Microsoft is trying to do. FOSS doesn't need to attack Microsoft, but it does need to defend itself against the unceasing attempts to assassinate FOSS. The poisons of FUD and patents seem to be the current weapons of choice.

OOoops. I tried to buy the Acer 901 with linux & 20GB SSD. They are so popular that everywhere had sold out. So I bought the 16GB windows version and installed eeebuntu on it without even letting it boot windows XP. Sorry guys, I screwed the stats up, its my fault. It should be 95.99999% of the netbook market is owned by microsoft.

@ Shawn

If you just don't care, then why are you caring enough to comment?

Why does Linux need to compete? So in 2014 when you don't sit down in front of your Linux PC/Media Center to watch your favorite team in the playoffs, only to discover the Linux version of Silverlight no longer works and EVERYTHING is now using Silverlight, that's why.

@ Carla

You must have hit a nerve to attract so many Microsoft Minders. Either that or selected Blogs and Journalists have been assigned a team of trolls to defend Microsoft's propaganda machine.

Another small way to help is to ask retailers about the Linux versions - even if you're just browsing for an SD card or batteries or something.

Wander past the laptops and netbooks. When the salesdrone accosts you, ask them if they have the Linux version of (insert name of some netbook they have a Windows version of on display).

And that's it. "No? Oh, okay." Buy your SD card and leave.

If enough people do it, retailers will eventually start noticing that there are a lot of people looking for the Linux versions, and perhaps some of them will pull their heads out of whatever orifice they're currently stored in and start stocking some of them.

Aquaadverse, I agree that some comments don't help. Those writing sometimes get carried away. Other times, they might even be working intentionally to hurt Linux.

I honestly have my reservations about the long-term viability of a company that is making their decisions based on who flames the worst among the fans of the competing technologies.

But generally, who is going to say what the commercial outfits may or may not say but needs to be said?

What counts is always to try and be honest. This way the audience is informed. The reader can judge the rest for themselves.

[I'm not justifying any specific pov, but it's ridiculous to think that a technology is going to be judged by what some fanatic is saying here or there. This goes for Windows as well as for Linux. There are a great many people that dislike Windows, are open about it, and give their explanations. You don't have to agree with everyone on every point.]

Anyway, you should be specific about whom you are criticizing and based on what. Avoiding quoting is a sure way to minimize the chances of receiving a useful response.

Shawn if you think Windows (or Microsoft) and Linux are like a tree and a flower, I think you should hang around tech forums a little longer or get off the pipe before posting.

The times that Dell has run a special that made equivalent Windows machines cheaper than Ubuntu machines (after having announced in the first place that Ubuntu would be $50 less, that is), there's been a flood of emails and "oh, oops" and then they dropped the price on the Ubuntu ones to match the Windows ones.

Although Auntie Elmer is inclined to exaggerate a bit, it is clear that Linux acceptance has been disappointing on netbooks. Not really unsuccessful, but disappointing.

Microsoft's success has never been based upon having a superior product. Microsoft knows how to sell.

Generally, Linux does not know how to sell. Not to the American consumer, anyway.

Auntie Elmer's comments about the lack of strategy have a ring of truth. On netbooks, it is likely that a coordinated approach that emphasized delivering all the goodies that consumers want would have been more successful.

On netbooks, it shouldn't be "all about choice", or even "choices that work". It should be about what the netbook consumer wants. Without the right strategy, Linux or any OS is going to have to be satisfied with a small piece of the pie.

My Linux netbook, as delivered, did not do some things it should have done. Now it does everything, but the problems were such that some expertise was required to fix it. On netbooks, this should not have happened.

What you people don’t realize is that the US accounts for less than 10% of the world netbook market. So the fact that Windows might have 96% of the US market doesn’t really mean that much. Worldwide, Linux has 20% of the netbook market.

And what will happen once Microsoft starts forcing netbook vendors to include Windows 7 Starter Edition, with its limit of 3 apps running at once on a maximum of 1GiB of RAM? Will the customers want to pay a 50% price premium to get a properly-functioning copy of Windows, or do you think more of them are going to give Linux a try?

I can barely find a store that retails linux ones here. Of course MS would have the lion's share of the market if they're encouraging people not to stock the linux-running ones!

Has anyone considered this "strategy"?:

The 'supporting MS issue' notwithstanding, go ahead and buy a PC with Windows (XP, preferably, in my case) and pocket the difference. Next, download your favorite Linux distro (Ubuntu for me), and download the latest free VMware (or any other favorite virtualization app).

Now you have two OSs at the best price... Either dual-boot or install Linux natively and then VMware, then "imprison" Windows in a virtual machine. Strip Windows to a minimum, and disable internet access (preserving OS-to-OS networking, of course).

Why is this good? Because most of us either have an existing Windows investment, or there are things that (unfortunately) still require Windows to run (and won't work in WINE). Complicated MS Office documents are perhaps the best example (many don't convert to OO properly). Photoshop is another good example; yes, GIMP exists as a viable alternative, but what about those who have a heavy investment (skills & money) in PS?

We don't WANT to have to run Windows just for that, so we put Linux on our machines anyway -- and virtualization then provides a solution for the occasional required foray into Windows.

But to do this, you need a copy of Windows, which isn't free. So go ahead and take advantage. Who really cares if MS can tote up the sale and claim supremacy? They'll do it anyway, as many posters have pointed out.

But you'll have the last laugh: Their "sale" of Windows to you is only giving you the "magic bullet" that frees you & *everyone else* to jump into Linux -- making 96% of your computing a pain-free, convenient experience without losing a means for the "needed" other 4%.

And with that you can show your system to anyone you know who isn't Linux-aware. And easily convince them that they can do it, too, without any disruption or loss on their part. (Remember, they're still using Windows, not contemplating a 'first computer'.) It's all upside, no downside...

Then we can watch MS's market share plummet rapidly! (who would say no?) And this, all the while "their numbers" make things look secure for them. Ha!