- Site menu:
- Latest Discussions
- Latest Newswire
- Archives
- Submit Story
- Story HOWTO
- Syndicate
- E-mail Alerts
We don't need you either Asus.
|
|
|
Comments (37)
It's really a shame...
Do you have evidence that Microsoft used its dominance to alter the business of Asus? That would be (the evidence) something to hand over to market regulators as anti competitive.
I'm disappointed in Asus because over the years I've generally preferred them with my mother board business amongst other bits. But the real story here as usual is the one about big business being divergent from best serving public interest. Why would/should it serve public interest? Because we (societies) allow through legislation special recognition and treatment of it (as being in the best interest of society).
The sad thing is the majority of the public treat business just as their attitude to politicians "it's them and there is nothing we can do about it". Or even worse they don't even pause (let alone stop) and think about which of these choices is best for them short, medium or for their families long term. So they buy what they know, the brand they have been indoctrinated to or for food (the most essential thing you can spend on) the cheapest.
The real story is that software and consumer choice is in fact politics and is in fact the province of every member of society; who should have an understanding of the implications of their choices. And I think (true of me) that everyone who believes cooperation to achieve goals is best and that choice on relevant merits is best tends to reason Free Software as the best option to real progress.
We just had elections in the UK (and EU) and for at least one political party Free Software support and endorsement was an issue. So it makes me wonder if the real progress with software will be when it acquires a label for goods that is the equivalent to "Fair Trade" or Soil Association certification as meeting their organic standards.
I'm disappointed in Asus because over the years I've generally preferred them with my mother board business amongst other bits. But the real story here as usual is the one about big business being divergent from best serving public interest. Why would/should it serve public interest? Because we (societies) allow through legislation special recognition and treatment of it (as being in the best interest of society).
The sad thing is the majority of the public treat business just as their attitude to politicians "it's them and there is nothing we can do about it". Or even worse they don't even pause (let alone stop) and think about which of these choices is best for them short, medium or for their families long term. So they buy what they know, the brand they have been indoctrinated to or for food (the most essential thing you can spend on) the cheapest.
The real story is that software and consumer choice is in fact politics and is in fact the province of every member of society; who should have an understanding of the implications of their choices. And I think (true of me) that everyone who believes cooperation to achieve goals is best and that choice on relevant merits is best tends to reason Free Software as the best option to real progress.
We just had elections in the UK (and EU) and for at least one political party Free Software support and endorsement was an issue. So it makes me wonder if the real progress with software will be when it acquires a label for goods that is the equivalent to "Fair Trade" or Soil Association certification as meeting their organic standards.
purplewizard, I'm skeptical that any regulatory body cares about Microsoft's blatant collusion with and control of hardware vendors. It's been going on since their inception, and both the US DOJ and the European Union insist on nattering about bundling Web browsers, as though that mattered to anyone. I doubt that it would be very difficult to build a case, it looks to me like they simply don't want to.
We really know nothing about what the current administration's antitrust policies will be. Supposedly they will be much stronger, but we have to wait and see.
Why is anyone blaming ASUS now even ARM-execs confirmed Android is not ready for netbooks?
http://www.pcworld.com/article/166256/android_doesnt_threate...
Maybe Android _does_ stink as a netbook-OS? Sure, Microsoft and Intel were involved, but if Android really stinks as a netbook-OS they only saved Asus' back; and we should thank MS / Intel for stopping Asus from distributing 'lame' / defect Linux-products.
We should blame Asus for not offering Moblin, Xandros or Ubuntu* I guess; not for its refusal to ship an OS which doesn't work on their hardware.
*Apart from the Android / Qualcomm story, that's exactly what people are doing now. I must have been confused or so.
http://www.pcworld.com/article/166256/android_doesnt_threate...
Maybe Android _does_ stink as a netbook-OS? Sure, Microsoft and Intel were involved, but if Android really stinks as a netbook-OS they only saved Asus' back; and we should thank MS / Intel for stopping Asus from distributing 'lame' / defect Linux-products.
We should blame Asus for not offering Moblin, Xandros or Ubuntu* I guess; not for its refusal to ship an OS which doesn't work on their hardware.
*Apart from the Android / Qualcomm story, that's exactly what people are doing now. I must have been confused or so.
> ...but we have to wait and see.
Given their priorities, that will probably be wait, and wait, and wait....
Given their priorities, that will probably be wait, and wait, and wait....
Quoting:Given their priorities, that will probably be wait, and wait, and wait....
They need some public pressure, awareness by the general public (voter?) and some consumer union(s) and angry bloggers / journalists helping them from time to time. Maybe some refund suits for the court. Same here in EU; what else is new?
Quoting:We just had elections in the UK (and EU) and for at least one political party Free Software support and endorsement was an issue.
Many parties, in fact. It was in the program for the Greens coalition and quite prominent even. The Greens were the ones who shut down the last attempt of IP landgrabbers trying to get software patents in the EU, by the way. All national parties in the Greens coalition had free and open standards, free software, digital privacy and net neutrality in their programs (in The Netherlands it was "Groen Links")
> They need some public pressure...
To be fair, the current administration has far more important things (in their mind, at least) to worry about at the moment than their antitrust policy. The still ongoing financial problems, health care reform, and the wind down of current overseas conflicts are a few examples.
To be fair, the current administration has far more important things (in their mind, at least) to worry about at the moment than their antitrust policy. The still ongoing financial problems, health care reform, and the wind down of current overseas conflicts are a few examples.
As far as I understand 'antitrust' is a matter of the DoJ, and financial problems, health care and overseas conflicts are not.
IMHO it's not fair not to mention GEU/NLG as well. You might remember Erik Meijer from that party (SP) together with Toine Manders (liberals) were the only ones to personally answer my e-mail concerning software patents those days, and Erik Meijer was actually very busy on the topic. He was the one having posed the most questions in general as well. Never heard anything from The Greens (GroenLinks).
Quoting:The Greens were the ones who shut down the last attempt of IP landgrabbers
IMHO it's not fair not to mention GEU/NLG as well. You might remember Erik Meijer from that party (SP) together with Toine Manders (liberals) were the only ones to personally answer my e-mail concerning software patents those days, and Erik Meijer was actually very busy on the topic. He was the one having posed the most questions in general as well. Never heard anything from The Greens (GroenLinks).
> As far as I understand 'antitrust' is a matter of the DoJ...
The Attorney General is the head of the DOJ. He's directly appointed by the president and considered part of his staff. And right now the President has what he considers more important things on his mind. Like I said, it's a matter of priorities, and right now antitrust is probably fairly far down the priority list.
I'm not saying if that's a good thing or not, and doing my best not to allow any political considerations to enter the discussion.
The Attorney General is the head of the DOJ. He's directly appointed by the president and considered part of his staff. And right now the President has what he considers more important things on his mind. Like I said, it's a matter of priorities, and right now antitrust is probably fairly far down the priority list.
I'm not saying if that's a good thing or not, and doing my best not to allow any political considerations to enter the discussion.
Quoting:IMHO it's not fair not to mention GEU/NLG as well
True. But their election program doesn't mention anything like that. The greens seem quite focussed on things like preventing software patents and spreading foss and open standards.
This is a good read if you are curious about the administration's antitrust position:
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/12/business/economy/12antitru...
Of specific interest to this discussion is
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/12/business/economy/12antitru...
Of specific interest to this discussion is
Quoting:The administration is hoping to encourage smaller companies in an array of industries to bring their complaints to the Justice Department about potentially improper business practices by their larger rivals. Some of the biggest antitrust cases were initiated by complaints taken to the Justice Department.
Ms. Varney said that the administration rejected the impulse to go easy on antitrust enforcement during weak economic times.
I'm with jdixon on this one. Yes, that's rare on anything even vaguely political but he happens to have hit the nail on the head. I also think that what little we have heard from the administration, as bigg points out, is promising.
A fair number of Linux distros, including Ubuntu, have been ported to ARM. ARM based netbooks do not have to wait on Android. I honestly hope they don't. I trust Google about as much as I trust Microsoft.
A fair number of Linux distros, including Ubuntu, have been ported to ARM. ARM based netbooks do not have to wait on Android. I honestly hope they don't. I trust Google about as much as I trust Microsoft.
disappointing, to say the least
yet another example of Microsoft buying market leadership. it's nice to see that governments of countries other than the US are starting to realize this and are putting a stop to it. where's the US government in all of this?
> where's the US government in all of this?
Corrupt up to their eyeballs, just like every other government.
Microsoft now wields campaign contributions and a lobbying arm of the Gates law firm, one of those "unintended" consequences of bringing the anti-trust suit back in the 90's.
Roy Schestowitznikovnik has gone into this in great detail over on BoycottNovell.
Corrupt up to their eyeballs, just like every other government.
Microsoft now wields campaign contributions and a lobbying arm of the Gates law firm, one of those "unintended" consequences of bringing the anti-trust suit back in the 90's.
Roy Schestowitznikovnik has gone into this in great detail over on BoycottNovell.
The US government was bought out by MS around 2000. That's how things work in DC. The EU have an ongoing ineffectual anti-trust action going on presumably because MS can't buy them out completely for some reason. My guess is because the EU process is just a tad less corrupt than lobbying dominated DC.
Seriously, guys. This is Asus. Who cares? Do we really have such a low opinion of Linux that we should care about a vendor that's third-tier on a good day? I mean Asus - let's not give the Windows fanbois something to laugh about. Dell or HP would be a different story.
@bigg: Asus does matter. They successfully brought the EeePC to market and were the first to successfully mass market a Linux system. That makes them significant.
Very often groundbreaking actions are taken by smaller companies, not big, entrenched ones. Asus was a good example. It is really a pity they've been co-opted by Microsoft.
Very often groundbreaking actions are taken by smaller companies, not big, entrenched ones. Asus was a good example. It is really a pity they've been co-opted by Microsoft.
But Asus needs Linux. As just another Windows vendor, they're a joke.
@bigg: Obviously they don't see it that way. Pity.
Well, Altavista was the first one to successfully mass market a search engine, and it made them significant. But it doesn't mean we need Altavista or they are important.
I think the same goes for Asus: if they're not careful, they will suffer the same fate as AV. They're moving from smaller inventive company to entrenched one.
I think the same goes for Asus: if they're not careful, they will suffer the same fate as AV. They're moving from smaller inventive company to entrenched one.
Android smartbook from Compal, not Asus(?)
It's starting to be more confusing, or less; I'm not sure.
Look at this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=66fEOh45iDQ
It's a Compal-smartbook they're showing. Might be the next EEE, I don't know. For those who don't know Compal: It's the no. 1 netbook/laptop maker (ODM) in the world. They recently surpassed Quanta, in case you missed that event. It might be someone peeled off the Asus logo of the smartbook after the announced 'problems' with Intel and MS. Obviously Compal doesn't have to be scared for Microsoft, as Compal doesn't sell Windows nor deal with Microsoft.
Problem is, ODM's don't sell netbooks to consumers. OEM's do. ODM's are not afraid of Microsoft, OEM's are. So the main hindrance to Linux on netbooks is OEM's. Such as Dell and HP. Don't believe Mr. Sparenberg and SJVN as they tell you Dell and HP are going to 'take over' the Linux netbook market, because this Compal-device shows Dell and HP are freakin' lame. All they have to do is call Compal and order 1000+ of those netbooks; but I'm pretty sure they don't.
Look at this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=66fEOh45iDQ
It's a Compal-smartbook they're showing. Might be the next EEE, I don't know. For those who don't know Compal: It's the no. 1 netbook/laptop maker (ODM) in the world. They recently surpassed Quanta, in case you missed that event. It might be someone peeled off the Asus logo of the smartbook after the announced 'problems' with Intel and MS. Obviously Compal doesn't have to be scared for Microsoft, as Compal doesn't sell Windows nor deal with Microsoft.
Problem is, ODM's don't sell netbooks to consumers. OEM's do. ODM's are not afraid of Microsoft, OEM's are. So the main hindrance to Linux on netbooks is OEM's. Such as Dell and HP. Don't believe Mr. Sparenberg and SJVN as they tell you Dell and HP are going to 'take over' the Linux netbook market, because this Compal-device shows Dell and HP are freakin' lame. All they have to do is call Compal and order 1000+ of those netbooks; but I'm pretty sure they don't.
What's "ODM"?
> What's "ODM"?
Google says Original Design Manufacturer.
Google says Original Design Manufacturer.
Let me 'explain':
There's Quanta, Wistron and Compal, and together they assemble about 80% of all laptops (and probably netbooks also) worldwide. HP, Dell etc. ask them for computers with certain specs, they deliver. If HP asks tomorrow all laptops should come with VIA Nano instead of Atom - they will have it next week because Compal etc. will do so. If they don't like the design of the case, companies such as Quanta will change it within a week - to have rounder edges for the Western market and such. I have to add Asus was an ODM as well (iBook for example, Google tells) until they decided they could be their own OEM; more profit can be made if you are both.
Nice figure; to have an idea: Compal sales were about $10 billion in 2008 (rough estimate).
HP, Dell etc. then continue to install Windows, write manuals, add nice carton boxes around the laptop, deal with environment-certification if necessary, do branding, marketing, offer product guarantee, offer product support, hotlines, press contacts, prove children didn't make their products, make deals with Microsoft, open mortar and brick stores (Dell not) and offices around the world, ship to Best Buy / Fry's / Dixon / Carrefour / Tesco / Mediamarkt or whatever shop it is on your continent, try not to frustrate Intel, deal with angry customers, goto court if people want a refund for Windows etc. so also employ lawyers, do some lobbying; sprinkle some bonuses to their execs if market share rose, that kind of stuff. 'Reselling & Retail' might be a good word.
However, that's when it comes to laptops; desktops is another story.
Now, when you want to sell laptops using the brand 'gus3' all you have to do is give them specs, specify how your brand should look like, buy 1000, and Compal and Quanta will deliver.
I'm starting to think the 'Linux communities' should start their own OEM and buy directly from Compal.
There's Quanta, Wistron and Compal, and together they assemble about 80% of all laptops (and probably netbooks also) worldwide. HP, Dell etc. ask them for computers with certain specs, they deliver. If HP asks tomorrow all laptops should come with VIA Nano instead of Atom - they will have it next week because Compal etc. will do so. If they don't like the design of the case, companies such as Quanta will change it within a week - to have rounder edges for the Western market and such. I have to add Asus was an ODM as well (iBook for example, Google tells) until they decided they could be their own OEM; more profit can be made if you are both.
Nice figure; to have an idea: Compal sales were about $10 billion in 2008 (rough estimate).
HP, Dell etc. then continue to install Windows, write manuals, add nice carton boxes around the laptop, deal with environment-certification if necessary, do branding, marketing, offer product guarantee, offer product support, hotlines, press contacts, prove children didn't make their products, make deals with Microsoft, open mortar and brick stores (Dell not) and offices around the world, ship to Best Buy / Fry's / Dixon / Carrefour / Tesco / Mediamarkt or whatever shop it is on your continent, try not to frustrate Intel, deal with angry customers, goto court if people want a refund for Windows etc. so also employ lawyers, do some lobbying; sprinkle some bonuses to their execs if market share rose, that kind of stuff. 'Reselling & Retail' might be a good word.
However, that's when it comes to laptops; desktops is another story.
Now, when you want to sell laptops using the brand 'gus3' all you have to do is give them specs, specify how your brand should look like, buy 1000, and Compal and Quanta will deliver.
I'm starting to think the 'Linux communities' should start their own OEM and buy directly from Compal.
Ah, thanks.
Quoting:I'm starting to think the 'Linux communities' should start their own OEM and buy directly from Compal.
TracyAnne, are you reading this?
I am, who wants to invest.
> I am, who wants to invest.
Private investment or were you planning on going public? I'm assuming private.
What's your minimum requirement, and what would it get you?
If you really want outside investment, especially from overseas, you'll need to have some legal documents specifying all the details drawn up and available for folks to review.
I could probably put up a couple of hundred, but it might take a while.
Private investment or were you planning on going public? I'm assuming private.
What's your minimum requirement, and what would it get you?
If you really want outside investment, especially from overseas, you'll need to have some legal documents specifying all the details drawn up and available for folks to review.
I could probably put up a couple of hundred, but it might take a while.
unfortunately it was a throw away line.
If those things cost $150 and the minimum number of devices you should buy is 1000, you need $150k. That's the problem.
When selling those netbooks to people who are familiar with Linux (targeting experienced Linux users), you probably don't need much marketing beyond spreading the story on the web. You don't need much of a manual and 'support' as those familiar with Linux will arrange some forum somewhere. You don't need to install a lot of software. So basically, by targeting the right people, there's no job for an OEM at all; except someone should deal with broken netbooks.
When selling those netbooks to people who are familiar with Linux (targeting experienced Linux users), you probably don't need much marketing beyond spreading the story on the web. You don't need much of a manual and 'support' as those familiar with Linux will arrange some forum somewhere. You don't need to install a lot of software. So basically, by targeting the right people, there's no job for an OEM at all; except someone should deal with broken netbooks.
> ...unfortunately it was a throw away line.
Understood. Well, if you ever do decide to start, and can take small investors, set up an appropriate website and let people know you're doing it. I think you'd be surprised at what you could raise, especially if you took investments down to the $20 range or so. I don't have the time or the skills to do something like that myself.
> ...you need $150k. That's the problem.
Yep. I could handle $1500 or so to get a small Linux laptop business started, but anything beyond that I can't do.
I've considered using refurbished machines from places like http://www.intechraoutlet.com/home/ but then the shipping costs kill you.
Understood. Well, if you ever do decide to start, and can take small investors, set up an appropriate website and let people know you're doing it. I think you'd be surprised at what you could raise, especially if you took investments down to the $20 range or so. I don't have the time or the skills to do something like that myself.
> ...you need $150k. That's the problem.
Yep. I could handle $1500 or so to get a small Linux laptop business started, but anything beyond that I can't do.
I've considered using refurbished machines from places like http://www.intechraoutlet.com/home/ but then the shipping costs kill you.
Crowdsourcing sounds like the solution to me to the $150k problem.
Something like LetsBuyIt. Should look into that.
Something like LetsBuyIt. Should look into that.
Ha, this is nice. Yet another example - this is a MID running on both Android and ARM. In fact it is running on an OMAP 3 from TI; a competitor of the recent Qualcomm products. I'm a bit late finding out about this; you might already know, but let's share it anyway.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HuI_4LKhAwU
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HuI_4LKhAwU
tracyanne: Perhaps it would be worthwhile to contact Compal anyway. I wouldn't be surprised if they have some generic white label laptops as well. If they do, you can probably place smaller orders since they wouldn't be building them just for you.
You're probably right Sander, I'll give them a hoy and see what they say. In the meantime, I've found Pioneer they are based in Australia, and build laptops from 7" to 17", they call all their laptops Dreambooks, and will preinstall Linux (Ubuntu) and ship them to my customer, if I choose.
Post a comment
A free account is needed to post. Write your comment here first: your text is kept in this browser while you sign up or log in, and is waiting for you when you come back.
Your message:Markdown: **bold**, *italic*, [text](https://link), - lists, > quotes, $x^2$ for math. Formatting help
Sign up and post (it is free) or Log in and post
The author is right (and so are the authors of the articles he links) when they say that the original EeePC 701 that launched the netbook craze was hot for a lot of reasons. One of them was the fact that it was the first successfully mass marketed Linux system. Accoding to Mr. Shih (the CEO) 30% of EeePC sales last year were systems preloaded with Linux. For Asus to turn their back on Linux makes dramatically clear how strong the Wintel near monopoly still is.
I also agree with the author that we don't really need Asus anymore. He links the David Williams article that makes the point the HP and Dell will be the big beneficiaries. Both companies are expanding their Linux offerings, something they wouldn't do without real customer demand. Having said that, I think the small, upstart manufacturers and OEMs who are bringing sub-$200 netbooks to market, mostly running ARM or MIPS chips, in the original EeePC form factor (or even slightly smaller/lighter) are really going to benefit the most. One of them could very well have the next EeePC and be the next Asus.