I have been using my Eee PC for a while now and have recently reached conclusions on how best to use it. Recall that in an earlier post I had installed Ubuntu Eee, which is a version of Ubuntu customized for the Eee by this man. The other option is to use Ubuntu with this customized kernel. My reasons for doing this were:
- I wanted the freedom to install software outside the bundled package.
- I wanted a more aesthetically pleasing OS. The default (a version of Xandros) is cruelly dubbed 'The Fisher-Price Desktop' in this thread.
- I wanted to avoid Microsoft.
Now I know very little about these things so it's unclear to me why Ubuntu doesn't work on an Eee when, presumably, it works on other machines. Anyway, it doesn't so I installed the customized version (which also didn't work), made necessary modifications to make that work and, after many hours, all was well. But then Ubuntu released a major update. My machine updated itself automatically but from the wrong source (i.e. from Ubuntu rather than from one of the non-generic repositories), something I (wrongly) thought I had guarded against. So the thing didn't work for the third time. I searched on the various fora dedicated to these matters and found ways of making modifications but, to be frank, I couldn't be arsed. I did not want a machine that had to be modified just to work properly every time a six-monthly update was released.
So I've reverted to the Fisher-Price Desktop - it works and does everything I would need a computer of that size to do. But the whole experience has taught me something about the whole business of software that is owned by a company (i.e. not free or open source): it has made me aware of just what one is paying for when one buys such software. One is paying for the fact that it 'just works'. And I have also learned that it would take more time and expertise than I have to make that happen myself. Now, I have not changed my opinion of Windows (which I think is horrid to use and bullying) but, I have learned from the 'Eeexperience', neither can my next main computer use a free operating system. So I shall turn to Apple when my ancient Toshiba laptop becomes extinct. By doing so I hope to acquire a machine that is aesthetically pleasing and 'just works'. I have not found that free software meets both criteria.
3 comments:
You do realise the Mac OS X kernel is open source, don't you?
Thanks to your link, I do now. But I also understand that it's illegal to use the Mac OS on non-Apple hardware. I'm assuming that Apple's particular way of integrating ware (hard and soft) will avoid the kind of problems with getting their machines to function such as I experienced with Ubuntu on the Eee.
I'm still very much a novice in these mattters: what's your view?
Indeed; since Apple make the hardware, they're in a position to ensure compatibility. If Mac OS is as flexible as you need (ignoring Boot Camp since that brings us back into Windows territory), and the platform has the software you need, then it might well suit you. I just notice that right after trying to exploit Linux's variety of distros, you're now looking at a pretty inflexible alternative; but presumably that won't matter much if it does suit your needs to begin with.
Post a Comment