Well, sure, it just has to slay the Combined Corporate Interest Monster.

Yes, I agree with this.

Personally, I'm using Windows XP at home and MacOSX at work, and then we touch all kinds of Linux systems here, and at least I personally don't ultimately really care. They're just tools, to get things done. It's like arguing over Nikon vs. Canon for digital cameras.

... Nikon and Canon might actually be a fun analogy, if you then take 'Linux' as some third camera manufacturer, hoping to break in in the DSLR market. It's about the ecosystem, the availability of lenses and accessories and all that. You would need to have a pretty compelling story to make me switch from my Nikon set to something else.

Well, I knew YOU would get it ragnar.

EDIT: has anyone seen the TV commercials (infomercials actually) from Kodak, trying to sell people on their printers? The selling point is that they consume less ink than say HP or Epson. This is extremely compelling ot me, BUT-- I'm concerned that the marketing blitz is one of desperation because I read about Kodak's business prognosis and it doesn't look good. So sure I can save ink today, but at what ultimate cost? Buying a potential doorstop printer from a soon-to-be-insolvent company?

Ok, I exaggerate but for a reason.

So it isn't and never can be about even the most obviously compelling switch points-- one simply must lok at their ecosystem (thanks ragnar) and use cases before making such a major cross from something like Windows to Linux.

The default thought seems to be "better the devil I know..."

Am I the onlyone thinking "ok... another netbook, move along..."

Oh, and yes, the design is nice, but I'd like to see a netbook without a thick bezel around the screen. Is it a licensing requirement for the Atom CPU's to have 2 inches of bezel around the lcd?

Rule number one: Don't get in bed with Microsoft.

Rule number two: Don't get in bed with Microsoft.

At any given time, the closest that Microsoft should be near you is about 3 meters.

No, no, not execs, just regular corporate stuff. You know, the 'buy 100 phones and 100 netbooks for the employees with some 3G bundles, don't let it look too shabby so we can take it to meetings, but don't make it too expensive, either, that's for execs'.

Blackberries and Thinkpads. m

I influence change by choosing where I spend my dollars, and (this is important) making sure the makers know why I spent where I did and where I didn't. Without that, it would just be pissing in the wind.

I understand WHY they chose to put Windows on it. Duh. I also am completely unsympathetic. I don't buy devices based on pity. I buy them based on delivering features I want, and avoiding flaws I don't want. Windows is a flaw (in every sense of the phrase).

You can go on and on about "linux isn't this" or "business that" blah blah blah. It is irrelevant to the statement I made, which is "I wont buy this, because it (so far) only offers Windows". Countering that with "but they had to!" has no value. It's a waste of breathe/typing.

Except for the battery life and HDMI...

I mean, it's pretty, but beauty is only skin deep. After that, battery and HDMI are all this thing has. I don't know anyone who buys netbooks for HDMI, so... it's success will depend entirely on the battery life? We'll see how long that lasts.

I fully understand that Nokia chose Windows for their first netbook, but I'm going to get worried if this is where it stops. There's just way too much competition in the PC market, and Nokia needs to differentiate itself. That doesn't need to happen today, but it needs to happen soon.

Looking at this from a Free software perspective, I think Nokia is one of the only companies that can bring Linux considerable market share. Google may have been able to, but they produced a crippled phone OS and a brain dead framebuffer web browser they want to call a netbook OS so they can lock people into their cloud services.

Looking at this from a business perspective, I think Linux is the platform Nokia can use to break Microsoft's and Apple's stranglehold on the computing market. If it's not broken before the full versions of OS X and Windows can run on smartphones, it's game over for Maemo and Symbian. Nokia will become just another Asus.

What I'd do is, yes, launch that Windows netbook now, but think of it as something like S60. You need to have it to deal with inertia, but that's it.

Then, release the N900. Next, a bigger tablet running Maemo to start eating at netbook market share. Grow Maemo market share rapidly using Nokia's phone dominance, and you suddenly have a Linux interface that close to 50% of the market is actually familiar with.

THEN, start selling larger laptops and even desktop computers running KDE 4.9 customized to look close enough to Maemo. Developers have Qt all the way from 40 euro Symbian phones to the hottest gaming PC:s, Ovi is the number one software source, and Nokia becomes larger than Microsoft on all platforms.


...or at least that's what I hope will happen, because I bought shares in anticipation of the N900 launch