bear in mind you could put XBMC on top of Win 7 on this though.
ZOTAC ZBOX ION 2 MINI PC IN STOCK NOW
- Thread starter Slackworth
- Start date
bear in mind you could put XBMC on top of Win 7 on this though.
Soldato
- Joined
- 7 Jul 2009
- Posts
- 16,234
- Location
- Newcastle/Aberdeen
True, but why would you want to? It would just run far worse and be less efficient.
just so you've got me straight i'm right with you on linux being the os of choice, and particularlly using XBMC as the media front end.
I've read bits and bobs on xbmc.org and I thought there weren't actually many performance differences between running XBMC live vs on top of W7, I could well be wrong but thats the impression i've always had?
Soldato
- Joined
- 7 Jul 2009
- Posts
- 16,234
- Location
- Newcastle/Aberdeen
You could also play geometry wars!
Grid Wars is multiplatform is it not?
http://indygamer.blogspot.com/2006/08/geometry-wars-clones.html
Only problem with that being that is the W7 is not unstable, it's not slow (even on netbook/nettop hardware zomg) and error messages and BSODs are few are far between.
Windows is hardly the pile of **** you make it out to be in order to try and emphasise your non point.
Linux clearly does something wrong when most people would rather pay for Windows than take the free alternative.
Like I already said, windows 7 works great on these ion machines. Aero interface is smooth as silk as is the media centre interface.
If you are using it just as a media machine XBMC is great but if you want ease of use and the ability to run windows apps then 7 has to be the way to go.
With regards to flash it gets accelerated by the hardware in the later versions (possibly still beta!?) so where as an intel chipset atom nettop or netbook will struggle with flash the ion really doesn't.
I also have windows 7 on a single core samsung n140 netbook and it works perfectly well but just doesn't look so nice without the ion accelerated visuals.
If you are using it just as a media machine XBMC is great but if you want ease of use and the ability to run windows apps then 7 has to be the way to go.
With regards to flash it gets accelerated by the hardware in the later versions (possibly still beta!?) so where as an intel chipset atom nettop or netbook will struggle with flash the ion really doesn't.
I also have windows 7 on a single core samsung n140 netbook and it works perfectly well but just doesn't look so nice without the ion accelerated visuals.
Soldato
- Joined
- 7 Jul 2009
- Posts
- 16,234
- Location
- Newcastle/Aberdeen
I was using those points in a satirical fashion as they're on the same level as the ones you were making about Linux.
Your logic is very flawed here, most people aren't even aware of Linux or how much easier it is to use and the various other advantages it brings to the table. People use Windows because they're told to use Windows.
Soldato
- Joined
- 8 Sep 2003
- Posts
- 23,173
- Location
- Was 150 yds from OCUK - now 0.5 mile; they moved
We have 5 more units arriving with us on Monday - if you want one pre-ordering is advisable.
I didn't make any points about Linux
Plenty of people are aware of Linux though and still choose not to use it. I use it on my netbook because I don't use it enough to warrant spending out on another copy of Windows but I wouldn't dream of putting it on my main PC.
Soldato
- Joined
- 7 Jul 2009
- Posts
- 16,234
- Location
- Newcastle/Aberdeen
My mistake, i thought you were the user i was originally quoting in that post.
There's no reason for at least 80% of the PC users not to be dual booting it. If that were the case then it would certainly be supported to the extent of Windows, considering it already has support for far more hardware than Windows.
Thankfully most people don't think like you, and the number of people i've seen coming from XP is huge.
There's no reason for at least 80% of the PC users not to be dual booting it. If that were the case then it would certainly be supported to the extent of Windows, considering it already has support for far more hardware than Windows.
Thankfully most people don't think like you, and the number of people i've seen coming from XP is huge.
I'd put money on more people thinking as I do than not, though obviously being as 'into' Linux as you so clearly are you will see a very distorted view of the number of people making the change.
In the last 2 years Linux has increased it's market share by what? 0.15%? In the same time frame, MacOS has increased it's share by over 1.5%, ten times as much and it costs more to get a MacOS machine than it does a Windows one, whereas Linux is free and will work on virtually any PC at all.
Maybe that's just down to exposure but i'm not entirely sure it is, having been using both for a while (and I get on with Ubuntu fine now, once I got past a fair few initial niggles) I really don't think Ubuntu (i'm being specific as it's the only distro i've used extensively) is in a state whereby it could be presented to the public as a true viable alternative to Windows for most people.
Soldato
- Joined
- 7 Jul 2009
- Posts
- 16,234
- Location
- Newcastle/Aberdeen
No, not really. Many people will still have a machine from that era, and i've seen tons who are sick of using a 7 year old OS but don't want to or can't change to Vista or 7, and so turn to Linux, which can easily do everything XP can and then some.
Problem with those two examples is that they're targeting completely different ends of the market. You can't just bundle them together under one 'non-windows' banner, because in terms of exploitation of users the scale looks something like this:
Free Linux--->Free Unix--------------->'Paid For' Distributions like Red Hat---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------->Microsoft Windows------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------>Apple OSX
Of course i've shortened it so as not to waste space.
Last edited:
Why on earth would the average person want to dual-boot? It's pointless and inconvenient. Hell, even I wouldn't want to dual-boot; I'd rather solely use Windows 7, and as such I do.
Soldato
- Joined
- 7 Jul 2009
- Posts
- 16,234
- Location
- Newcastle/Aberdeen
So they can have a proper, well made, stable and fast OS for day to day use and a separate, worse, operating system for the odd time when they need to use a specific piece of software.
Although you're right, the average user wouldn't need to dual boot. Since they just use it for browsing the web, word processing and playing music etc. it could all be done in Linux.
I've tried Ubuntu several times, and every time I've struggled to get it to recognise my wireless adapter (and it's nothing exotic either). Not very convincing for a proper, well-made OS that supposedly supports every piece of hardware ever.
Most people use Windows because it's what they're used to and it's what everyone else uses. That being said, Linux had the perfect opportunity to show the world what it was capable of with the surge in popularity of netbooks, and it failed completely because a) nobody knew what it was about, and b) it was never really that great. I tried various distros of Linux on my Aspire One and none of them particularly blew me away or convinced me that they were far more fit-for-purpose than Windows. Ubuntu Netbook Remix was nice, but far too slow for what it needed to be.
Most people use Windows because it's what they're used to and it's what everyone else uses. That being said, Linux had the perfect opportunity to show the world what it was capable of with the surge in popularity of netbooks, and it failed completely because a) nobody knew what it was about, and b) it was never really that great. I tried various distros of Linux on my Aspire One and none of them particularly blew me away or convinced me that they were far more fit-for-purpose than Windows. Ubuntu Netbook Remix was nice, but far too slow for what it needed to be.
Last edited:
Soldato
- Joined
- 7 Jul 2009
- Posts
- 16,234
- Location
- Newcastle/Aberdeen
It isn't the job of the Operating System to support hardware, but even so Linux comes with infinitely more support out of the box than Windows.
Sure with a bit of advertising i bet Linux could really take off. But you have to pay for advertising, and since OS Devs don't have that much money it's far better spent making sure they have a better product to offer.
Sure with a bit of advertising i bet Linux could really take off. But you have to pay for advertising, and since OS Devs don't have that much money it's far better spent making sure they have a better product to offer.
Oh how i love Linux Fanboys
1. Drivers
2. OEM support
3. Migration
4. Tech Support
5. Games (whether you like it or not, it just isn't convenient for the average user to use Linux for games)
6. Many programmes simply don't exist, and until you can get video editing software to the standard of Final Cut Pro on a linux OS, i'll be steering well clear.
I'd also be interested to know precisely WHY you think OS X is so inferior.
Soldato
- Joined
- 7 Jul 2009
- Posts
- 16,234
- Location
- Newcastle/Aberdeen
Oh how i love Linux Fanboys
1. Drivers
2. OEM support
3. Migration
4. Tech Support
5. Games (whether you like it or not, it just isn't convenient for the average user to use Linux for games)
6. Many programmes simply don't exist, and until you can get video editing software to the standard of Final Cut Pro on a linux OS, i'll be steering well clear.
I'd also be interested to know precisely WHY you think OS X is so inferior.
Support for most hardware is available. Learning curve depends entirely on the distro and who it's aimed at, if they're not that technologically competent then surprisingly it's easier for them to make the change. If you are then you know not to complain about it, as it's mainly user error. I don't know about you but i've found it a lot easier to get answers to my questions and solutions to my problems in Linux than Windows, where the first response is always to 'defrag, check for viruses and malware'. I'm a gamer and i'm happy enough with my Source games, not to mention stuff like Warsow and Nexuiz etc.
Maybe not to professional quality, but i've found KDenLive to be a great entry level replacement and combined with Cinerella is more than enough for my needs. Even if that program isn't available then you dual boot, it's advantages can still be reaped (perhaps even more so) for everyday tasks like browsing, music playing and word editing, stuff like that.
OSX? I've always found the interface hard to use, to the point where i've used Peppermint on a USB stick when i have to use my mac. It offers nothing over Linux or indeed other Unix OS's and costs an outrageous amount while still managing to be somewhat worse, especially in customization.