Same Price, But Same Hardware?
As you know, I am absolutely against making the same hardware cost the same with two different operating systems that don’t cost the same price. So if you take a given PC or laptop, put a free OS on one version and a commercial OS on the other and charge the same price, that is unfair. You may wonder why I am making such a big deal of the same hardware. Obviously you can’t compare across two different PCs, right? Well, apparently not.
A recent Techworld article is titled “Windows same price as Linux in new Eee PC.” When I read this, I thought “Ugg. Asus is messing with prices again.” Then I read the article.
If you look closely, the end of the second sentence says “although the specs are different.” That makes the story completely different and makes the title very misleading.
Just to make sure I am very clear, there is nothing wrong with selling machines with different priced OSs, if there is a difference in the specs that compensates for the price. Please, no more misleading titles.
June 23rd, 2008 at 5:51 am
Acer said it: on a $1000 pc windows is peanuts, but on a budget pc…
linux will be a great competitor on the low cost front.
if you look at the amazon eeePC linux reviews, everyone is good (not much to complain about), not a single bad review. In fact the Win XP version gets lower scores
June 27th, 2008 at 1:33 pm
I still don’t think you can compare at all. To Asus, the Linux Eee PC and Windows version are two different products, and are no doubt priced differently - based on anticipated demand, expected volume to ship, expected technical issues or complaints, etc.
It’s just not as simple as “same hardware different OS” and when people claim that it is, it shows a complete lack of business sense, and amounts more to wishful thinking than fair comment.