[CALUG] My EeePC 1000 Review

[Daniel Deighton]

On Wed, 2008-08-13 at 07:01 -0400, Jason Dixon wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 13, 2008 at 06:43:03AM -0400, Rajiv Gunja wrote:
> > David,
> > 
> > I applaud you for sharing your experience with EEEPC with us, but I have to
> > say couple of things that are wrong with your outlook:
> 
> Dave is a big boy, so I know he'll defend his own review.  That said,
> I've known him for years and he's fully qualified to give an impartial
> judgement of the hardware, software, and general configuration of the
> device.  Rather, your critique of Dave's email sounds defensive almost
> to the point of fanboi-ism.
>  
> > 1. EEEPC is not a desktop/laptop replacement, it is for a traveler who wants
> > to browse the internet, download some pictures from the camera and may be
> > use skype or IM to talk. That is the reason why it has such a slow CPU.
> 
> I'm not sure where you're getting the impression that he didn't like the
> CPU.  I read nothing but positive remarks about the hardware,
> particularly the battery life.  He also compared it highly favorably to
> his older Transmeta-based system.
>  
> > 2. Replacing Xandros (built for this hardware) by Full/modified Fedora or
> > Ubuntu is an overkill on the hardware and a bad choice. Why in the world
> > would you kill a small hardware with such a bloated software? Its like
> > trying to fit an elephant into a car.
> 
> There's no reason another Linux distribution can't be fitted to this
> device just as elegantly as Asus did with the EeePC.  It just takes
> time, patience, and creativity.  Perhaps he prefers the package
> management and software availability offered to him by the other
> distributions.  I hate to tell you this, but the vast majority of Linux
> distributions, including the native Xandros, is "bloated".
> 
> > I have used the EEEPC 701 for a few days, but had to give it up as it did
> > not serve my purpose. But it serves the purpose of a computing platform when
> > traveling and it should stop at that (not meant for day to day computing).
> 
> And I think Dave's email expressed as much.
> 
> > If you know your security, then you should know that by turning off Samba,
> > Print sharing, NFS, you would have in effect turned off the so called bad
> > services, which is what a Firewall does.
> > 
> > So it is not really a question of Firewall not being there or services being
> > turned on, but the question of what distribution "you" like, so your whole
> > point about changing the OS. If you ask me, once you install the default
> > Fedora or Ubuntu, you will see lot more services than the 4 you have
> > mentioned running and you will have to turn then off on those distributions
> > too.
> 
> This is the sole point that I agree with you on, and I'm sure Dave knows
> as well.  I'm surprised that he didn't mention this given his stance on
> security.  I think he just got so hung up on the lack of a firewall that
> he "couldn't see the forest for the trees".
> 
> > Trying to extract / compare EEEPC with a normal desktop / laptop is not
> > doing the product justice. Its like expecting Elevator qualities from a Ski
> > lift.
> 
> Again, I never saw Dave trying to compare the EeePC to a normal laptop.
> He compared it to his previous "subnotebook", which is a perfect
> comparison.
> 
> > My intention was not to attack your comments but over the years I have read
> > so many reviews on different distributions where the reviewer has some
> > notions in mind and wants something out of a product which it is not meant
> > for and it just annoys me to no end.
> 
> I can't help but wonder if a large portion of your response isn't a
> template from other attacks on reviewers.  With the lone exception of
> the firewall, everything else you mentioned was either invalid or repeating
> what Dave had already said.
> 
> 



Dave, thanks for the review.  I'm a big fan of the EEEPC.  I have a 701
and it is exactly what I need for traveling, consoling into network
equipment, and as a spare laptop.

There are already many alternate distros that have been customized for
the EEEPC.  See http://wiki.eeeuser.com/#custom_eee_linux_distros for
details.

I have to agree with Dave with regards to the lack of a firewall being
an issue.  In my opinion, this should always, at least, be an option.
In the case of the EEEPC, the modules were not even built into the
kernel.  Of course, turning off all listening services will mitigate the
issue.   However, computers are dynamic and things will change.  Do you
trust your vendor not to make a mistake?  Earlier this year, Asus
released an update for the EEEPC that broke wireless functionality and
had to be updated the next day.  More recently, VMWare released a patch
for their ESX server that prevented VMs from starting up.  In both of
these cases, it was an availability issue and a firewall wouldn't have
helped.  But, the point is that vendors make mistakes, users can install
things that they don't understand and a firewall could mitigate some of
these issues.  

 -Dan