Beta

Slashdot: News for Nerds

×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

cancel ×

386 comments

Fatal flaw (3, Insightful)

xxxJonBoyxxx (565205) | more than 7 years ago | (#18348009)

Linux users may need to stop being so fussy when putting demands on OEMs for pre-installed Linux PCs


The reason most of us got to be Linux users in the first place was fussiness: we didn't like what commercial OS vendors did with their stuff so we went to open source so we could improve upon it any time we wanted. The average user just doesn't care that much about the OS they're running; vanilla Windows or OS X is good enough for the masses.

If you Venn-ed "Linux users" and "people who can control their fussiness", you'd have very little overlap.

Re:Fatal flaw (5, Insightful)

i_should_be_working (720372) | more than 7 years ago | (#18348189)

To be fair to Shuttlesworth, he didn't actually tell us to stop being fussy. He said we are fussy, without making any judgements. And that this fact would make it harder for Dell to satisfy us. I don't know why the /. article claims he said that.

Re:Fatal flaw (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#18348703)

I don't know why the /. article claims he said that.

Sometimes.. when I write "Slashdot journalists" I get modded down...

Umm... (1, Flamebait)

kiwimate (458274) | more than 7 years ago | (#18348301)

+5 Insightful? Okay. But irrelevant to the actual article.

Or, if you prefer, you extend it to hardware to say you're fussy enough that you will build your own system rather than buying a Dell/whatever.

Put it the other way around: Dell did not get to be a hardware distributor to satisfy Mr. Dell's fussiness. It was to make a profit.

The rest of the article follows on from there.

Re:Fatal flaw (3, Insightful)

Richard_at_work (517087) | more than 7 years ago | (#18348323)

If you Venn-ed "Linux users" and "people who can control their fussiness", you'd have very little overlap.
Personally I get the impression that those Linux users that are vocal about Dell et al supporting and providing Linux are not the same group that would ever use a Dell provided install - preciselly because of the issue you highlight.

Re:Fatal flaw (1, Redundant)

jcr (53032) | more than 7 years ago | (#18348357)

The average user just doesn't care that much about the OS they're running; vanilla Windows or OS X is good enough for the masses.

That being the case, what does the vendor have to gain by selling Linux pre-installed? Remember, if you're not talking about a million units a year in incremental sales improvements, Linux is barely a rounding error on a financial statement.

-jcr

Re:Fatal flaw (2, Insightful)

suv4x4 (956391) | more than 7 years ago | (#18348489)

The reason most of us got to be Linux users in the first place was fussiness: we didn't like what commercial OS vendors did with their stuff so we went to open source so we could improve upon it any time we wanted.

Then improve upon it and stop whining that hardware vendors support it. You can't have it both ways.

The very reason enterprise Linux vendors today (like RedHat/Novell) can sell an OS which is essentially free, is because the open source model is way too fussy for wide adoption and support in the industry.

What works for tinkerers and geeks doesn't necessarily work for people primarily interested in carrying out a specific set of tasks with an OS, and putting reliability and predictability a lot higher than flexibility.

and then... (5, Funny)

malevolentjelly (1057140) | more than 7 years ago | (#18348027)

And then Mark Shuttleworth made the Linux community a glass of warm milk and sent them to bed...

Re:and then... (-1, Redundant)

Linegod (9952) | more than 7 years ago | (#18348091)

Where are my mod points when I need them.....

Re:and then... (5, Funny)

pizzach (1011925) | more than 7 years ago | (#18348667)

The Linux community then proceeded to complain about there being no choice of chocolate, strawberry, cafe-mocha, or cowboyneal.

Shuttleworth who (-1, Troll)

VEGETA_GT (255721) | more than 7 years ago | (#18348037)

Is this someone I relay should be concerned with telling me to settle down. Um considering Dell is actually moving towards putting Linux on desk tops, why should we settle down as it seams to be working and people are lisining. If we all sit back and just do nothing and Settle Down, then company's like Dell will not do this and we don't get linux on desk tops. Hell because of this, I may be looking at Dell for a low to medium end Linux system to replace my aging Linux system for testing and programing use. But if thye don't add linux on the system, I an't going dell, end of story.

Re: Shuttleworth who (5, Funny)

jdgeorge (18767) | more than 7 years ago | (#18348223)

Is this someone I relay should be concerned with telling me to settle down. Um considering Dell is actually moving towards putting Linux on desk tops, why should we settle down as it seams to be working and people are lisining. If we all sit back and just do nothing and Settle Down, then company's like Dell will not do this and we don't get linux on desk tops. Hell because of this, I may be looking at Dell for a low to medium end Linux system to replace my aging Linux system for testing and programing use. But if thye don't add linux on the system, I an't going dell, end of story.

Hmmm... I think I understand the plan here:
1. Butcher the English language nearly beyond recognition.
2. ???
3. Receive Dell desktop computer with Linux preinstalled.

Re: Shuttleworth who (3, Insightful)

networkBoy (774728) | more than 7 years ago | (#18348267)

Yes and no.
We should not settle down about having a pre-installed Linux option, but we should settle down on what distro.
Specifically I want the following:
A mainstream distro with all devices that ship with the PC supported.
Whatever is easiest for Dell/HP/Acer/whatever within the above constraint is fine.
*Gnome Vs. KDE? I Don't Care (If I want "the other one" I'll change it)
*Emacs Vs. VI? IDK
*Ubuntu/FC6/Suss10.2/Slackware? IDK (though I think the slack may be a bit too geekish)
Give me any mainstream distro, with a desktop and window manager. Give me drivers for all the devices in the box. Make it "nice" to joe sixpack. I'll geek it out myself.

Now what wouldn't hurt is if the community came up with a "tweaked" distro (or even an entirely different build) if Dell would host a repository of .iso files with the good ol "we disclaim any liability from these distros, they are un-supported blah blah blah..." warning.
-nB

Re: Shuttleworth who (2, Interesting)

SatanicPuppy (611928) | more than 7 years ago | (#18348387)

Frankly, if they put out good driver support, I think the best move is to gear the pre-installed linux options toward non-savvy users. I'm not going to use a damn out-of-the-box install of fricking WINDOWS, more less an out-of-the-box install of Linux, and I'm less anal than a lot of people around here.

Let 'em gear the linux installs toward grandmas and newbies, because the rest of us are almost certainly going to be unsatisfied regardless of what they do. Expecting a hardware company to support a hundred different os configurations is absurd.

Re: Shuttleworth who (1)

VEGETA_GT (255721) | more than 7 years ago | (#18348565)

But thats just it, make it so Grand Ma and such can use Linux instead of Windows. If I get a Dell Linux box I am sure I will be changing the config FAST. but for a desktop machine, make it so anyone can grab it and just use it for e mail, text editing and such. that way more people would buy a Linux based system, save the cash, and with Dell backing it (assume 1 distro only) they can get help with the system. I see this more as a move for people to start getting Linux better prepared for General Desk Top use then anything else.

Re: Shuttleworth who (0, Redundant)

VEGETA_GT (255721) | more than 7 years ago | (#18348481)

I just want to know who marked this Redundant considering its getting level 2 comments which I have to admit bring up some great points.

Re: Shuttleworth who (1)

jcr (53032) | more than 7 years ago | (#18348491)

Um considering Dell is actually moving towards putting Linux on desk tops,

Dell is grasping at straws to try to make up for their sales dropoff. What I think you really want, is for Linux to be available from vendors who aren't just doing it as a publicity stunt, and whether that ever happens willl depend very much on whether Dell makes enough in new sales of linux systems to make it worth their trouble. If they can only do that by offering 500 flavors, then it's not worth it, and that's the point that Shuttleworth was making.

Really, Linux on the desktop isn't about satisfying today's Linux users. It's about making Linux good enough that you don't have to be an expert to choose it and use it.

-jcr

Dell Preinstalled Linux survey (1)

bensafrickingenius (828123) | more than 7 years ago | (#18348073)

On the other hand, Dell appears to *want* our feedback:
http://www.dell.com/content/topics/global.aspx/cor p/linux?s=corp [dell.com]

Re:Dell Preinstalled Linux survey (2, Insightful)

Yvan256 (722131) | more than 7 years ago | (#18348465)

They could, of course, use the answers to say something along the lines of "After seeing the survey results, the demands of the Linux community are too diverse. For reasons of technical support, we cannot offer Linux as an OS option on our computers."

Or something.

Wait, what? (2, Insightful)

voice_of_all_reason (926702) | more than 7 years ago | (#18348077)

He wants us to be satisfied with a piece of technology (likely the most complicated one you own) doesn't work out of the box? What is he, retarded?

Would you put up with that on other devices? Like an ipod that requires compiling, or a toaster that needs C statements to process bread?

Re:Wait, what? (5, Insightful)

stratjakt (596332) | more than 7 years ago | (#18348151)

Ya it's like shipping DVD players without movies to watch, or a video game console without a game to play, or a 200 CD jukebox - WITH NO MUSIC ON IT!?!

The computer works just fine out of the box. Pop in a bootable CD and watch it do it's thing, or have fun setting the date in the bios.

Re:Wait, what? (2, Funny)

voice_of_all_reason (926702) | more than 7 years ago | (#18348201)

Ah, touche...

Re:Wait, what? (0)

Tony Hoyle (11698) | more than 7 years ago | (#18348383)

It's actually quite hard to buy a console that doesn't ship with a couple of games, and beyond the cheapest bargain bucket stuff you normally get a DVD thrown in with a DVD player - retailers *know* you need this stuff so sell it as a bundle.

Re:Wait, what? (4, Informative)

eln (21727) | more than 7 years ago | (#18348547)

What planet are you living on? With the exception of the Wii, none of the next-gen consoles ship with a game, and I don't think any of the previous gen ones did either (by default).

As for DVD players, maybe if you buy them at a fancy electronics store that overcharges for them, they might throw in a DVD. But that's probably the store doing it, not the manufacturer. I've never purchased a DVD player (or VCR or TV for that matter) that came with a movie included.

Re:Wait, what? (1)

AndroidCat (229562) | more than 7 years ago | (#18348573)

Pop in a bootable CD and watch it do it's thing
Mark Shuttleworth can help you with that. (Except that it's a ram pig.)

Re:Wait, what? (2, Insightful)

apt142 (574425) | more than 7 years ago | (#18348579)

To me, you and the rest here on slashdot that makes perfect sense. To the average user, they'll be upset there were sold, in their minds, a $1000+ paperweight.

And, while it would be tempting to say "tough shit, they can learn to stick in a disk", you can't expect that of the average user.

The main thing slashdotters would be getting out of this is an exemption from the Micrsoft Tax. As far as OS's go, we're more than capable of formatting and installing what we like. So, the whole choice of pre-installed or comes with a disk only matters to the rest of the population. So, why not make it easier on them? We want them to get interested in it don't we?

Re:Wait, what? (5, Funny)

Vulva R. Thompson, P (1060828) | more than 7 years ago | (#18348399)

or a toaster that needs C statements to process bread?

Wouldn't be so bad, just use a bakefile.

Re:Wait, what? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#18348485)

I poured flour, water and yeast into my toaster, and I definitely didnt get bread as a result!

Re:Wait, what? (3, Funny)

sethstorm (512897) | more than 7 years ago | (#18348599)

Wrong compiler.

Re:Wait, what? (2, Funny)

smackt4rd (950154) | more than 7 years ago | (#18348681)

I thought that's the whole point of linux, something complicated and hard to use, so you can show everyone how smart you are. :)

How does that response answer anything? (5, Insightful)

jojoba_oil (1071932) | more than 7 years ago | (#18348079)

If nothing else, that "response" seems to be more of a paraphrase than anything else, with a few links that are on the original anyways. And obviously the comment quoted by CRN doesn't understand the problem from the shoes of the OEMs.

Pre-installed? o.O (0, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#18348093)

Part of the Linux "experience" is installing it. If people can't do that, then they don't need to be using Linux.

The people begging for pre-installed Linux are probably the same people who would, upon receiving a PC from a vendor with a pre-installed OS, immediately wipe that OS and install it from scratch anyway lest they be left with an OS that has tons of cruft.

Re:Pre-installed? o.O (1)

jimstapleton (999106) | more than 7 years ago | (#18348287)

In some ways I agree - definetly that those who want it preinstalled would reinsall it anyway.

For all I'll complain about, most Linux distros these day have one thing that they without argument do better than any other OS - install.

Their installers are some of the most effective, useful, and asthetically appealing installers around. Not to metion they are fairly fast. Installation may be part of the experience, but more importantly, it's one of the /easiest/ parts of the experience. I won't say they are much of an experience though, more of a non-experience, which is what a installation should be. They are a good example of how-it-should-be-done.

That being said, getting it working may not be. Great it installed, but if the hardware doesn't have good Linux drivers, you are SOL, unless you /like/ writing drivers. I think that's the issue here. I could care less what OS the machine comes preinstaled with. I just want to know that there's drivers available for the hardware in my OS of choice.

Which is one of the reasons I'd rather them supply OS drivers for Linux, or well documented blobs that can be accessed by the developers as they choose - I run FreeBSD, not Linux, and if they do everything to get ONE distro of Linux working, there's little chance it'll help me with my use, but if they provide OS drivers and say "chosoe your own distro", I'd be much happier, the BSD crew is good at porting Linux drivers over.

Re:Pre-installed? o.O (1)

solevita (967690) | more than 7 years ago | (#18348345)

Part of the Linux "experience" is installing it
This is posted from my linux laptop, a computer that I use pretty much all day every day. I'd just like to say that I much prefer the experience of browsing Slashdot than I did the experience of installing Firefox. No, it wasn't hard at all, but I still find your statement strange. I run linux largely because I can have as little installed software as possible, as opposed to having to run all the crap needed to support Windows.

It's easy to take a snobbish attitude and say "if you can't install it you shouldn't use it", but I know people that have bought Dells and use them only to run the default browser. Put linux in their computers and they'd never know any difference. If I was Dell I'd just rebrand Fedora or Ubuntu and market it as "Dell OS" or something similar. For most people this'd be great and for us /. readers that demand something different, we can install it ourselves.

Re:Pre-installed? o.O (2, Insightful)

dvice_null (981029) | more than 7 years ago | (#18348349)

The point of pre-installed Linux is that if there is a pre-installed Linux, then most likely the hardware is well supported in Linux also. This is why I would buy a computer with pre-installed Linux, rather than one without.

Also having pre-installed Linux would most likely increase the Linux user-base.

Re:Pre-installed? o.O (1)

locofungus (179280) | more than 7 years ago | (#18348551)

The point of pre-installed Linux is that if there is a pre-installed Linux, then most likely the hardware is well supported in Linux also.

Definitely - infact I'd settle for a no-OS laptop with a live CD that supports all the hardware.

That way I can install it exactly the way I want but if I can't get something to work I can boot it up with the live CD and find out how it can be made to work.

Tim.

I agree (2, Insightful)

stratjakt (596332) | more than 7 years ago | (#18348103)

I don't get the fuss about pre-installed linux. Isn't it enough that OEMs will ship a PC with no OS installed? There's just too many flavors and dickitry and infighting in the linux world, and I guarantee what Dell pre-installed on their boxes wouldn't be "the linux I want". Maybe it'll have KDE, and I want gnome, maybe it'll have gnome and I want fwvm, etc.

Pre-installing Windows makes sense from a volume licensing standpoint - the consumer gets windows cheaper than retail. And the first thing I (and many others) usually do is flatten and reinstall anyways, to get rid of all the preloaded settings and software I don't want.

But (most) distros are free, so whats the big deal? Install ubunto or gentoo or whatever by yourself.

Re:I do not (3, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#18348319)

The idea is that if a vendor ships boxes with Linus preinstalled that means that there are drivers for hardware in these boxes, that ACPI works OK with Linux and is not filled with MS-only quirks, etc, etc. Even if drivres initially are for specific distro they will find their way into the mainline pretty quickly.

It's the econ^H^H^H^Hhardware, stupid! (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#18348389)

No, it is not enough that OEMs ship no-OS systems. However, if those OEMs would ship these no-OS systems with guaranteed Linux-compatible hardware/drivers so that every piece of your computer will function just as well as it would have in Windows, THAT would be enough. So far that has not been the case.

Re:I agree (1)

Taevin (850923) | more than 7 years ago | (#18348407)

I don't get the fuss about pre-installed linux. Isn't it enough that OEMs will ship a PC with no OS installed? There's just too many flavors and dickitry and infighting in the linux world, and I guarantee what Dell pre-installed on their boxes wouldn't be "the linux I want". Maybe it'll have KDE, and I want gnome, maybe it'll have gnome and I want fwvm, etc.
This is true, but you forget that there are many people that would not be quite so picky. Many existing Linux users would likely be happy with an OEM OS install, especially if it was a popular distribution like Ubuntu or RedHat.

I think that the real issue is that if a major OEM like Dell started offering pre-installed Linux that Just Works(tm) right out of the box, it would be a huge boost for Linux as a desktop platform. If Dell could offer a computer with Linux for less than a computer with Windows (should be possible once you remove OS licensing costs, and costs for extra but common add-on software like Office), people would be more likely to go with the Linux box - especially if their wiz-kid son/friend/nephew/neighbor/random-dude-on-the-stre et said Linux was better than Windows. I think we can all agree that a well configured Linux install with Firefox and/or Thunderbird, Open Office, and a printer driver is probably more than sufficient for the average person who just wants to surf the web, check email, and print some photos.

Re:I agree (5, Interesting)

asphaltjesus (978804) | more than 7 years ago | (#18348467)

1. Business guys like Shuttleworth view success in terms of volume adoption and profitability.

2. The vast majority of users don't understand that the hardware is separate from the OS. They can't comprehend that another OS will actually run on their hardware. PHB's included.

Which leads us to the conclusion that resellers like Dell are a gateway to _very_ many end users.

Re:I agree (1)

SmokedS (973779) | more than 7 years ago | (#18348545)

Many that are not capable of installing either Windows or Ubuntu would chose the free alternative if they could do so easily and without fuss. That choice is not available today. That is the big deal.

Re:Hardware support (4, Insightful)

Bastian (66383) | more than 7 years ago | (#18348561)

The big deal is hardware support. If the laptop comes with Windows preinstalled, there's no way of knowing if Linux drivers exist for, say, the wireless card.

If they sell it with Linux, you can at least be sure that Linux drivers exist and that you'll be able to get everything working when you wipe the hard drive and install your favorite distro.

Personally, I think laptops with Linux preinstalled is barking up the wrong tree. I'd much prefer if Dell, HP, etc. were to just provide a list of which of their models and hardware configurations include only hardware that is known to work well with Linux. They can provide just as much of a guarantee to me that I'll be able to get Slackware or whatever working without having to take the effort to set up all the infrastructure for preinstalling Linux.

Re:I agree (1)

ErroneousBee (611028) | more than 7 years ago | (#18348581)

I think just as long as it ships with a decent distro, it doesnt matter. Just supporting one distro should maen that drivers are available for all of the hardware.

Just as long as the drivers are freely downloadable from somewhere, other distros can come along and check thier releases against your hardware.

Install ubunto or gentoo or whatever by yourself. (1)

oliverthered (187439) | more than 7 years ago | (#18348589)

and hope that the hardware works ok

Re:I agree (1)

db32 (862117) | more than 7 years ago | (#18348691)

I don't care what it has on it. Preinstalled linux means that the hardware works. It means that I know regardless of distro, the kernel will make all my crap work without wanting to kill myself. I won't be fighting stupid driver issues, nonstandard hardware, etc. If you can order it with Preinstalled linux, it means your hardware is going to work with relative ease in linux.

Huh? (3, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#18348105)

CRN finds a response to Shuttleworth that seems to be both amusing and telling at the same time.

You mean the quote at the end? Yeah, it's "telling" -- it's telling of how thoroughly garden-variety forum idiots can't even conceive of the possibility that there's something about Dell's business that Dell understands and they don't, and not vice-versa. You'd think that if nothing else, the editors here, as employees of a failed Linux box provider, would understand that.

That's not fair... (1)

physicsboy500 (645835) | more than 7 years ago | (#18348115)

But I want it now!!

No fair... you love Microsoft more than me!!! he gets to have all the fun!!1

Razor thin gets wider with Linux (1, Insightful)

garcia (6573) | more than 7 years ago | (#18348121)

First, margins on PC's are razor-thin.

That changes a bit when 50% of the PC cost is eliminated when a free OS is installed with free office software.

Re:Razor thin gets wider with Linux (2, Insightful)

Rycross (836649) | more than 7 years ago | (#18348315)

Well, assuming we're talking about Vista, the entry level is $200, which for a lot of PCs isn't 50%. But the fact of the matter is that Dell doesn't pay $200 for a copy of Vista. I'd be surprised if they payed over $50 for it. I think XP was something like $15, right? I know I payed $5 for it from my university.

But one also has to figure in the cost of supporting the transition to Linux. Software systems updated, maybe hardware swapper out, staff trained and informed at every level. I doubt its as expensive as some people want to make it seem, but its a non zero cost.

Re:Razor thin gets wider with Linux (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#18348335)

50% of the PC cost? That's a bit of an exaggeration.

Most OEM computers don't even come with Office, just Works which costs significantly less (~$40). Dell packages the cheapest computers with Vista Basic OEM (~$95 on Newegg). That's a grand total of $135, hardly 50% of the cost of most computers. Dell obviously can purchase these software for a lower cost than Newegg is selling it and they also preinstalls a ton of unwanted software which subsidizes the cost somewhat.

Re:Razor thin gets wider with Linux (1)

xenocide2 (231786) | more than 7 years ago | (#18348391)

I don't get how this got rated insightful. The margins on computers aren't thin only because of costs. They're thin because of competition. Gateway, HP, compaq et all, they're all competitors to Dell. And all of them are equally capable of making the cost saving switch as Dell. So even if Dell did reduce the price, competitors will easily step in and force Dell to reduce margins.

Re:Razor thin gets wider with Linux (2, Interesting)

xtracto (837672) | more than 7 years ago | (#18348633)

The problem with offering Linux ready machines is that buyers will cry loud if the cost of the system is the same as the one *with* windows included because they will reason on the lines of "WTF Linux is free blah blah".

I would be very happy to buy a complete desktop PC to Dell, HP or anyone else with whichever Linux distro they choose given that I can personalize the machine (in one or other way what you can do now) before buying it including things like webcam, scanner, printer and other devices that are KNOWN to work with Linux. It is similar to my rant in the MythTV vs Tivo article, I would gladly pay them to offer that. Gosh, they could *even* Include CrossOver office or Cedega as an option (similarly on how they include MsWorks, antivirus and other crap now). I would buy it.

What I want is a complete solution, for me and for my dad, mom, brother, etc. A solution which is *guaranteed* to work.

For that, as I stated in another post, Dell would have to create their own Distro, based on Fedora, Ubuntu or any other distro. Why? because that way they will have more "control" over the content. It does not have to be a very different fork, just Ubuntu with some personalized Dell shit and personalized drivers for the offered machines that JUST WORKS. Now THAT would make Apple shiver :)

Re:Razor thin gets wider with Linux (3, Insightful)

kjart (941720) | more than 7 years ago | (#18348493)

That changes a bit when 50% of the PC cost is eliminated when a free OS is installed with free office software.

Wait, so you're willing to pay more than $CostOfWindowsPC - $CostOfWindows? That does not appear to be the vibe on other threads here that I've read.

Re:Razor thin gets wider with Linux (2, Informative)

big_gibbon (530793) | more than 7 years ago | (#18348533)

From TFA:

Microsoft co-marketing funds are a substantial portion of the profit margins for many large PC retailers. Tweaking the nose of the giant might be fun but it's risky. If Microsoft reduces the per-PC marketing contribution it makes for a particular reseller, that puts them at a huge financial disadvantage relative to their competitors.

It's not the costs of the OS that are the issue, it's the fact that Microsoft may take their ball and go home. Once that happens, you could be stuck with narrower margins, even if you're saving on the OS.

Re:Razor thin gets wider with Linux (5, Insightful)

n6kuy (172098) | more than 7 years ago | (#18348627)

Not quite.

Actually, the "Windows Tax" gets offset by vendors paying the manufacturers to install all kinds of demo crap on the Windows computers they sell. Remove the Windows Tax, and you also remove the Windows Tax Credit... A PC with a free OS will prolly cost more than the one with Windows on it.

Begun the flame wars have. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#18348127)

n/t

I still don't get it (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#18348133)

Why would someone (I'm talking to you, guys) want an open operating system in a closed computer??? They rivet the cases shut on Dells!

Any other computer maker, sure, but for the life of me I can't figure out why an open source guy would want a Dell. Dell and Windows are a perfect fit.

From TFA:

you are not a "Linux" user, you are a user who wants version 6.06.1 of Ubuntu, or 10.2 of SuSE, or Fedora 6. You want a specific distro, and in many cases also a specific VERSION of that distro.

I don't get this, either. KDE or Gnome, sure, but when KDE is on my desktop I don't see a lot of difference between Suse or Mandriva, and one's German while the other one's French.

I hate feeling stupid, someone please enlighten me!

(A/C because I'm too embarrassed at my ignorance to log on)

Re:I still don't get it (1)

stratjakt (596332) | more than 7 years ago | (#18348293)

I don't get this, either. KDE or Gnome, sure, but when KDE is on my desktop I don't see a lot of difference between Suse or Mandriva, and one's German while the other one's French.

That's fine until you want to install something. Then you find out that there is no package for what you want for your distro, and your off compiling by hand, or trying to hack something else, etc.

Maybe you want PPTP server, but your distro only has client support. Or for commercial products on linux (I'm thinking Sybase right now), you need certain versions of certain libraries, and you can only get support for certain versions of certain distros. A Dell box running Mandriva may be useless to people looking to run Sybase ASE and turf MS SQL Server.

As for why people care whether OEM's ship linux or not, I have no idea. I think most of them are just assholes.

Re:I still don't get it (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#18348297)

Since when have they rivited the cases shut? I have yet to see one, you just must not be smart enough to figure out how to open the case.

Re:I still don't get it (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#18348695)

Any other computer maker, sure, but for the life of me I can't figure out why an open source guy would want a Dell. Dell and Windows are a perfect fit.


(Disclaimer, I do work with a number of dells at work, so I'm slightly influenced by choice but only because I support them and like the dell support I do get... BUT, I do NOT work for Dell in any way/shape/form, etc..)

Obviously the Post was tongue-in-cheek, but the above statement is rather true... I will TELL someone who wants an easy computer: "Use Dell, Dude.." Prices are not too out of line, etc...

But for myself, or someone who can really "USE" A Power system, I build my own. And I have a few that I've put Linux on. (HTPC + Knoppmyth for friends, etc..) I don't see a REAL Linux person wanting an OEM Install on a consumer PC. (THAT IS WHAT IT IS... CONSUMER PC... You figure it out...)

In My eyes, it's tooo little, TOOOO LATE... If this was 1990 and we had a choice between Win3.1 and OS/2 and the Choice was kept in play for consumers until 2007, then yeah it would work for a few power users... But I (We) have been shunned for so long and predicted to be an unimportant market, that they created a self-fulfilling prophecy.

The only exception to this would be in the business world... Here, Dell and other mass market computer manufacturers have an advantage of speed of delivery and warrenty of product. If my company depends on computers, I don't want 1000 computers from "JOE SCHMOE" to slowly trickle into the company... Time is Money.. $$$ I WANT 1000 Computers 3 weeks from now delivered to this office... Put this image on there - Period. Done.

I Don't know about the Licensing and Windows, etc... Dell USED to make us buy our windows through them, with the PC... But they would put our image on the PC (extra charge, of course) even though each PC came with a seperate license key for XYZ-Pro MS Product. Why not the same image with Linxu, and just leave out the Windows? Not hard, right...
(I don't know if this is still an option, we quit that, and now do image casting via zenworks when the PC's come in, so we no longer pay that xtra charge for Dell imaging..)

Just some thoughts...

OEM means... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#18348141)

oh forget it

hmm (1)

mastershake_phd (1050150) | more than 7 years ago | (#18348145)

First, margins on PC's are razor-thin.

This has two significant consequences. Most importantly, it means that Microsoft co-marketing funds are a substantial portion of the profit margins for many large PC retailers.

 
So a PC with free software costs more than one with $100+ software? What are "co-marketing funds"? Kickbacks?

Re:hmm (1)

spun (1352) | more than 7 years ago | (#18348317)

What are "co-marketing funds"? Kickbacks?

Kind of like kickbacks. Basically, company A and B do business together. Company B wants to advertise. Company A says, "mention that your product uses our product, and do it in a specific way that we like, and, because you are advertising for us, we will help cover the cost of the advertising." For example, the "Windows-ready" and "Intel inside" campaigns are both covered under co-marketing agreements.

Co-marketing, marketing together, get it?

Re:hmm (1)

Rycross (836649) | more than 7 years ago | (#18348375)

Well, besides that a lot of companies like Dell will now pre-load a lot of "trial" software with their Windows installation. They get money from the software vendors for doing that, so yes a Linux based computer may be more expensive.

anti-Spyware/Adware/Trials (3, Insightful)

everphilski (877346) | more than 7 years ago | (#18348385)

Ever seen a (dell/HP/Compaq/etc) straight out of the box? There are like 50 programs installed ... each vendor pays the computer manufacturer to put these things on their PC's. So the cost of windows gets paid for, mostly or even in excess, by these vendors.

Problem with Linux being, the computer manufacturer doesn't get any of these kickbacks or a % of the purchase price from a trial installation... less profit, gotta charge more for the box.

Re:hmm (1)

RingDev (879105) | more than 7 years ago | (#18348431)

[quote]So a PC with free software costs more than one with $100+ software? What are "co-marketing funds"? Kickbacks?[/quote]

Yes. I'm not sure on how the situation is now, but I had heard that for a while MS was negotiating highly exclusive contracts. Basically, the PC distributor paid for a license to install Windows on EVERY machine they produce. Any machine that DIDN'T have Windows on it would be charged a fee under the theory that any PC with out an OS installed would likely get an illegal copy of Windows installed. So if you spread the licensing cost of Windows out over every PC the distributor built, it may be $100 for each PC, but any PC they built W/O Windows would be charged a $300 fee to recoup the 'inevitable' loss to pirated Windows.

-Rick

Re:hmm (1)

mastershake_phd (1050150) | more than 7 years ago | (#18348661)

Any machine that DIDN'T have Windows on it would be charged a fee under the theory that any PC with out an OS installed would likely get an illegal copy of Windows installed.

Sounds a lot like a "pirate tax" on blank cds and dvds.

For Linux, read Vista (0, Troll)

Rogerborg (306625) | more than 7 years ago | (#18348147)

The worst-case scenario is a customer who buys a computer at the lowest price off your website, assuming it's a Windows machine, and then calls, infuriated, because it "won't work with the game they are trying to install".

And that's different from the problem with selling Vista boxen because...?

Re:For Linux, read Vista (1)

DingerX (847589) | more than 7 years ago | (#18348445)

Because with Windows, most of the time, that game will work. With all that pre-installed crap, it'll probably work badly, but it should run. Or, if it doesn't run, the Support people can drag the sucker out and frustrate 'em to the point where the user blames something else.

With a Linux install, that's a very quick (and angry) phone call.

Yes, the assumption that "any PC" is a "windows PC" is a big problem, and at the same time, it is a bit of a red herring: the assumption has no historical basis (15 years ago, a PC was not necessarily a windows box), and if you go in, determined that people believe that way, you're never going to change beliefs (and market share).

But, heck, what exactly lies behind this Linux drive? Most Linux users would have no problem assembling their PCs from scratch (and for less money) -- all the parts are top-notch, and those with any technical knowledge tend to view "support" as hassle you go through to get an RMA. I'm sure folks at Dell are asking themselves: "The Linux $***storm, does it represent real customers, or is it an ideologial crusade by a vocal minority, who wouldn't buy our stuff anyway?"

Well?

Okay, here's what I'd like to see: the option to buy a system that works with some decent version Linux, with everything I needed to run it, in the box. I don't need front-page real-estate, and I don't need bickering over particular installs.

Would I buy it? Probably not. If I'm gonna set up a PC to run Linux permanently, I'll follow the time-honored way of doing it: take some old PC parts I have lying around the house, put them together, curse and swear over the non-existent or crappy drivers, and have some frankenstein computer around the house.

I think the problem.... (3, Insightful)

Churla (936633) | more than 7 years ago | (#18348153)

I think the problem becomes evident looking at the Dell survey...

6) Which Linux distribution should Dell prioritize on?
        Commercial: Novell/SuSE Linux Desktop
        Commercial: Red Hat Enterprise Desktop
        Community Supported: Fedora
        Community Supported: OpenSUSE
        Community Supported: Ubuntu
        Other
        If 'Other', please specify

People complain about several different versions of Windows Vista but you just named 5 completely different builds of a Linux OS, and there are several more I know some niche market people would like to see on that list too (like Kubuntu). Since if you roll out a SuSE based Linux machine several of the others would just say "Meh, I'll order it however and flatten it once I get it" you have a much smaller target audience who would actually buy it.

And until a company can determine that there's a big enough audience who would buy a specific distro of linux on a computer they won't make efforts to support them.

Re:I think the problem.... (3, Insightful)

sconeu (64226) | more than 7 years ago | (#18348437)

The key thing is that if it's shipped with any of these, especially a community supported distro, then wiping and reinstalling is cool, because you know the hardware has drivers available.

If you just buy a generic Windows version of said box, the hardware may not be supported.

Re:I think the problem.... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#18348553)

because you know the hardware has drivers available.

I agree with this idea. I think Dell would do better if instead of trying to sell computers with insert_distro_of_the_day, they should start by taking a few hours, look at their hardware, and identify configurations that are supported on a particular kernel version.

Re:I think the problem.... (1)

MMC Monster (602931) | more than 7 years ago | (#18348549)

Exactly. Let Dell sell a box with a wiped out HD and a copy of SuSE or whatever. Maybe with a coupon for 6 months free support from Novell for the version of SuSE that's in the box.

If they want the software installed, charge them extra and have the machine redirected to Novell to complete the installation.

Dell can do what they want... (0, Redundant)

Bert the Turtle (1073828) | more than 7 years ago | (#18348167)

...but until they guarantee their hardware will work with a certain version of the linux kernel, they aren't going to get any business from me.

It's about the money (3, Insightful)

DeHackEd (159723) | more than 7 years ago | (#18348185)

For me, it's about the money. If I buy a laptop with Fedora Core 6 pre-installed (for the sake of argument), that money spent on the software would go to people who actually develop code for the system I bought, even if I nuke the hard drive and install $OTHER_DISTRO later. If I buy the same laptop with Windows on it, the money going to somebody with whom I have no interest in whatsoever.

So, put some kind of non-Windows OS on it. If the software costs money, make sure it goes to the people who make the OS. Don't let Microsoft have it. Personally I'm okay with Red Hat getting a small amount of money for the system that will be turned into Gentoo. Microsoft, not so much.

This is one of the big reasons we want Linux pre-installed -- evasion of the microsoft tax.

I don't get it. (4, Insightful)

xerxesVII (707232) | more than 7 years ago | (#18348187)

I followed the link expecting to read a response. All that I found was a copy and paste of a few snippets and some snark at the end about just slapping an install disc in and calling it good. I am as proud a Linux user as anyone around here, but I fail to see how that kind of "response" qualifies as productive or even linkworthy. I've seen more detailed discussion around here. I agree with Shuttleworth- if we want the big boys to start shipping with linux, we need to meet them half way and explain what we truly expect. This is a very large corporation we're dealing with, not a couple of friends building computers in the garage.

Re:I don't get it. (1)

OneSmartFellow (716217) | more than 7 years ago | (#18348353)

This is a very large corporation we're dealing with, not a couple of friends building computers in the garage.

Ah, but it was just that not very long ago !

Shuttleworth has some good points. (5, Insightful)

jlowe (907739) | more than 7 years ago | (#18348207)

Obviously, Mark Shuttleworth has become a major voice in mainstream Linux. He raises some good points.

He mentions the problem vendors face with the idea of Microsoft cutting some co-marketing funds. I really do not see much risk to Dell from this. After all, they already sell some OS-less (freedos) desktops and laptops (albeit fairly hidden). That to me seems like something for Microsoft to complain about more than selling preinstalled Linux machines. It should be understood that the cost of a pre-installed Linux machine will be more than a Windows machine. The additional software Dell installs on Windows helps them make money.

Shuttleworth also brings up the valid and true point that Linux users are very fussy and picky. Linux users also are very specific with what they want. The problem being that Linux users will want specific hardware and a specific distribution. With Dell already talking about certifying several lines of machines for Linux, I see this problem disappearing completely. If the Inspiron notebook line is certified to work with Linux, then it should be trivial to have Dell install Linux instead of Windows Vista. Dell should decide on a specific distro to support, and preinstall that on the Linux computers. Then, if someone is a more "expert" Linux user, he or she can install whatever distro and version he or she wants. The main issue is that the Linux buyer is not buying Vista.

Re:Shuttleworth has some good points. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#18348419)

After all, they already sell some OS-less (freedos) desktops and laptops (albeit fairly hidden).

What's hidden about them? Go to the upper left hand corner of their web site and select "Open Source Desktops" or "Open Source Notebooks" under the "Products" tab.

Careful what you wish for... (1)

Bullfish (858648) | more than 7 years ago | (#18348235)

I've only bought one pre-built system in my life and have watched others with pre-builts. So many of these are packed with so much software that isn't needed by a most users that it degrades system performance and casues all kinds of conflicts. Frankly, I would rather the companies didn't bother. When I have often fixed pre-builts for friends, it has often involved junking a good chunk of the stuff that came with it. You get a far more stable and efficient machine when you build your own and only put on the software you want. If you don't have the skills to do it yourself, befriend a geek. You will be happier in the end.

Judging by the way these companies bog down windows machines, I would hate them to do this with linux. It might give linux a bad name if inefficient systems bogged down with too much crap hit the mainstream.

Mark's End Game is Dangerous (1)

asphaltjesus (978804) | more than 7 years ago | (#18348249)

The guy is sinking big-money into a linux-based distro and that's not bad.

But, with comments like this he is intentionally creating a winner/loser environment in the Linux distro ecosystem. Raising the visibility of desktop linux at the expense of others.

Instead of a rich and varied distro ecosystem taking each others best ideas, there will be a couple of distros and the rest will be hobby-class systems. Microsoft is helping this along by picking a winner. (Novell) Dell appears to at least be mulling the idea over. I can't see them offering more than one distro.

This gives Microsoft the tools they need to contain another competitor. More importantly, what happens to the pace of innovation when there's one maybe two distros driving adoption?

I like a million distros. I don't like Mark's end game.

Linux drivers are the real key (2, Insightful)

IckySplat (218140) | more than 7 years ago | (#18348309)

It doesn't really matter WHICH distro goes on the machine.
But once they start delivering Linux on Dell machines the
ugly issue of available drivers hopefully goes away...

If Dell were to certify that model xyz comes with Linux pre-installed
then I would know that most if not all of the hardware in was supported!

Yes, I will flatten the machine and install the Distro of MY choice.
But at least I'll know that the hardware in the box will go.

Note to Dell etc...
-------------------
PLEASE supply tar archives of your drivers and source!
I'm sick to death of picking apart your bloody RPMs to get what I need :(

Driver support (1)

Kjella (173770) | more than 7 years ago | (#18348311)

In general, I assume no distro kernel has less support than the vanilla kernel, backports might be a different issue. So just chalk up the list like:

Working functionality - vanilla kernel version
Motherboard (POST) - 2.6.17
ACPI Base - 2.6.14
ACPI Sleep S1-S4 - 2.6.19
SATA - 2.6.12
RAID - 2.6.18
Network - 2.6.18
Sound - 2.6.19

Seriously, isn't that the kernels job? If all are supported and the distro version is higher than the listed version, you're all good. Maybe they can throw in some extra info on driver quality (traffic light), alternatives like binary blob, ndiswrapper, distro backports or whatever but that's secondary. Of course, they can always put up their "Works with distro $foo, version $bar" but that is really fluff.

Linux on Dell doesn't help Linux at all..... (0)

budword (680846) | more than 7 years ago | (#18348343)

Dell sold my ex's Mother a P4 with 128MB of ram and Windows XP installed. It ran far slower than my old pentium 100Hz with 32MB of ram running Windows 95. You know for a fact Dell will pull the same shit with Linux, but many of those people will have no idea they forked over good cash for a crippled system, so Dell could save 40 bucks. They will blame it on Linux, which does us no favors. Just ask them to stick to selling crippled WINDOWS systems. Please.

They should just offer naked. (1)

gfxguy (98788) | more than 7 years ago | (#18348351)

They don't have to even sell systems with Linux, I think the biggest complaint Linux users have is they are forced to buy windows when they buy a pre-built system (yes, I know, there are a tiny group of vendors out there that may sell Linux boxes).

One of Shuttleworth's complaints is that we even argue about which distribution we want.... again, sell the PC naked and include several DVDs of different distributions.

He complains we're fussy, but that's not entirely accurate - we do want things to be a certain way, it's true; but the difference between us and windows users is most of us are more than willing to do it ourselves.

I can put the CD in my own cupholder (1)

roystgnr (4015) | more than 7 years ago | (#18348361)

Although I understand "i'm getting so sick and tired of hearing excuses and rationalizations.", I don't understand the amusing proposed solution of "just put the cd in the cupholder, install it and sell it. period. there's no need to analyze or certify."

Installation of any popular Linux distribution isn't hard, and hasn't been hard for many years. There are two reasons for wanting Dell to preinstall Linux, and for both of them, there is a need for Dell to go beyond hitting "Next" on a bunch of installation screens or cloning a partition image.

1. Tested hardware. I may not want to use Red Hat Enterprise Linux, but our last batch of new Dell servers had it preinstalled, which was nice to see. Linux hardware support is pretty solid lately, but it's reassuring to have a vendor stand behind Linux support for what they sell, even if I'm planning to switch to a different distribution than they chose.

2. Support for non-Linux-users. This is the big one. Seriously: if you already know that installing Linux isn't much harder than finding the "cupholder", you don't need Dell to install Linux for you, you just need them to give you a discount for the OEM Windows license you don't want to buy. Preinstallation isn't for the computer you're looking to buy, it's for the computer Mom & Dad are looking to buy. If Dell is going to sell Linux to new users, Dell is going to need to test what they sell, both so they can preconfigure things to reduce the amount of support calls they'll receive and so they can train phone operators to handle the support calls they get anyway. They'll have a hard enough time answering questions like "Why doesn't this Super Geneaology Plus CD install?" no matter what they do; they'd better at least try to nip "Why don't my Dell printer drivers install?" questions in the bud.

To be honest... (1)

Mizled (1000175) | more than 7 years ago | (#18348373)

Do We all really want Dell compiling our kernels for our *nix system? I'd rather do the install myself or just give me a computer with a formatted HD that I can install whatever distro I want on it and compile it the way I want.

The only people who will truely benefit from a pre-installed *nix system will be your average user (I.E. Grandma or Joe Guy) who (as someone already pointed out) doesn't care how it was compiled as long as they can send e-mails and photos of their 50th Wedding Anniversary to all of their friends.

Linux on the desktop can do everything most users want (e-mail, photos, web browsing, instant message, etc.) if not more. Everyone knows this already.

IMO the only ones being picky about which distro and version would rather install and compile it themselves anyway.

Dell just needs to pick a distro that's user friendly (Ubuntu, SuSE, Fedora) and support that on their major models of Hardware. If it comes with Ubuntu Edgy Eft and you want Feisty Fawn then I'm sure you already now how to upgrade that or recompile the kernel as needed.

It's all about the hardware (4, Insightful)

FreeForm Response (218015) | more than 7 years ago | (#18348397)

What I want from Dell is a commitment to selling a machine with hardware that is supported by the community. No Winmodems, no ndiswrapper, but actual, tested, "we put this in a box together and it works like we think it does" hardware.

Past that, I couldn't possibly care less what distribution of Linux they throw on it. If it's a distribution I like and am willing to use, then more power to me. If not, "lsmod" and I'm off and installing the distribution of my choice. Either way, I'm golden.

I own a Dell Inspiron 4100, and I remember what a holy terror getting Linux to run on that machine was (with full hardware support). If I could buy a laptop from Dell with a piece of paper that says, "The network adapter uses the 'eepro100' driver," etc., then I would be a happy customer.

He's right. (1)

Bluesman (104513) | more than 7 years ago | (#18348411)

Reading over the Dell forums and comments it seems like a bunch of spoiled, whining children over there. It's really not the best way to encourage someone to do you a favor.

The worst part are that the most vocal are the "I don't want to pay the Microsoft tax" portion. If these folks had their way, what Dell would provide is an entirely separate line of Linux PC's that may or may not run Windows.

That's not what I'd want, for a couple of reasons:

1) I use Windows and Linux, and I'd like to have a computer that will run both Linux and Windows.

2) There are not enough people interested in Linux-only machines for this to succeed financially, which would set the whole Linux on the desktop movement back another few years when we'll go through this again.

What Dell originally offered was to provide some sort of guarantee that hardware would work with Linux. This would be a huge step in the right direction, especially for laptops, but I'm afraid even that might not happen as everyone scrambles to be the most shrill proponent of their own favorite distro on the Dell message boards.

It's amateurish, it shows the "Linux community" is extremely fractured, and it shows Dell that catering to a bunch of whiners would probably be a financial disaster.

We can do better than this, I think.

Mark's perspective is upside down... (1)

cameronk (187272) | more than 7 years ago | (#18348423)

Part of what makes Macs so reliable is that Apple offers the OS on a limited configuration of computers-having perhaps 100 machines that need to work with the current OSX versus millions of possible configurations for Vista. I do not see why someone running a Linux distribution, like Ubuntu, does not just publish a very detailed specification of what will work best with their OS and then allow a vendor like Dell to sell PCs which precisely map to this configuration. That way Ubuntu, or whatever, gets better distribution, Dell avoids the Microsoft tax, consumers benefit from a more accessible Linux and system administrators have a more manageable network.

Re:Mark's perspective is upside down... (1)

Yvan256 (722131) | more than 7 years ago | (#18348601)

I do not see why someone running a Linux distribution, like Ubuntu, does not just publish a very detailed specification of what will work best with their OS
The websites of the distros should have some sort of "What peripherals do you own", so you can select from menus (printers, mouses, graphics cards, video capture device, scanners, etc) and the distro tells you which peripherals work or not.

I agree with him on this... (1)

bogaboga (793279) | more than 7 years ago | (#18348441)

...(W)e free software fans are a fussy crowd, and very hard to please...

Indeed. We are so hard to please, but at the same time, getting OEMs to pre-load Linux would not hurt at all.

Why install anything? (1)

Dancindan84 (1056246) | more than 7 years ago | (#18348455)

All I want (especially in the case of a laptop where this tends to be more difficult) is something from them saying "This hardware will work with kernel 2.6.20.3" and have it come with nothing on it. That way I can decide what distro to use, what desktop to use etc without having to deal with stripping everything off it in the first place. With the skill level of the average Linux user, I'd be willing to bet support isn't an issue. They'll probably get the least amount of false positive (PEBKAC) support calls from this group.

What I want (5, Insightful)

TopSpin (753) | more than 7 years ago | (#18348475)

Not really interested in OEM installation of any specific distro. They'll do it wrong or pollute it as they do Windows. What good is that?

What I want is machines designed with components that are supported by mature Linux drivers. For almost any given component there are implementations that have good Linux driver support and others that don't. Select only components with good driver support, explicitly advertise this policy with adequate technical information, charge a modest premium for it if you must and give me the same hardware warranty as your other products. Seems fairly simple to me.

That's all I want. You can stop fussing about distros now. That and support lines for Linux; I won't be calling unless your hardware fails.

"Open Source certified" (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#18348487)

If dell wants to offer RH corporateware desktops, fine. But what I care about is that every component in their machine has open-source driver support. If they would sell bare machines, but certify that every major component is "linux ready" with open-source in-linus'-kernel-tree drivers available, then I'm happy. I'd probably even consider buying from dell - less hassle than building my own these days.
 

No OS (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#18348535)

I don't even care if you put an OS on the system at least sell the system with a NO OS option, how hard can that be!??

fnord alley with this one (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#18348557)

More Linux the better, I am not fussy about what other people run, and a true geek would not buy a preconfigured piece of shite...

It's the hardware, stupid! (2, Interesting)

Ignatius (6850) | more than 7 years ago | (#18348689)

Linux customers could care less about the pre-installed distrib, but the do care about 100% Linux compatability of the hardware, which is pretty much the same over all distribs (modulo non-free drivers). After all, even for large roll-outs, "installing" a customized system on identical hardware simply means gunzipping a prepared disk image (which can also include the partition table).

Therefore the best way to go about it would probably be to merely install a minimum system with a small footprint (1 GB max) but all hardware drivers installed and configuered in order to demonstrate Linux compatibility and to allow to check the hardware. The distrib should not matter in this case. Then, the customer can install his favorite Linux distrib and opt to keep the minimum installation as a rescue system.

In the case of Dell, this means: Replace the existing FreeDos installation (which you get when you order a Dell w/o OS - at least here in Europe) with a small Linux system, and everyone is happy.

flaw (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#18348701)

Our reasons most obtained the fact that it is the user of Linux of the fussiness beginning which is: As for us we wanted us with anytime, therefore we made the open source, whether the angle where therefore we do to that it is their raw materials it can improve the seller of commerce OS you did not like. The general user does not worry concerning OS which they are moving by any means thing mainly; Vanilla Windows or OS X is good sufficiently for becoming firm. When "the people and fussiness them" of Venn ED "Linux user" it can control a little just the repetition it is.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...