Mandrake to Come Preloaded on Wal-Mart PCs

surfimp writes "Here's a story from NewsForge: 'MandrakeSoft CEO Jacques Le Marois confirms the news this morning, and company spokeswoman Margaret Waters says, while a contract with Microtel has not been finalized, the company is working on getting Mandrake certified to run like clockwork on the Microtel systems. Waters is hopeful that the dotted line will be signed and PCs up for sale by the end of next week.'" Update: 06/20 17:21 GMT by T : Ooops! The Mandrake spokeswoman's name is Margaret Waples, not Waters. Apologies, and thanks to Todd Lyons of Mandrakesoft for the correction.

Comments

Not at Walmart, at walmart.com

[ShawnDoc]

For those that are too lazy to read the story, the computers pre-loaded with Mandrake are going to be available at walmart.com, not at Wal-Mart retail stores. There's a difference.

Re:Not at Walmart, at walmart.com

[Knoxvill3]

Good Call. I was too honestly making a shopping list for walmart (Deoderant, Sams Choice, over Stuffed Bean bag, Microtel machine running Linux..).

But I can see where they are just pushing on their website as opposed to in stores. For one, think of how many stores they have throughout the country (US), just putting 10 of these units alone is quite a chunk of change, and if no one bites at the offer, there now stuck with all that inventory on these machines.

But from a website, you keep it at one area, you don't have to stock up on the machines, you can pass the order directly to the manufacture and have them ship it to the customer (In this case Microtel.), this way you keep a lower surplus, and the customer still get's their product.

Re:Not at Walmart, at walmart.com

[1010011010]

They could still let people order the PC through the local WalMart store, and the fulfill from the central warehouse. It would be nice to see a display saying "Buy a WalMart PC!" in the stores. They need to make a deal with an ISP now -- "includes internet service for 6 months."

Actually, they should pressure AOL to write a Linux version of their client, and then sell "WalMart AOL-PCs!"

I think their average customer might be interested in it. After all, they sold those MSN Companions for $200+ each ... and they just run Wince.

Re:Not at Walmart, at walmart.com

[sharkey]

the computers pre-loaded with Mandrake are going to be available at walmart.com, not at Wal-Mart retail stores. There's a difference.

Right. To get the PCs preloaded with Mandrake, you simply drive to Wal-Mart, purchase a Lindows PC, take it home and sign up with an ISP. Then, connect to the Internet, visit walmart.com and order yourself a Mandrake PC. Finally, return the Lindows PC to the store and wait for your new Mandrake PC.

wow

[TheMMaster]

I am no american so I might be talking out of my ass here, but it seems that wallmart really is trying to bring choice to ther customers, I just wonder if they'll support all OS's they ship now (mandrake, windows and lindows), if they do, and are succesfull, maybe more companies will follow...
I can't help but feel that this is "a good thing (TM)"
I'll bet dell is really wondering what they did wrong back then ;)

Re:wow

[astrashe]

I think that WalMart is trying to push prices lower, and that choice is a byproduct of that. They are as feared and hated in their circles as Microsoft is in the tech world.

Small computer shops in California are selling decent PCs without OSs or monitors for under $300. The cost of the OS is becoming a more significant chunk of the total price, and if you want to push the prices way down, you've got to confront it.

For all we know, this is brinksmanship, and Wal Mart is just trying to push MS into giving them special deals on OS pricing. They've done that to other suppliers.

Re:wow

[SuperCal]

I don't really think that WalMart cares if its customers are getting a choice. I think what they are trying to do is to figure out wether or not they can make higher profits by avioding the MS tax(I know, I know, that term is getting old). If people will buy a PC w/o Windows and Walmart can keep some of the difference then you can bet they will stick with it. If not they won't keep linux around just to give a choice to customers.

Re:wow

[SirSlud]

Walmart is notorious for demanding that magazine covers and CD covers be changed if they are going to carry it. Seeing as Walmart represents 15% of all US music sales, and an even higher percent of the magazine retail market (I think, might be wrong on that), publishers constantly have to succumb to Walmarts desire to retain its 'family image'. In that sense, Walmart censors .. they couldn't give a rats ass about choice. They are down to make money, and by opting to force magazines to self-censor, I don't really think choice has much to do with this story.

I think money. The margins. No MS Tax. Yadda yadda. Ironically, due to their size that causes the negative behaviour referenced above (nevermind they represent the new generation of ultra-shitty employers), they might just be more than a little 'blip' on MS's radar. It's like Godzilla and Mothra; they're both evil, but if one takes down the other a few deserved notches, I won't complain!

Re:wow

[Brian_Ellenberger]

>Walmart is notorious for demanding that magazine >covers and CD covers be changed if they are >going to carry it. They are down to make money, >and by opting to force magazines to self-censor, >I don't really think choice has much to do with >this story.

That's not censorship, that's is choice. Don't like it, go to Target or KMart. I personally love the Wal-Mart policy and shop there because if it. But that's my choice.

I mean, there is alot of crap out there in this country. Which is fine, it is a free country. But just because you create crap doesn't mean people or corporations have to buy it! That's the other part of a free country.

Don't you think it is pretty arrogant of you to basically say, "I don't care what Wal-Mart or its loyal customers say, you must carry these soft-porn magazines and raunchy CDs"?

Re:wow

[SirSlud]

Two things:

1. Walmart gets magainze covers changed before they are printed. That means, *every store* carries the 'walmart approved' copy. Thats not choice. Thats Walmart unfairly influencing what musicians (Nirvana is one such band that changed the cover of their CD before releasing it, *soley* due to Walmart issuing a complaint with their label.) and magazines wish to print. You really shouldn't talk like you do, in a country which claims free speech (both the right to be free of censorship, and the right to be free of undue pressures to self-censor.) is one of its founding principals. But you dont sound like somebody whos interested in these types of issues. No worries, people like me will care about the world you live in such that you dont wake up and find free speech an outdated concept in a not-so-distant future.

2. These are not soft-porn magazines. This is Time. Rolling Stone. Seventeen. All mainstream magazines. Many magainzes specifically call up Walmart and seek approval for their covers pre-printed, because if Walmart refuses to carry the published run of the magazine, you cannot justify to stockholders, as a magazine publisher, giving up 15% of your sales right off the bat.

You dont sound like you have a clue as to the scope of leverage and power that Walmart brandishes in the marketplace. Sit down and really think about what it means, to have virtually every magazine in your country seek approval from Walmart before running the presses. Walmart is censoring your culture.

Re:wow

[SirSlud]

> Walmart isn't the one "not buying" the offensive covers, it's the shoppers, the family-values crowd.

Kind of hard to prove that if they dont actually carry them, now, isn't it? For that matter, that *nobody* ends up carrying them?

I don't really care about reasons or excuses; only that magazines willingly admit to changing their covers (content-alterting self-censorship is more common in the news biz, true) is due to one retailer, in what some people insisnt on holding up as an example of a functioning free market. Please! If people wont buy it, they wont buy it. Walmart seems to think that you are incapable of even *viewing* a potentially controversial cover and making a decision whether or not to buy it - they make that choice for you! Since you dont know what the pre-Walmart-Approved covers are, you're in no position to evaluate whether they are censoring material you deem censor-worthy. Alas, as usual, since they are successful and wealthy, people are all too happy to assume (envy?) that they must be the poster child of how to run a retail conglomerate and that all is good in the world.

Oh, and way to keep the lid on your sons' hormones! Heaven forbid they should learn that tool of the devil, masturbation, nevermind potentially read about musicians! *guffaw*

Re:wow

[nathanm]

1. Walmart gets magainze covers changed before they are printed. That means, *every store* carries the 'walmart approved' copy. Thats not choice. Thats Walmart unfairly influencing what musicians (Nirvana is one such band that changed the cover of their CD before releasing it, *soley* due to Walmart issuing a complaint with their label.) and magazines wish to print.

There's nothing unfair about WalMart's policy. Nobody has a right to sell their products in any particular store. If they want to sell in WalMart, they'll just have to comply with their policies.

You really shouldn't talk like you do, in a country which claims free speech (both the right to be free of censorship, and the right to be free of undue pressures to self-censor.) is one of its founding principals.

The right of free speech is protection from the government. The first amendment starts out Congress shall make no law... Gee, I can't find WalMart anywhere in the US Constitution.

2. These are not soft-porn magazines. This is Time. Rolling Stone. Seventeen. All mainstream magazines.

Mainstream magazines and the advertisements therein show a lot more skin than they used to. Many people, myself included, see this as a problem. Just because something is popular doesn't make it right, or preferable. Personally, I could care less what's in these magazines, I just won't buy them.

Many magainzes specifically call up Walmart and seek approval for their covers pre-printed, because if Walmart refuses to carry the published run of the magazine, you cannot justify to stockholders, as a magazine publisher, giving up 15% of your sales right off the bat.

Then that's a choice they've made. No censorship involved.

Re:wow

[johnnyb]

What they really mean to say is that they worship at the cult of baby and don't give a rats ass what the single/childfree people with disposable income want.

*********

I.e. - a significant portion of their customers.

As a parent, I don't want my child seeing racy stuff just walking in a store. I'd like to be able to _shop_ without having to explain why such material is indecent. Therefore, I go to Wal-Mart. It seems that a lot of people have the same idea (notice the number of children walking with their parents in walmart). These people constitute a _market_, and a large one at that. The beauty of capitalism is that the market decides. If you aren't a part of the mass market, don't go to mass-market places. It's that simple.

Is there nowhere else to find porn? I mean really, if blockbuster doesn't rent porn, find someone who does! It's not the end of the world. It's not like Ma and Pa Video requires a different kind of VCR to play their tapes.

It's not like buying at Target all-of-a-sudden makes your stuff incompatible with the rest of the world. It's not like Wal-Mart lies and cheats it's way to the top. They are what they say they are. The market likes them.

Re:wow

[nathanm]

The problem is that Wal-Mart is such a major distribution power. What if telecoms "made a choice" that they are no longer going allow you to transmit information of which they don't approve. I suppose that isn't censorship either. They are both private companies, and both control means of distribution.

If all the telecoms conspired to block certain information, it would be collusion, which is illegal. This is what the big 5 recording companies got slapped by the FTC for price-fixing CDs (not that the prices have changed any). Also, they do not control the means of distribution, only one mean. There are plenty of other retailers that carry products WalMart doesn't.

Once a company reaches a certain level of size and control of its given market they SHOULD lose much of their choices, because it is censorship, and it is dangerous. It is someone saying, "This you may not hear, this you may not see, this you are forbidden to know." It does not matter whether the entity is public or private. The decision whether or not to view something should rest ultimately with the consumer, and if some delicate little sensibilities are upset along the way, too bad.

So WalMart should be forced to carry everything under the sun, no matter how dangerous or objectionable? You want unlimited individual freedom, but want to force large corporations' behavior. You can't have it both ways. Freedom of choice must be protected for all. Besides, we may have the right to freedom of speech, but we don't have a right to be heard.

Grow up. People bleed, People die. Babies aren't brought by the stork, and they don't come from under cabbage leaves. Real live is rated at least NC-17, and if you don't like it, live in a bubble, but there's no reason the rest of us should sacrifice to make it easy for you.

<SARCASM>Really? Then how are babies made?</SARCASM> Like I said in my previous post: I could care less, I just won't buy the stuff. I'm not asking anyone to make any sacrifices, just let corporations have the same freedom of choice you expect yourself. And my life is rated PG (besides the bathroom & bedroom).

I can't understand their reasoning

[scott1853]

Why carry Windows, Lindows & Mandrake? Isn't this just overkill?

Worst yet, it's going to really confuse the people that can't afford to get confused when buying a computer because all they can afford is the cheap models. This is a disservice to their loyal customers because they'll have just bought a computer from WalMart but won't understand why they can't walk down the software isle and pick up a game for the kids. So is Wal-mart going to carry shrink wrapped Linux apps too, or are they going to blindly claim that every Windows application can run on it like they did last week?

Re:I can't understand their reasoning

[PunchMonkey]

Good point. Let's drop that Windows thing.

Re:I can't understand their reasoning

[thelexx]

"Why carry Windows, Lindows & Mandrake? Isn't this just overkill?"

As sold at least, this seems very logical to me:

Machine A - 100% Windows
Machine B - Linux w/option to run some Win stuff (they've lost points on marketing this though I know)
Machine C - 100% Linux

"Worst yet, it's going to really confuse the people that can't afford to get confused when buying a computer because all they can afford is the cheap models."

Well yes, options brings complexity. I've long felt that the entire consumer-level computer industry has played it very close to false advertising at a root level though. It's a rant for another time, but cripes, you can control a robot, your stereo, enjoy the internet, play chess, etc a computer. It's a COMPLEX device because it gives you so freaking many fundamental options. Yes, cute and limited software can be used quite easily by the unlearned, but that's not what started the revolution or the interesting part of its unfolding. Anyway...

"This is a disservice to their loyal customers because they'll have just bought a computer from WalMart but won't understand why they can't walk down the software isle and pick up a game for the kids. So is Wal-mart going to carry shrink wrapped Linux apps too, or are they going to blindly claim that every Windows application can run on it like they did last week?"

Indeed, but how many more companies will, between things like the IBM commercials and Linux being sold pre-installed on a highly visible chains shelves, see Linux as a viable market and target it? Maybe our time has finally come.

LEXX

Passing the Savings

[Dark Paladin]

Before people think Wal-Mart is being all altruistic, think of it this way.

Wal-Mart wants to advertise they're underselling the compitition. Easiest way to do this? Sell computers without an operating system. Of course, if you do this, you sell a computer that is a) useless to Joe User (who probably doesn't know how to install an OS without help), and b) Microsoft cries piracy (I don't have the link, but one of their white papers basically says that only software pirates buy computers without operating systems.)

Now, go to Dell. Computer comes with Windows, and Microsoft Works (or Office, or whatever). You can't tell them *not* to put it on, and odds are, they have some legal ass bullshit agreement with MS that all computers must have the OS and some office suite on them (aka, the "Windows Tax").

So Wal-Mart figures they can save $100-$200 on each computer sale by putting on Mandrake and probably Open Office. Joe User gets a computer he can do email/web browsing/document editing on. Yes, it might not run all the same software as Windows - but if he wants that, he goes back to Wal-Mart and shells out another $100 (or he learns to live with it and gets a Playstation 2 instead).

Guys like me who just want cheap ass hardware without the Windows Tax get hardware. Everybody wins. Well, except for MS, but the way they've been acting with their draconian "Use software subscription or no patches for you!" additude they've been shelling at the Corporate Level, I don't feel too sorry for them.

Re:Passing the Savings

[DunbarTheInept]

This is untrue. Microsoft has complained about certain manufactuers, and in many cases BIG manufactuerers, who knowingly sell "naked" (non-OS'd) machines to people for the express purpose of them pirating Windows.

Speaking of "untrue", selling a naked PC to someone so they can install the OS software they *already have* on it is not piracy, no matter what FUD from the industry you are swallow. If I want to upgrade to a newer, better machine and ditch the old old, but I'm not changing OSes, it is not piracy to re-use my existing copy of the OS. It only becomes piracy if the new and the old computer are in use at the same time, and both have the OS installed from one common copy.

I have way more copies of Windows (legally) than I do machines to put them on.

If ordering from an OEM and putting Windows on, I would prefer to put on my own store-bought copy of windows than use a broken "for OEM only" version that doesn't even come with the re-install disks and instead has some useless "system restore" disk that fails if I've upgraded any software or hardware. However, I don't want to have to pay MS for the OS twice to do this, which is what happens when I had no choice but to get the pre-installed OS with the computer.

Re:this frightens me.(But don't let that stop you)

[Marx_Mrvelous]

Have you ever used Mandrake? The default install is very secure, if I rmember right FTP, telnet, etc are all disabled by default. Anyways, is it any worse than yet another MS computer out there to be infected by nasty e-mail viruses?

I guess beign scared by change is one thing, but I'm glad Walmart and Mandrake are attempting to bring some choice.

Dude!

[Hard_Code]

You're getting a Microtel!

Consumer Confusion?

[Capt_Troy]

I'm a little worried to where this is heading. If these PCs are intended for low budget novice consumers...

A> They might be confused about Lindows (while not infringing on MSs Trademark, it is definitely misleading). How many novice users are going to buy a PC that they think will run all the screensavers and games that a Windows PC will?

B> Giving novice users a choice between Mandrake and Lindows seems strange to me. How will most novice users be able to choose the most appropriate? I think we might just confuse them out of buying a computer, or they will probably choose the Lindows box just because the name sounds familiar.

C> As far as I know Walmart sells Windows PC software (maybe Mac??). Won't user's assume that since they buy their computer from Walmart, that the software they buy from Walmart will work on their computer? Is Walmart planning on selling Linux software somehow as well?

I like the Mandrake thing, but I am a little worried that the inclusion of Lindows will be confusing to the non-technical user who is most likely to buy these boxen. The name of the distro implies that it is analogous to Windows. As far as I have read, it is not. This will only serve to make the general public hate linux because they can't run "regular" software on it.

Troy

Much better than Lindows

[colmore]

This is good to hear. Lindows is a beta product, and acts like it, Mandrake is as competitive as entry level desktop Linux gets these days.

I hope someone will write a *really* good users manual, one that involves the words "terminal" "compile" and "man" as little as possible.

Wal-Mart Shopping List

[rirugrat]

Hmmm...let's see...

Powerbait Rubber Worms (check)
Sam's Pork Rinds (check)
Nascar Queen-size bed sheets (check)
George Foreman Lean Mean Grilling Machine (check)
Unix box (check)

Chris

Re:Wal-Mart Shopping List

[MAXOMENOS]

Now that you mention it, it is kinda cool that a "cheap" UNIX box has seen a ten fold drop in price, a ten fold increase in processor speed, a thousand fold increase in storage, a twenty fold increase in memory, and a huge leap in user friendliness, since I went looking for one back in 1991.

Plus I can get one at Wal-Mart. Wow.

I wonder what would happen....

[Fizzlewhiff]

If Walmart struck a deal with AOL to develop a Lindows friendly version of AOL (or a Linux version) and preinstall it on their machines. The cheapest Walmart.com PC is $299. With those prepaid subscription rebates Walmart and AOL could give these machines away.

Re:Wait

[eaddict]

And PriceWaterhouseCoopers isn't evil on Mondays!

Re:Did Bill Gates piss Sam Walton off?

[The Ape With No Name]

Sam Walton is long dead. But if anyone could piss off the dead, it'd be Microsoft.

I only have a few questions you should ponder

[FortKnox]

When the customer buys the PC and goes to the computer software section and picks up MS Word for their kids, cause they need to type up papers (or games to play, etc...), and it doesn't install on their new shiny boxes, what are they going to think?

When they want to get online, and put in the AOL CD they got in the mail, and nothing happens, what are their impression of Linux?

Software is what makes windows big. Its how they stomped Mac. Is your average Wal-Mart shopper going to be able to know to pick up linux software, and will they be able to install it by themselves?

I'm not going anti-linux, pro-ms, I'm just getting you people to think before patting yourselves on the back.

Re:this frightens me.

[capt.Hij]

The article says:
Walmart.com has a few well-placed electronics buyers who are savvy to Linux, and a management team looking for ways to reinvigorate stagnant computer sales numbers. The combination has resulted in innovations like the Windows-free Microtel line and has generated strong sales and low return numbers...

Contrary to what was posted in the last slashdot story about this, Walmart is not selling these machines to unsuspecting rubes who are still trying to figure out how the door to their mobile home works. It sounds like Walmart knows their customers which is exactly why they are able to reach a large portion of the American public. A large number of the good folk here at slashdot seems to equate this with ignorant masses but that is not the case.

I live in a small town and have seen what Walmart can do to a community. I don't like Walmart but I certainly am not going to underestimate it. This appears to be a very shrewd move by a company which is the master of its domain.

MANDRAKE IS THE BEST BECAUSE FRENCH ARE THE BEST !

[Anonymous Coward]

Hi !

Thank you, stupid American.

You consider Mandrake like the Best distro of the world, and you are right !

As I said before, French is the smartest people of the World, and as Mandrake is French, Mandrake is the Best !

SuSE, distro of German, poor Quality, totalitarism, Nazism --> Burn it !
Redhat, Lindows, Windows : American , so like Americans are stupid, these products are not good !

thank you American, and please repeat after me :

NOUS SOMMES LES MEILLEURS, NOUS SOMMES LES CHAMPIONS, ON VA BOTTER LE CUL DES AMERICAINS !

WOW!!!

[tadd]

This rules!!! When did Wal-Mart become so cool. Now that they've put so many Mom&Pops out of business I guess they've got bigger fish to fry... like Micro$oft!!!!

do we now have to say

[Anonymous Coward]

GNU/Wal-Mart?

A possible /. interview?

[sielwolf]

Ok we have seen a pretty consistent stream of articles about how Walmart/walmart.com have taken a decided interest in pushing non-MS OS machines (be they Linux based or clean).

But the 10k question is: who is behind this? I mean, this isn't like some normal free or open software guru we've known for ten years. Somebody at Walmart must be putting their John Hanncock on this.

Personally I'd like to get to know a little more about them (to congratulate them at least). Even more so I'd like a little more insight in to what got them started on this and how it all went down.

Short take of this Post: I wanna /. Interview! I'm sure it would go over huge.

To me this seems to be one of the first mainstream (outside of the IT industry and for endusers) acceptances of things most geeks hold dear. Who wants to miss this part of history?

Re:A possible /. interview?

[nolife]

I view this differently. The department store operation and computer selling in general is cut throat. Walmart needed a way to stand above the crowd and sell PC's for less then the competition. Walmart and Microtel got together and started offering cheap PC's with no OS at all. To 99.99% of computer users that planned to stay legal, the PC was useless, remember the first versions had a Winmodem so in theory, Linux was out also. Microtel switched modems and shortly there after started shipping with Lindows. Both Walmart and Microtel come out looking better because Walmart is getting more for there money and Microtel added very little cost to their bottom line. Now the same is happening with Mandrake. Mircotel ships a more stable full operation system with the PC's (no disto jokes, just making a point here). Again both companies gain. Walmart could probably care less what the hell the machine runs, as long as they are not paying any more for it, after all, they initally were happy selling it with nothing on it. I think Microtel's and more so Walmart's involvement in choosing Linux is next to null.

Re:the way walmart is

[miracle69]

I've actually suggested this exact thing on the Mandrake Forum.

Mandrake could increase market share by offering other resellers a "branded" OS, while making money on the support of the machines and the O.S.

Take Mandrake 8.2 and brand it to say, WalMart.

During Boot-up, Walmart gets screen space. They get a link on the desktop to Walmart.com. And Mandrake gets 30 bucks or so to do tech support for the OS.

If the big retailers pick up on this, Linux will be poised for a several percentage point growth. Combine this with an AOL client for Linux, and this could easily propel Linux into the mainstream desktop.

Moral quandary...

[binarytoaster]

Wal-Mart... but... Linux PCs... but... Wal-Mart... but... Linux PCs....

AAAARRRRRRRRRGHHHHHHHHH

No, This Is A Bad Thing

[hotsauce]

In a world where it is a struggle to get the average user to use Mac OS because they are so used to Windows and confused by the smallest differences in user experience, I think pitching Linux to the average user is a Bad Thing. The average user will try it and hate it for eternity.

Remember the Newton? It became a killer PDA, but it could never live down the first rev's handwriting recognition reputation.

Until Linux has a polished user experience (user interface and hardware/software compatibility) this should not be attempted. I know someone who got an iBook, got a scanner without checking compatibility, and then found there wasn't an OS X driver really hated it.

Re:The only way this will succeed...

[JabberWokky]

There's no solution for WMP, of course. For everything that you mentioned in your comment, WMP is the only valid point. Lack of WMP support just may be a problem on these computers. But it won't be a big one.

Look into mplayer. It plays just about everything: WMV files, DVDs, DivXs, and of course, all your MPGs, AVIs, VIVO files, etc. Excellent support for acceleration, video capture and other hardware features. It is very stable, and does full screen beautifully. There are several GUI interfaces for it now - probably it's major weakeness, as since there is no "standard one", there's not a single really strong one with semi standard interfaces. Work is being done on interfacing it to aRts, so any KDE player interface can control it, though.

--
Evan

Hardware Specs for $299 Unit

[Milican]

I e-mailed Microtel Computer Systems and asked them what their hardware specs were for their SYSMAR701 PC With 850 MHz Duron. I got a response back on 6/17/2002. Anyway, the motherboard for the $299 PC is the MSI MS-6378X-L (MS-6378 V.3) [msicomputer.com]. A quick rundown of major specs is shown below:

• 200/266MHz FSB, Supports AMD Duron/Athlon/Athlon XP up to 2000+
  
• Ultra DMA 66/100, 2 PC100/133 DIMM Sockets up to 1GB
  
• Integrated Trident Blade3D AGP Graphics Engine shared memory up to 8MB
  
• Micro-ATX Form Factor, 3 PCI, 1 CNR, AC 97, 2 USB, AGP 2x
  
• ADMTek AN983B 10/100 BaseT Ethernet
  

Also, I should note the motherboard used changes based on model. Not bad for a $299 PC with Linux!

JOhn

P.S. Big thanks to Rich at Microtel for the quick repsonse :)

Re:Hardware Specs for $299 Unit

[MsGeek]

Anyway, the motherboard for the $299 PC is the MSI MS-6378X-L (MS-6378 V.3)

That's no slug of a motherboard. I was expecting PC Chips crap, like EliteGroup or Amptron, but MicroStar International is not a company that makes crappy motherboards.

I've had one exemplary experience in dealing with MSI. I was putting together a machine with an ancient 486 motherboard. It was a weird bugger too...it had PCI SLOTS and none of the VESA Local Bus slots you expect on a 486. Anyway, I needed the jumper diagrams and the support area of the web site had nothing.

What did those nice folks at MSI do for me? They scanned the whole Fine Manual for me to a series of .JPGs, then they emailed the .JPGs to me. I had my jumper settings, they had a happy customer.

These machines are BARGAINS, folks. And to have them preloaded with a DECENT Linux distro is a Very Good Thing (tm) indeed. Yeah, Wally-Mart is an evil place. But so are most of the other big discount store chains. And often, what Wally-Mart does, more palatable establishments like Target will follow.

Ha ha, Bill Gates! Just watch as the floodgates open, and there's a cascade of bargain PCs with Linux pre-installed rushing out over the country!! Did I hear a "Glub, glub" somewhere near Redmond, WA?

PS: who makes their hard drives?

Re:Walmart and censorship

[SirSlud]

> And how do you intend to enforce a "right to be free of undue pressures to self-censor"?

Thats pretty easy. Make sure nobody can get super big. I think that the concept of economy of scale has costs that are both social and cultural. Yes, many people will laugh at me for worrying about social and cultural consequences of fostering pure economic goals. I dont care anymore, because it seems to me that the advertised ultimate goal of free-market capialism is to help people attain wealth in order to foster cultural and social health, safety, etc in addition to spurring technological development. (Although, with technology, whats the point of keeping people alive and physically safe if the social and cultural things one requires in order to enjoy life are sacrificed to attain it? I'm not anti-technology, but I think people lose sight of what the purpose of it is .. )

It just seems silly to me to encourage attaining massive amounts of wealth and economic leverage if it has negative consequences on the advertised goal of the system in the first place. And just because you or I dont want to see those covers doesn't mean that it doesnt make a lick of difference to me that my neighbour, who would like them, cant. My potentially laughable form of altruism is simply a way of paying my interests and values forward .. I dont want this to go furthur to the point where I feel my ability to enjoy and access to my culture is being opressed.

Comment removed

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion

Re:without MS all PCs should cost a lot less

[zerocool^]

The suggested retail price for Ms XP is $200.

That is a stiff item at the low end.

OEMs like Hpaq, IBM, DELL and Gateway should begin to offer PCs sans OS as an alternative.

You're missing 2 things:

1.) Windows does not cost us the same per licence as it does HP or Dell. They get it at a discount.

2.) In accordance with their agreement with Microsoft, they get a discount IF and ONLY IF they put Windows on EVERY MACHINE THEY SELL. Hence why if you buy a comptuer from dell, you get windows. Now, if you buy a server from dell, you can get no OS or RedHat or one of several options, but that's a seperate agreement.

So, In order for the big guys to sell computers sans OS, they lose all discounts on other copies of windows they get, something that would cost them more in the long run.

Regards,
Will

Yes it can

[Sloppy]

I wouldn't be too sure about unlicensed DVD players being illegal. Kaplan's decision was in regard to one particular program: DeCSS, which didn't play movies. This warped Kaplan's decisoin about what it was "primarily designed" (important words within the context of DMCA) to do. He incorrectly concluded that it was primarily designed to circumvent copyright (this making him particularly hostile to it), but was technically right that it was primarily designed to bypass the technological measure. And being primarily designed to bypass the technological measure, was what made DeCSS so vulnerable to DMCA.

A program that actually plays DVDs (even if it contains an unlicensed DeCSS implementation), though, would be another matter. You can't look at the .01% (pulling number out of ass, but you get the idea) of the code in a player that descrambles CSS, and make a good argument that bypassing the technological measure, is its primary purpose.

An unlicensed DVD player would be far less likely to be judged as "illegal." And face it, it would never go to court anyway. 2600 was picked on because MPAA knew 2600 would have trouble defending itself. Nobody thinks that about Walmart.

Walmart has money on their side, and probably the law too. That makes it legal. Go for it, Walmart.