Slashdot Mirror
Dell To Offer Windows-Less PCs
An anonymous reader submits: "As a follow-up to the Slashdot story Dell No Longer Selling Systems w/o Microsoft OS, News.com is reporting that Dell will sell systems without Windows. Microsoft's new licensing terms stipulate they can't sell PC's without an OS (hence the removal of the NoOS option), so Dell will be offering FreeDOS as an option for some computers. It will come with the computer, but not installed, so that users may install any other OS that they wish. It's a very creative interpretation of Microsoft's licensing terms, and one I imagine Microsoft didn't have in mind."
Who else could n't see this comming? Having said that I was expecting it to be some kind of Linux distro.
I'm heartened to see them doing the right thing-- continuing to be willing to sell customers completely legal things that they want to buy even if that is what another very powerful company doesn't want.
On the other hand, it's utterly ridiculous that Dell would even have to perform this end-run around Microsoft's licensing terms in the first place.
Anybody want to place bets on how long it will be before Microsoft changes their licencing terms again to prevent Dell from what they're doing now? (Or perhaps M$ will just tell Dell that they've decided not to licence Windows to them at all; they've used those sorts of threats in the past.)
(Who appointed Microsoft as the regulatory agency for the computer industry anyway?)
-Rob
This interpretation of their license agreement can only lead to more money for the lawyers!
1. The systems will cost just as much as if you'd ordered them with Windows in the first place.
2. They're aimed primarily at large companies and won't, for the most part, be available to consumers via Dell's web site. (their workstations will, but not the generic line of optiplexes.
Given point 1, I fail to see how this is a Big Deal, other than the obvious snub at Microsoft.
--kurt
Gentoo Linux http://gentoo.org/
I have get a few new NEC PCs that are having FreeDOS installed, too.
That just happened a month ago.
Considering that most vendors won't sell you a PC without a Windows license, I was beginning to wonder just what the hell the point of the Microsoft Select licenses was. I mean, wasn't it supposed to be that by buying them in volume, we'd get a discount? Wasn't this discount kind of, erm, compromised by the second license MS wants you to buy with new hardware?
This should have been a provision of any settlement the govt. accespted in the first place, but at least someone is doing it on their own. If Dell makes this stick, hopefully others will follow.
-brennan
Why not FreeDOS? It doesn't matter. It's just a token.
How much space does FreeDOS take? Perhaps only one CD, or less?
It's pretty clear that Dell does not expect anybody (or much of anybody) to actuall install the included FreeDOS. The FreeDOS is just a maneuver to get around a loophole in Microsoft's licencing agreement. Now they can say, hey, we included an OS, we're abiding by their terms. What they're really doing is selling an OS-less PC, plus an extra CD that adds very little to their costs and might even be useful to a tiny fraction of their customers.
(Heck, I'd rather get a FreeDOS PC than the useless Windows driver disks I get with every piece of hardware I buy. Even when I've installed the drivers on my wife's Windows box so that she can use the printers over the network, I discover they're broken and I have to get updated drivers from the web anyway.)
-Rob
Here's a line of crap from the article:
The new policy exists to prevent piracy and to better track OS shipments.
My ass. It exists to sell MORE MICROSOFT PRODUCTS. I'm not even normally a MSFT basher, but even someone completely asleep at the switch should see something wrong with that line.
No, and that's the point. They don't have to support it. Linux is big, complicated, sometimes quite painfull to use. Dell most likely does not have the expertise in their call center to handle the influx of support calls a linux installation would cause, so I think this is a very smart move.
They could, however, partner with a company like Mandrake or Red Hat in the future. Maybe they will, maybe they won't. Problem is, even with the party line "call Red Hat for help", they'll still be getting a large volume of Linux calls that they probably don't want right now. Maybe when the economy gets a little better.
What they're really doing is selling an OS-less PC, plus an extra CD that adds very little to their costs and might even be useful to a tiny fraction of their customers.
..as opposed to a couple of CDs (Linux) which would be very useful to a lot of users?
The reason they dont cost less is you are STILL PAYING for windows - and Dell still pays microsoft for that computer!
I kid you not! This is just Dell trying to get back into our good graces. It is all a PR stunt - "Look we don't like M$ either!!!!" as they hand MS money under the table.
Don't take this as a win for all of us alternative OS people. M$ is still getting their cash in spite of being found a monopoly.
Derek
Sure many of us here probably build our own machines, but if you do plan on buying one of these, do it on the phone. Ask the salesperson if they can ship it with Linux (or your favorite OSOS).
If they say no, then tell them you want to place a customer request that they offer that because that is what you are going to install anyway and then order it.
If they get enough requests for it, then maybe they will warm back up to the OSS desktop market.
Of course, this may have no effect but it doesn't hurt to try.
They do offer a dist. I think it is Red Hat. Dell had three options to fill different needs. The first is Windows, which is the most expensive option for people who want all the hard stuff done for them. Second is RedHat which is less costly, but required some work to learn. To make it easier they had linux tech support though RedHat. Finally Dell offered a No OS computer do customers who wants to the least expensive option at the expense of being required to do all the work in both installing and supporting the Free OS of their choice.
It was this final option that MS's new policy removed. Dell now simply uses FreeDOS as a loophole to replace the third option.
Business News and Resources: www.usasource.net
This "new" PC system, is again only available to big buyers, you won't be able to order single Optiplexes sans Windows from their website.
Basically this is an old news rehashed as new news marketing droid PR stunt.
If you want a PC without Windows on it, your best bet is still Walmart.
It has become appallingly obvious that our technology has exceeded our humanity. --Albert Einstein
Isn't this kind of B.S. that the anti-trust case is about? What kind of software vendor tells a PC maker they can't sell a PC without speciific software included?
This is the kind of thing that makes me hope that M$ gets spanked clear into the middle of next year by Judge Kollar-Kotelly.
The most charitable thing I can say about Micro$oft is that they could be so much more than the festering abscess they've become if it weren't for their blind imperialism and obsession with maintaining a hegemony.
Vortran out
Knowledge is like ignorance.. too much can be just as bad as not enough.
No, and that's the point. They don't have to support it.
;-)
Connectix do something similar with VirtualPC for Mac. They sell various ludicrously expensive editions with different Microsoft operating systems and then they sell an el-cheapo, electronic download, version bundled with PC-DOS.
No-one wants PC-DOS, but if you just want the plain app to install your own OS on it, that's the cheapest option. It allows them to stick to Microsoft's anti-competitive policies, but still give people the choice to do what they want.
The installer even has an "Install Application Only" option so you don't even have to delete PC-DOS afterwards
Microsoft can do pretty much whatever they want and most people and company's just don't really care all that much, however this last move was a bit too far and most definately an example of anti-competitiveness rather than the anti-piracy measure they would have you beleve it to be. However not being able to buy a PC without an OS is not a concern for the mass majority of people. Now, we're all /.'s and we definately care a great deal about this, mostly just because we're all nerds and geeks who like to install an OS for the fun of it, but another perfectly valid reason for our caring (and in my opinion more important) is the fact that it seems Microsoft is trying to be a bully agian and we are all just really, really tired of that position from MS, as a matter of a fact if they started to act decent I might actually have a few good things to say about them.
So if Dell is sell the systems for the same price as if Windows was included that means Dell is pocketing a nice hunk of change; What about MS? This has gotta hurt MS' sales since in the past companies buying the PCs would have a site license for x number of machines, plus all the systems coming in would already have an OS license included.
Microsoft is taking a hit on this one, right were it hurts the most, in their pocketbook.
III.IIVIVIXIIVIVIIIVVIIIIXVIIIXIIIIIIIIVIIIIVVIII
If the world's most successful Intel PC maker has to do stuff like this, how can Microsoft argue it is not a monopolist?
The pattern, from Microsoft to the RIAA, seems more and more protectionist. Which is all very well, but protectionism stifles innovation and new business models. It's a tragedy that at a time when things are changing so fast, when a grasp of what is happening in the rest of the world is increasingly important, that instead of having a government that can hold monopolists and protectionists in check and encourage innovation, we sem to have a US government that is run by them and thinks that foreigners are funny people who don't matter unless they might be able to stop oil from flowing.
Dell has always been a company that challenged the conventions, and its low-cost manufacturing has been an example of how to respond to globalisation. It's ridiculous that they are being hampered by the sort of 19th century practices that Marx banged on about.
Panurge has posted for the last time. Thanks for the positive moderations.
If you aren't going to install an OS, and instead simply put it in the box, why not choose one that results in the user throwing away one floppy disk instead of throwing away all the media required for a bigger one? Most likely the user buying an OS-free computer isn't going to be using the pre-installed OS in the first place, so this makes the most business sense.
Besides, do they really want to get firebomed by Debian zealots when they bundle RedHat? Or have all the RedHat cusy-life sorts sitting there scratching their head looking for graphical configuration tools in a bundled Slackware? It's easier to go with a non-issue. Like the unbelievable generic people in sample pictures included with picture frames: the least number of people will be offended.
There should be a moratorium on the use of the apostrophe.
Max V.
NeXTMail/MIME Mail welcome
Does this mean that MSFT still gets their piece of silver (aka license) for a FreeDOS machine?
I would then proceed to install Linux the first day I got the computer, without ever booting up Windows, and ask for a refund for the software. Others have done it. If they are going to charge me the same amount, then why not prove a point? Worst case, you don't get your refund, which you wouldn't have gotten anyway, but maybe you can get the point across. Best case, you get your point across and maybe get a few bucks for your trouble.
Not the easiest solution, but it kind of sounds like fun.
My beliefs do not require that you agree with them.
But who gets the money that is saved by not shipping Windows? Is any money saved at all? Previous incarnations of this sort of deal had the manufacturer pay Microsoft for a Windows license anyway.
I think it's a big deal whether you are sponsoring DELL for taking on Microsoft, or are actually making some sort of implicit mandatory donation to Microsoft, just to be spared from the horrors of running Windows.
It's not just the saved step and saved labor. It's also the reduced complexity in licensing. If a big corp buys a site license, they don't want extra copies under other licenses running around loose...
The Mongrel Dogs Who Teach
>>I'd be just as happy to know that Microsoft wasn't getting paid a tax out of my money for purchasing a computer.
In fact, with this deal you are paying a non-Windows tax. They are charging you the same money as if they were installing Windows and pocketing it. Plus they don't have any obligation to support Windows on this system, further lowering their costs, and the system with Windows was profitable in the first place. These systems are a practical joke by Dell and you're the target for thinking that you're some how better off.
Actually, I think the word you're looking for is "bought"
If this flies, ya gotta love it.
Turnabout may not always be fair play, but sometimes it does justice.
Couldn't happen to a nicer bunch of folks.
It was just this kind of "creative" contract interpretation that let Microsoft screw Spyglass pretty much out of existence.
PS: I hear that Spyglass picked up a little justice of its own in the form of a lawsuit settlement. Seems Microsoft told the Court some things in the antitrust trial that affected the way the Spyglass contract should be read. Guess they figured no one was paying attention.
Nah, it's completely legal... These numbers are made up, but they should illistrate the point.
Microsoft: Tell ya what, Dell. If you promise to only sell computers with our OS, we'll only charge you 30 dollars for a copy.
Dell: That sounds good. What if we want to seel OS-less or Linux computers.
Microsoft: Well, then the OEM Price for Windows goes up to 60 dollars each.
Dell: Ow. I guess I'll just sell computers with an OS installed (Quick, lawyers! make sure the agreement doesn't specify Windows!)
Whoever stated that signature sizes should be limited to one hundred and twenty characters can just go ahead and kiss my
Which, in my mind, is total bitchcake. And part of the reason I use a Mac.
Not to split hairs with you here, but I'd be really surprised if Apple's EULA allows you to move your copy of the MacOS from machine to machine. There are lots of reasons to use a Mac, but I'm not sure that Apple's operating system policies (try buying a Mac without the MacOS) are one of them.
I'm not talking about Joe IT worker who uses it to make a living (I've done that in the past, and while it's uncomfortable and icky, it's a necessary evil.) I'm talking about the guy who comes home and uses Windows and posts to /. about how awful it is and how hardcore he is for hating it and making it crash. Big deal. If you believe in something, don't be wishy-washy. (I don't mean to sound like RMS, because I'm coming from an entirely different place. I just think that if you do have ideals, it doesn't reflect well on you if you don't walk the walk.)
There should be a moratorium on the use of the apostrophe.
Max V.
NeXTMail/MIME Mail welcome
It's more than a PR stunt. Dell is using FreeDOS as a small doorstop so the door will remain ajar, allowing Linux or whatever other OS they choose to squeeze through in the future.
Dell does not think anyone will use FreeDOS. They just want to sent the prescedent that they have the ability to ship some other OS with their machines so that they can change this OS when production facilities, support people, developers, drivers, etc are ready.
If they shipped only windows and then 1 year from now tried to slip Linux in, MSFT would slay them on the spot. Instead, if they ship FreeDOS now, which MSFT knows is know thread, they can SWITCH to linux instead, continuing to do something which they had be doing for many months -- shipping an alternate OS with their PCs.
Who appointed Microsoft as the regulatory agency for the computer industry anyway?)
Microsoft did, of course. And believe me, it for your own good.
Those who would give up liberty in exchange for security and DRM should switch to Microsoft Palladium!
I think the reason why Dell is offering machines without Windows installed is the fact Dell has announced an alliance with Red Hat Software to provide Red Hat Linux on both corporate PC's and servers on Tuesday.
That way, Dell offers a low-cost alternative to Windows to satisfy increasingly penny-pinching large-volume customers, and Dell chose the Linux distribution that is #1 in the business environment, Red Hat (which has pretty much become the de facto standard for Linux distributions).
Ha! Of all the systems they could have shipped, especially to include Linux and the *BSDs they picked FreeDOS. That's just funny. Okay, the dumb little Dell kid just got a slight bit more tolerable in my mind.
It would be more practical to use FreeDOS.
Since Mac OS X does not exist per se for PCs, Dell would have to go to the next best thing: Darwin, the open source core OS from Mac OS X, which does run on x86 and is free.
It would do a hell of a lot more than FreeDOS.
Vos teneo officium eram periculosus ut vos recipero is.
MS is in the middle of an antitrust trial the core of which is the accusation that MS strongarms OEMs with exclusive deals. Now wouldn't it be convinient for MS to demo the fact that an OEM could indeed *not have to* ship with MS OSs even with the existing licences with MS. Enter Dell and FreeDOS. Who is actually using FreeDOS (well i am but i don't think that's the norm.)? From a shippers perspective Linux/xBSD would have been a better choice because of the market share. If Dell truly wanted to provide alternative OSs for the benefit of consumers wouldn't they pick from the list of OSs that are higher up in market-share-ranked list? ie. since they ship the top ranked OS -- windows -- woulnd't they pick the second next? But then MS wouldn't like that too much now would it? Solution: ship FreeDOS with the machines -- that way people are at least still in the DOS mindset. Then MS goes back to court saying -- "Look, Look, the OEMs can and are shipping machines with other OSs. We didn't strongarm them into exclusivity!! The OEMs *can* choose other OSs and that's not restricted by our *existing* license. The only reason they haven't taken advantage of that is because they didn't want to. Not because we threatened them in any way!"
So me thinks this idea hatched somewhere in the northwest US. NOT at Dell. Do you really think that if Dell wanted to piss off MS by shipping an alternative OS they would ship FreeDOS as opposed to something with more demand -- linux? Unless of course MS wanted Dell to *ship* (or at least look like they offer) another OS. That OS would have to be close to MSs own. But very very outdated version of MSs own.
First, it's lose, not loose. I hate to be a spelling Nazi, but this error is so common I have to mention it. I admit that the double-'o' sound with a single 'o' is confusing, but that's just the way English is. :)
Second, the "minor difference in cost" isn't minor at all... I bopped over to Dell, to see the "freedos" option in action. Apparently they haven't changed the web page yet. More interestingly, I discovered that, for example, in a PowerEdge 1650 rack server the cost of adding a 5-client license of Win2k server increased the cost of the machine by 45%. I don't care how little anyone thinks businesses care about the cost of hardware -- only a moron pays an additional 45% for something they're just going to throw away, and any manager who approves such a purchase was ignorant of what they were actually approving.
I can definitely see why Dell would want to maintain a no-OS option.
The enemies of Democracy are
I recently went through this issue with Dell when I bought a laptop from them about a month ago. Dell would not sell me a laptop with Linux unless I bought 10 or more. They would also not sell me a laptop with out an OS. However this is not a Microsoft licensing thing. In fact it is a requirement of the Interational Standards Organization. Dell does not actually build their machines but has a group of companies contraced to do it. As part of this, Dell requires their contactors to be certified under an ISO Manufacturing Standard (I dont know the number). This Manufacturing Standard states that Dell may not sell a computer without an OS. The guy explained to me that this is a requirement as they must quality inspect each machine with an installed OS and then send that machine out in its current state. I hate MicroBorg as much as the next guy, but this time they are in the clear.
Well okay so maybe the tail is 100 times the size of the dog, but it's still bizarre to read things like this:
I think it's safe to say that the concept of a "software license" is completely out of hand when a software license can dictate another company's product line.
Another strangely funny quote:
What a crazy idea! Who are these "Dell" people? They should sell customers what DELL wants! And lobby for laws that disallow everything else! That's the New Capitalism! Get with the program!
Hmm then again I guess you could parse that sentence so that "they" could refer to Microsoft..
Dell wouldn't sell me FreeDOS unless I bought a PC also! Thus I have to pay for a PC just to get FreeDOS from them. Those Bastards!
Table-ized A.I.
Yeah, it'd be as interesting as last time MS went to court...
MS: "We're not guilty of evil things."
Court: "Yes, you are. Change stuff."
MS: "OK, we'll change stuff in such a way that nothing changes."
Court: "OK, you have until the end of time to make said changes. We'll keep pretending to argue so lawyers can make more money."
Lawyers: "Yay!"