Dell's New Linux Blog

comforteagle writes "I've just written up an interesting find: Linux engineers at Dell have started their own Linux site and weblog about Linux at Dell. From the announcement: "Welcome to the Dell Linux Community Web. This site is dedicated to providing any information that may be useful regarding your usage of Linux on your Dell equipment. While Dell primarily works with and officially supports Red Hat Linux, many of our customers choose to run other distributions." And perhaps more importantly it appears that the new site and weblog is run and maintained by the engineers themselves. It certainly has that 'made with vi' look." And kudyadi points to this PC Magazine interview with Michael Dell, in which Dell talks "about Dell's expanding product line, the company's late entrance into the Media Center space, and where the PC giant and the industry go from here." He touches on Linux just a bit, too.

Comments

Re:How long will the blog last

[crsgrg]

The blog should last about as long as it takes Michael Dell to take his tongue out of Bill Gate's bunghole.

His position on AMD processors way back when was, "... we don't use them because our customers want to know/see that there is an Intel CPU inside..." (At the time, he was servicing Andrew Grove).

Don't forget about the "looks like a standard ATX power supply, but it's not - HA HA - joke's on you DUDE - pay up!!"

I could go on and on, but I won't.

tiny url

[twitter]

Why not simply post the link instead of the tinyurl redirection? Oh, because you are a troll, I see now. That's the last time I click on a tinyrul link on Slashdot. Next time it will be goat sex which is only half as offensive and pointless as your "joke".

I'm afraid Dell is tired of being screwed around by their buddy, Bill Gates. There's an alternative and Dell has grabbed onto it. No more one PC one OS charges, I presume. I also expect commerce.euro.dell.com to be run off a usefull OS soon. A few years ago, Dell recommended Win3.1, what they recommend tomorrow is clear for all to see.

Re:Micro$oft is dead.

[mcrbids]

As that alternate platform is technically superior, there is little reason to shell out big bucks for legacy software.

Sorry, I can't let this go. Linux is nice, Linux generally works, and I won't pretend I'm typing this on anything but my RedHat 9 Linux workstation.

But, Linux is only "technically superior" when you limit "superior" in some way.

Linux is quite stable. Linux has a modest security model. Linux compatability is generally decent. Linux is more modular and flexible than windows, allowing it to run on more hardware platforms.

But Linux is not better at all things than Windows.

For example, the kernel interface for drivers is just the pits. I mean, you either have to have open source drivers to build for your kernel release, or your equipment manufacturer has to have a binary for every possible kernel version and build!

I think that is retarded.

Linux has a very inconsistent UI, so that tech support for "Linux" is very difficult. For example, somebody can't "get online". Are you running Lindows? Mandrake? Red Hat? Suse? Slackware? Gentoo? KDE? Gnome? IceWM? Which version of each? What kernel build do you have installed?

Try walking somebody through setting up email over the phone sometime. And, sorry, if you disagree with me on this point, it's probably because you haven't done it with a Linux setup you didn't install yourself in the first place.

What Linux offers is not "technical superiority" but "political superiority". It's license is a good mix of open and closed.

--) Open enough that people don't get that "vendor lock-in" feeling, and can do what they want with it.

--) Closed enough that it remains cohesive enough that it can continue to grow and expand. (Unlike the BSD licensed Unix systems)

This makes Linux more of a marketplace or an environmental force than a mere product. Selling Linux-related services is becoming an industry in its own right.

In this light, due to the political security that Linux offers, it doesn't need to be "better" than Windows - it only needs to be "good enough" and cheap. It's both, so it will win unless something drastic fundamentally changes the marketplace.

Again, I use Linux routinely, I'm sitting in front of an Athlon, RH 9.0 Linux workstation, and get paid nicely for programming and sysadmin work.

But, I feel I'm also realistic about Linux's weaknesses as well as its strengths.