HP to Globally Launch Linux-Based PCs

Rade T. writes "Reuters UK reports that HP, the No. 1 personal computer and computer printer maker, said on Wednesday that its putting its weight behind personal computers that run the Linux operating system. I guess this is the first serious step towards solving the problems that Linux faces on the Desktop/Laptop."

Comments

$699 each

[QuantumRiff]

Pay your SCO Fee, they throw the computer in for free!!!

In other news,

[pen]

RMS demands that HP be referred to as GNU/HP.

Re:In other news,

[Anonymous Coward]

To be pronounced GNU/Hippy

Buy

[DrugCheese]

I'll probably try to buy a manufactored PC for the first time in 10 years simply to support the principle of having a choice.

It's about time...

[IO ERROR]

...that a major computer manufacturer started offering desktop PCs with Linux pre-installed. Even though I'm not terribly impressed with HP's hardware, this definitely makes me more likely to support HP in the future - but only so long as they don't back down when Microsoft and SCO come calling and tell them to quit it.

Linux can run more stuff that this...

[CharAznable]

"Fink said that he expects businesses to use Linux where employees only need a few applications, such as in a call center or support center where workers need to access only a database and e-mail." I have one of the only 2 or 3 Linux desktops in a predominantly Windows environment and I can do considerably more than anyone else. On the other hand, we're safe as long as Management does not know about the existence of Tux Racer and FreeCiv!

Re:Reuters Buying the SCO line?

[jdunn14]

Based doesn't mean that the code base came from Unix. I'd agree with Reuters in that Linux is based on Unix from a design perspective. It's no coincidence that the command line is extremely similar, or that errno.h is similar, etc.

Time to mature

[mao che minh]

Linux (and more importantly, the applications that the big dogs like IBM and Novell are now pushing on it) will never mature to a usable level until it gets corporate desktop exposure. With it, they begin to get feedback, like "We need feature A in application B, and this aspect of KDE/Gnome/Ximian isn't very useful".

It's a shame that the Asian market gets it first (for selfish reasons), I would like to see a fully functioning Novell/Suse desktop (the people at the Brain Share "show" are getting a sneak peek now).

Novell's press release

[i2878]

HP and Novell Expand Relationship to Offer Linux From Desktop to Datacenter

Can Novell please get a /. "topic" now?

I wonder what microsoft thinks of all this

[Capt'n Hector]

First HP goes with Apple for music (iTunes and HP iPod) and now they are trying out Linux... that's twice microsoft has been bested in favor of open standards. I never thought I'd hear myself say this, but go HP!

Re:Why is this going to be different than Dell

[GooberToo]

Because Dell's effort was completely half-assed, at best. Dell made as much effort to sale Linux as you wanna kiss your friend's date's ugly girlfriend. Simple fact is, if someone actually makes an attempt, they make actually be able to do something with it.

Dell's attempt was worthless and self defeating.

Forget world tours, show us the drivers

[MrIrwin]

When HP budget injets and scanners come with Linux support in the box then I will take this sort of news seriously.

This is not as good as you might think

[Mentorix]

My experience with the Linux offerings from HP is that they don't really mean Linux, but just RedHat or SUSE. I spoke with one of their european account managers a few weeks ago concerning their blade server solutions and basicly, if I wasn't going to run RH or SUSE on their hardware they couldn't offer support or anything. Since both redhat and suse don't meet our needs (not without rebuilding the kernels that came with them - thus voiding support responsibility) there's no choice at all.

It's the vendor lockin story all over *again*. I have no doubt that they will try to approach the desktop market in the same way. At least until HP proves me wrong and announces support for the linux *kernel* and promises at least a best effort policy on the different distros.

Now this is just my experience with HP, a talk with IBM went much smoother and their bladeservers are already on their way, just have to install debian on them and I'm all set. (yay! got to mention debian afterall!)

Re:This is not as good as you might think

[theantix]

Your demands are not realistic, you could not reasonably expect HP to support any linux distribution someone could throw one one of their machines. There is so much variety in the linux world that a technical support team would be hard pressed to help the disparate needs of their customers, I would be surprised if they would even support version of SuSE or RedHat that was customized in a significant way (for example a custom kernel or non-stock filesystem type or desktop environment). Tech support just doesn't work that way, and you can't reasonably expect them to be able to help people that deviate too far from the stock system they understand.

What you _can_ reasonably suspect is that they will officially support a select few distributions that have special relationships with the company, to ship drivers that work with those distribtions, and finally *release specs* to their hardware and the source to their distro-specific drivers. That way, other distributions have all the information they need to get their systems to work with HP's hardware if they desire it. That is far more reasonable that what you propose.

No trolls please

[Dalcius]

Just to cut off some of the trolls at the pass:

Linux is not ready for "12 year old John gets a Linux CD and installs and is ready to go", nor is the support out there for Mom and Pop to click "DOWNLOAD ME" on a website and be up and going.

That said, for the corporate environment, Linux is perfect. It can be pre-configured and mirrored in a sysadmin's sleep, locked down to kill almost all support problems, and managed remotely with little effort. The applications, for the vast part, work almost exactly the same as their Windows counterparts and as such training costs are minimal.

Notice a pattern? The limitation of Linux is ease of administration and software/hardware support. Any place where Joe User is wanting to download and install a program from his favorite news website or Jane User wants to reinstall the OS, Linux is not 'ready' for casual use. But in a controlled environment, like a company where hardware and software falls under the umbrella of IT, these issues don't pose a problem.

As long as a company can find the applications they need to do their work (or start/join an OSS project and complete their own), Linux is pie on the desktop and has many benefits most companies would die for, once realized. Once you've got a Linux friendly IT department and have found the right apps, limitations are few and far between.

Once corporations adopt Linux, support problems will diminish, and once workers take it home, support problems will all but disappear. The snowball will feed itself.

Lack of lock-in, lack of security issues, lack of luser-stupidity-blew-everything-up scenarios and lack of licensing and upgrade costs are huge in the terms of $$$.

Cheers

Cheap computer, expensive replacement keystrokes

[Anonymous Coward]

In the spirit of HP's line of printers, they will offer these computers at below cost to manufacture them, but they will be limited to 100 keystrokes from your keyboard and 100 feet of movement from your mouse. At this point, you will need to buy the appropriate replacement keystroke cartridge at $129. Replacement mouse balls and optical lights will be available somewhere where you can't find them.

Scanners and Printer drivers

[RichMan]

HP needs to show how really committed to Linux they are by making drivers for their scanners and printers that work under Linux.

Look at all the unsupported scanners SANE Project HP search

Re:Cheaper with Linux . . . or not?

[pjkundert]

I would be totally happy to pay the same amount for a supported Linux desktop, laptop or PDA, as for the Windows version. I would much rather give my money to a company willing to support me, than to Microsoft, who as never supported me, no matter how many copies of software I have bought.

I have worked with Windows since 2.0 (yes, you read that right). I've installed (and re-installed, and re-installed...) it on hundreds of computers -- for friends and family, not as my job! I've purchased several copies of Windows for our business -- not by choice, but because necessary software has required it.

Microsoft has had literally hundreds of chances to "win me over", by just giving a *shit*, JUST ONCE, about my experience. But, they don't even know I exist. So, I've used Linux since 1995. Through all the growing pains (ever installed Slackware from 36 floppies?). Through the infancy and adolesence of Open Office, KDE, Mozilla. Through the busted device drivers, developed by dedicated developers blindfolded by the hardware manufactures they are working to enrich -- who, in turn, are slobbering after Microsoft.

How many other people are willing to put up with just about ANY amount of annoyance, just to get some option OTHER THAN Microsoft? I'll bet there are a LOT of such people.

If Microsoft can't make Billions AND give a crap about their clientelle, then they deserve to get the crap kicked out of them by Linux. It's not a question of if, but when.

Ehm yeah right. Read up on MS history

[SmallFurryCreature]

If you are old enough you may remember when PC's were new and suspicious. Real work was done on terminals hooked up to mainframes or at a minimum servers.

But slowly the idea started to emerge that not everyone needed the full power of a mainframe setup. Cheap simple extremely limited machines started to appear wich could do a few tasks but that was all they needed to do. These machines where DOS and later Windows machines.

Now linux is doing the same. Sure Linux does not have the same capacity yet as a windows machine but windows did not have the same capacity as a mainframe. The question is does it do what is required well enough?

There is a difference. Dos/Windows got in through the lowend single purpose workstation. Linux is going in at all angles. High end server, middle file/printer server, lowend single purpose workstation, specialized appliance (firewall).

MS is scared. HP selling linux as an option is not something MS wants to see.