Slashdot Mirror
Is Dell Just Testing the Market?
sarig_magik asks: "It seems that Dell is testing the Linux desktop market worldwide, and their choice of desktop is Linspire 4.51. I wonder how Microsoft will view Dell, now? Could this be a real attempt to gain a foothold before any of the other distributors do? We know the hardware vendor, but can anyone comment on the choice of OS?" Although Dell is offering a system with a preloaded Linux Desktop, they aren't doing it here in the US, but through their Italian partner, Questar. While the choice of Linspire as a desktop may leave a few of you underwhelmed, this does seem to be a step in the right direction. Is Dell testing the market? Of course they are. How well do you think they will do?
Dell (IMO) is a good manufacturer for the "average" computer, and the brand recognition is quite high. I think Linspire is a good choice for a pre-installed distro. Most Linux geeks (who would prefer, say, Gentoo or Debian or whatever) would want to install it themselves anyway. Linspire is a good "first-time" distro, or so I've heard. The people who need the OS to be installed when they buy the computer will like what Linspire has to offer.
Also remember the legal trouble Linspire had when it was Lindows.
If they every decide to install new hardware they might. Although I have no idea how often the average Dell consumer actually upgrades their machine instead of just waiting to buy a new one?
unknown/controversial
There's a combination you don't see every day.
I'd actually support a subscription model for Linux desktops. You don't necessarily pay for the software. You pay some local guy to come around every Friday to play Bridge and update your software. (He'll bring this week's updates on CD. And he'll happily train your child or grandchild in Linux system administration.)
Give Linux a friendly face.
tasks(723) drafts(105) languages(484) examples(29106)
You think Dell pays Microsoft $99 for each copy of Windows they install?
I'm Rick James with mod points biatch!
... I've tried L'Inspire (apparently some sort of French Linux distro) when my buddy bought it. It was nice, in a mindless sort of way, but within a week of using it I formatted my HD and reinstalled Debian. The stupid limitations of Linspire got irritating real fast. If Dell's testing the waters, they won't get an accurate result using Linspire, because Linux geeks will be the first to buy a Linux CD when offered the choice of Win vs. Lin. Only later will regular users start to choose Linux.
Maybe Dell WANTS to fail, to justify future lack of Linux support. Because I can't see this being successful. Especially because they will undoubtedly have various devices that don't run under Linux -- modem, wireless card, etc. Until the hardware is 100% supported, Linux won't make inroads with the common man. And until they ditch Linspire, they won't make inroads with geeks.
I'm not normally an irrational zealous dickhead, but I figure "When in Rome..."
1) Dell is friend with Microsoft ...but make sure they use a really lame, unsecure distro (everyone is root!)
2) Microsoft has some serious security issues
3) Microsoft has no clear "target" to say, "hey Linux too has security issues"
4) Microsoft ask Dell to start shipping Linux
5)
6) Microsoft steathly release an exploit/virus/whatever that target Dell's Linux machines
7) voila! Bingo! Next on CNN, "Linux is target of a mass viral infection! Microsoft has the solution!"
8) A page show up on microsoft.com talking about how Linux is bad, etc...
Really, it makes sense...
OK, I'll put back my foil hat now. Kthxbye.
But Dell already has this experience with regard to providing this kind of support...They sold desktops and Servers not long ago with Redhat installed...this is probably a localized deal with their Italian partner Questar...the MS feelings in Europe are different compared to the feelings in the U.S. and the market in Italy is probably more ripe for such an offer.
In
I'd like to know how many /. users have acutally used Linspire/Lindows. It seems to me that there is a large negative cloud that follows this distribution but the cloud isn't substantiated by actual use. The main negative issue that seems to always come up is the "runs as root" issue. Well, that's been resolved. When you first log in, you can choose to create a user other than root. Plus, look at the bigger picture. Linspire is designed with the END USER in mind. Not your typical linux user who likes to re-install their system frequently or likes to wrestle with dependencies when installing applications. I've been using Linspire since last November. It hasn't been perfect but I'll tell you, it's been the best linux distro I've ever used. The combination of a Dell system and an easy-to-use DESKTOP linux distribution is win-win. Heck, any PC being sold with linux preloaded is a win for the open source community. Remember, it's not a competition between linux distros, it's a competition between Linux, MacOS, and MS Windows.
1.) Dell is bound by liscense agreements with Microsoft to ship consumer PC's with a copy of Windows installed. (notice I said consumer PC's)
2.) Dell does ship servers with linux pre-installed to businesses. So, there's no contractual requirement forcing Dell to ship a machine to a business with Windows.
3.) Dell will ship desktop machines to businesses with FreeDOS installed (they call it the no-OS option). This re-enforces the statement in 2.
4.) Questar is buying white-boxes with the no-OS option, and intalling Linspire itself. Questar then ships these to consumers. This is a work-around for case 1.
5.) Dell is testing the waters in Europe. Once they've got the bugs worked out, they'll start shipping machines, under another name, with Linux pre-installed, within the U.S.
There's nothing to prevent a mom and pop shop from buying white-boxes from Dell today and doing what Questar is doing, inside the U.S. Maybe this is what Dell wants. It's a win-win. They sell machines (albiet not Dell branded) and consumers get machines with Linux pre-installed.
I bet this is a ploy by Dell to obtain more favourable terms for its OEM licenses from Microsoft.
One can expect them to drop Linux again in a few weeks once they have been to Redmond to have a personal talk with Bill and Steve
(you know MS dont want to loose one of their biggest resellers)
I fear Lindows, because it's basic installation is 'run as root' in order to simplify things. IMHO this is no better than Win9X or WinNT with the first/prime user set up as Admin, and perhaps worse because new Lindows users will be even more ignorant that they were on Windows. They will be more susceptible to human-engineering attacks because they'll have less experience, and because they think they're getting better security just by moving away from Windows.
IMHO, Lindows should have set up root and a default user, and a bunch of sudo gui programs to admin the box. The default user should have been a random name, with the installation option to change to a user-chosen name. Then use the autologin feature of gdm/kdm/xdm so the system boots to a ready-to-just-use state.
Next thought... Include something like pam_usb hooked into the sudo, and include a USB memory key. The installation process sets up the key, and then you plug it in to administer the box. Make the user aware that the key IS the security, and not to leave it just plugged in. Possibly even limit the admin that can be done while the network is up. Include a sticky hook so it can be stored on the system.
Does Linspire run users as root?
The living have better things to do than to continue hating the dead.
Competition reduces cost - economics 101.
Plus of course over 90% of Windows installed ... is of course pirated, so the so-called Linx cost advantage simply doesn't exist.
Ahhhh, now I understand. Hell, if the 3rd world would just steal everything they need then they wouldn't have to live a life poverty. Don't you think that if Microsoft wanted to they could make their OS unpirateable? Activation keys are very close to that, if it wasn't for the no-call-in Corp edition, the option to pirate wouldn't exist at all. In fact, I'd bet that the Corp edition exists with the no-call-in feature specifically to keep the option to pirate open. I know of very few non-corporate users who, if the OS didn't come with their PC, have a valid licensed copy of XP.
Good people do not need laws to tell them to act responsibly, while bad people will find a way around the laws-Plato
The fact that Dell is supporting any linux distribution is what's significant here.
By supporting linux as the OS as a vendor, you automatically guarantee hardware support for at least one distribution.
I find it interesting dell will try an obscure distro of linux but they still won't come out with any PC with arguably superior AMD cpu's. It's not so radical- after all HP also offers AMD
Join Team Mozilla #38050 Folding@home
Pretty much the same could be said of any computing system - including acknowledged crap like MVS. Nobody claims that the mainframe o/s like MVS are ideal any more, but ten years ago there were still people arround who had never used anything else and thought that the MVS way of doing things was perfect.
Linux is essentially architected the same way a modern mainframe O/S are architected. You have a reasonable user interface that is connected to a terrible one via pushrods. All the work gets done by the cruft underneath, which does not matter much most of the time, but when something goes wrong you have to start fiddling with the engine.
Windows has a unitary design that is much closer to the way a car is designed, in windows the UI is the O/S, there is no underlying layer, most users never look at the registry, let alone start editing it.
From a pure architecture perspective the Windows approach is the right one, there is much less to go wrong. With Linux you have two places where things can go wrong, the O/S itself or the pushrods holding up the UI. This means it is much more likely something would go wrong, but if something does go wrong you have a lot more visibility into the problem and it is more likely that you can fix it - if you know what you are doing.
The last part is the kicker as far as being a real new computer user goes. It is very easy to learn UNIX if you have a large support community who can get you out of trouble, if you are at university or whatever. If you don't have that support structure you are not going to do UNIX for very long if there is an alternative.
Back in the early 90s the incentive for learning UNIX was that you could buy two SUN sparcstations for less than the cost of a slower VMS box. So it was worth putting up with the poor documentation and user interface. Today I just don't see the incentive, even though Linux is a major advance on SunOS or ULTRIX, the improvement there is nothing like the improvement of Windows over VMS.
Despite the claims made about OSS and innovation the fact is that in the last ten years the OSS movement has not done much more than write a copy of a 1970s O/S and layer on a 1980s window system.
Looking for an Information Security student project suggestion?
Try http://dotcrimeManifesto.com/