Slashdot Mirror
Dell Offering "Open" PC
Sans writes "Dell began offering a new desktop Dimension E510n PC this week with no operating system installed. The machine is designed for people who want to run open-source software such as Linux instead of Windows. The PC comes with a blank hard drive and a copy of the FreeDOS operating system, which can be installed by customers."
Apparently the original poster failed to mention that 99% of the time the machines that do not come with Windows are generally priced equal to or more then the comparable system with Windows. In addition to that, they generally never come with all the "free" offers Dell gives out with there PC's.
.. so where is the deal?
Right now Dell will see there 380n Precision workstation (no windows) for $1058. But I can go buy the 380 Precision workstation (with windows) for $1058
-- Knowing too much can get you killed, but knowing who knows too much can make you rich.
I have a Dell Premier login so I can configure machines for our company, and send the e-quote to our purchasing rep. Dell lists a bunch of "standard configurations" on the first page. If I choose an Optiplex GX 520 MT and configure it, for example, it costs more than if I go under Systems and choose the Optiplex GX 520 MT there. Some comparisons ... moving from the 40GB SATA hard drive to an 80GB SATA II hard drive costs $16.15, and changing to an optical mouse costs $11.90 on the standard configuration GX 520. If I do the same by going under Systems, the hard drive upgrade costs $11.25 and the mouse upgrade costs $10.50.
Shenanigans is right!
I just love that the use an ATI video card, an audigy sound card, and a Serial ATA drive. If you can pack more difficult components for linux into a single box I would be very surprised. Most distributions seem to have the USB issue under control, but the rest is laughable. The price is also out of this world.
Ross Winn "not just another ugly face..."
Very few customers are going to specifically look for the Open Source desktops (as a whole). Dell knows this. If you look, they started the packaging off differently for their Open Source systems than they did for their Windows ones. They actually start off being more expensive. So, since they also didn't start off with equal hardware, you changed the configurations until they matched in spec. Surprise, price difference!
Well, you're not dealing so much with "this proves the licensing cost," as you are with "this proves that I can stretch my dollar further at McDonald's by getting a value meal." It's all about packaging. Manufacturers just as fast food companies want to reward customers for fitting a mold and making it easier for their workers to make generic things.
Go to your local dealership and spec out a base model car with all the premium model options added, you'll find that, aside from getting wry looks from the salesman, you'll be paying a lot more. Does that prove that the NAV system that comes as an option has more licensing fees than the one in the Luxury package? No. The price difference is specifically related to the manufacturers desire not to have to custom build vehicles if they can avoid it. It's also to try to convince people that getting a little more for another chunk of money is a value. Lastly, it's to try and squeeze money from the rube who doesn't know any better.
I tend to think that Dell is really focusing on that last point. They know that only a certain number of people will compare the two systems. How many paying customers are going to notice or care that there's a $30 difference? Especially when the base model Windows machine is cheaper.
No. Don't compare Linux of today with Windows of yesterday. Compare today's with today's and yesterday's with yesterday's. If you compare Win XP with nearly any X setup you'll find the X is more efficient.
What eats resources is the X11 windowing system. {Though object-oriented, interpreted languages -- such as the JavaScript embedded into web browsers -- probably don't help much either.} It used to be that KDE was horribly bloated, but GNOME is no longer a lightweight alternative. Of course there are less resource-intensive desktops {my favourite, which I will be using in my own distro, is WindowMaker} but most people are expecting a Windows XP clone. Hence, KDE or a heavily-customised GNOME.
I have a Pentium II 266 Compaq laptop that came with Windows 95 installed originally. When it was given to me it didn't work right and had been deemed useless. I brought it back to life with VectorLinux. It runs X (albeit a little slowly) and I normally use XFCE. When my wife uses it she likes IceWM, it has a Windows 95 feel to it. I know people who use full KDE on Pentium 3 600 machines with 256MB of memory, it keeps its pace with Windows easily. Besides, I wasn't even talking about old hardware. I was talking about lower end machines right for sale (new) today. The Dimension 2400 is a 2.4GHz Celeron with 256MB of memory. That will run KDE handily. That's better specs than my old P4 1.7 with 256MB memory, on it you could see a noticeable difference between KDE and Windows.
[I know I'm taking this out of order, but I think my reply is better organized this way]
And while I believe that is false, I also know that offering lower-spec hardware with Linux is not going to do anything to challenge that perception; in fact, it will only serve to reinforce it. Most people are clueless and just want a machine with big numbers, under the impression that it must be better {car analogy: they only care about engine cc's, not how far it will go on a litre of fuel}. You're essentially making out that a lower spec machine is only good enough for running Linux, not good enough for Windows.
That's not what I'm saying. I'm not saying, "only offer Linux on the cheap." I'm saying: "Offer your all of your models as OS-independent, especially those that most people will be shopping for. Ohh yeah, and give the value of that Windows license back, definitively." I have no problem with Linux being looked at as more of a premium offering, but why on earth can't a whitebox pc be considered a commodity? I think it's because they don't want to be offering it; they're still charging for Windows on it; and they want to use it as an incentive for force people who want this to buy more expensive hardware. If I'm spending that much money on a PC then I am not spending it at Dell.
One, why do I get no results searching "All of Dell.com" for "e510n", but plenty when I search for "e510"
Two, why is the e510n selling for $849, when a 3.0GHz e510 with the same hardware sells for $779?
Truly puzzling...
"Murphy was an optimist" - O'Toole's commentary on Murphy's Law