Slashdot Mirror
Dell's Open Source Desktop Systems
An anonymous reader writes "An article at XYZComputing goes over Dell's open source line of desktop computers and workstations. The N line is something which Dell began to sell recently, but the situation is much more complex that it would seem. There is often little or no discount given if consumers opt to go with FreeDOS as their operating system. There is also a great link in the article showing how Dell is selling AMD processors in their Accessories section!" From the article: "A major hurdle preventing the growth of Linux with non-professional users has been installation the operating system and dealing with the resultant compatibility issues. An ideal solution to this would be a major manufacturer which is willing to sell computers with Linux preinstalled. This would not only make it easy for users to buy a computer and have Linux running after simply plugging it in, but it would theoretically allow the manufacturer to lower the cost of a computer because software licensing costs could be minimized."
Support is probably the primary issue why Dell cant realistically start flogging Linux boxes to the general populace. When your selling the cheapest hardware at the cheapest price with low profit margins you cant really afford to lose any money because you have to support every clueless newbie whose never used anything other than Windows and cant understand why his bloody activex banking sites will never load on his new pc.
Have you ever set up a brand new dell for someone? There's so much shitware installed, free trials of dvd players, etc, etc, that it's faster to format and reinstall straight away than to uninstall it all. Each of those bits of bundled wankware earns dell money, it more than offsets the XP bulk license cost.
What would be good is a way to buy a dell and immediately sell the license on to a reseller.
I am one of many. My idea is not unique, nor do I expect my voice alone to sway you. I speak in a chorus of opinion.
I bought a PC recently. Part of the justification was that I would finally get round to setting up a Linux desktop and configure it just the way I want.
But all the distros I've tried so far have had hardware issues that I consider pretty fundamental to a desktop. RedHat - getting nvidia graphics installed to run Doom3. SuSE - intermittent sound and wifi issues. Ubuntu - screen resolution issues, sound issues, unremembered wifi config. (Knoppix is next, fingers crossed.)
I can solve all of these, by getting down and hacking the config files, but the fact that these mature and well-backed distros don't Just Work illustrates the fact that getting a Linux desktop distro to work is a non-trivial job, and I'm not surprised PC manufacturers aren't interested in doing it and supporting it.
I don't know what the answer is - some of these distros are backed by big companies. It's a shame IBM didn't do a distro when they had a hardware division, I think it'll takes someone who does software and hardware (like Apple) to really get it right, sell you a machine that just works.
If software licensing costs could be minimized then software revenue would be minimized.
Why would a software corporation engage in an activity where revenue would be minimized?
Answer: he wouldn't if he wanted to keep his job for long. The shareholders wouldn't stand for it.
Maybe the People's Repuplic Of Chiner will front the software.
Cogito Ergo Sum
Dell has low prices because of large production lines. A small change in the line changes the price radically. The reason the Linux machines aren't as cheap is because so few are purchased. Also Dell gets money (savings get passed to consumer) from software companies promoting their product on WINDOWS, and their aren't many (if ANY) that do that for the Linux machines.
/ 05/1240206&tid=137
This is a lame conspiracy theory, and frankly makes the Linux crowd seem desperate. I'm not trolling, but you can't honestly think this is anything other then a wild attempt to explain slower then expected adoption rates.
The reason it is more expensive has to do with economics of supply and demand, volume, etc. How this got put on the front page TWICE in such a short period of time really blows my mind.
Last Time: http://hardware.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=05/10
If you want to compare workstations look at Dell's Precision line, don't compare it too a Dimension. A Precision 670 Dual Processor Dual Core system can come from the factory with RHEL4 WS if you like. These are very good systems and they will run Solaris/FreeBSD as well and run High Quality Intel Processors on High Quality Intel Motherboards.
These stations are highly configurable and customizable to the task you want to perform. Whether it is Finance, Engineering, Video Editing (Avid) or 2D/3D Artistry.
Dell has embraced Linux for a long long time, since RedHat 6.2 and yet the same behavior from the Slashdot crowd. Apple doesn't embrace linux and are Intel Only now and Slashdot loves them... Why?
a) They sell you expensive Intel chips.
b) They sell you an expensive Microsoft Operating System.
Dell needs to realize that they could sell you a cheap AMD system with Linux installed. Given the variety on AMD chips, they could sell you low-end "desktops" or high-end "workstations".
I could humorously say this the PDA effect. It seems any PDA that runs Linux is instantly more expensive than its CE counterpart and only available in Asia.
I wonder, though, if this is part of Dell just doing this to say they offer Linux. I imagine their agreement with Microsoft requires them to attach a Windows license to the machine thus keeping the price structure equal to their other PC's. Either way it really sucks. OEM's need to start telling Microsoft to kiss off in situations like this. If Dell, HP, Toshiba, and the like did this it would go along way in helping level the playing field. I know, I know, where's the incentive?
The cost (to Dell) of Windows licenses will rise substantially if Dell starts (really) offering systems without Windows. Don't you people know anything about monopo-nomics?