Slashdot Mirror
Why Won't Dell Promote Its Linux Desktops?
Brian McCoy writes "In this article, Steven Vaughn-Nichols proclaims "Last Thursday, when I wrote about Dell's new Linux desktop, was one of the most frustrating days of my professional life. My eWEEK colleague John Spooner and I tried our best to get Dell to confess that they really had released an honest-to-God Linux desktop.""
Is there a Majority Shareholder keeping Linux support at the lip service level?
Or, do Dell's executives own Massive Stacks of certain stock?
Maybe Somebody would be Mighty Sore at Mr. Dell if he Mustered Sufficient courage to Make Significant choice available to people.
Ah, Monopolistic Speculation: gotta love it.
Get thee glass eyes, and, like a scurvy politician, seem to see things thou dost not.--King Lear
I bet they don't want to be responsible for any sort of support. Like someone calling and asking how to get their scanner to work.
It's very simple. Support will be an absolute nightmare. The few hundred bucks per machine that they're charging over Windows doesn't come close to paying the bill of the support that the "average" computer users would need if they actually bought these things. They want to make sure that people who buy them REALLY want them and know how to use them, already.
I don't respond to AC's.
There are plenty of other companies that sell Linux an no-OS machines. http://www.addonshop.com/ http://www.emperorlinux.com/ http://www.ibexpc.com/ http://www.koobox.com/ http://www.linare.com/ http://www.linspire.com/ http://www.linuxcertified.com/ http://www.linuxsyscorp.com/ http://www.microtelpc.com/ http://www.outpost.com/ http://shoprcubed.com/ http://www.sub300.com/ http://www.systemax.com/divisions.htm http://www.walmart.com/ http://tuxmobil.org/reseller.html http://www.us.debian.org/distrib/pre-installed http://www.linux.org/vendor/system/index.html http://tuxmobil.org/ (general information)
Retaliation!
Got Code?
Just for fun and to see if it existed, I tried http://www.dell.com/linux/ and it brought up a page full of information about Dell Linux products and information.
But it is interesting to note that on the http://www.dell.com/ page, there is nothing about Linux.
Maybe Dell could add a link to Linux on their root page? Just a thought.
He who knows best knows how little he knows. - Thomas Jefferson
At this point, it seems anyone who would care about Dell's Linux machines are nerds like us who already know, and are least likely to base a computer purchase off an ad anyway. Why would they spend money on promotion that would preach to a choir and go ignored by the masses?
Slashdot Burying Stories About Slashdot Media Owned
Novell puts out a monthly (free) magazine called Novell Connection. I just got the latest issue a few days ago and I do remember noticing a Dell / Linux Advertisement on the back cover.
"What does slashdotting mean?"
"You've never heard of slashdot?"
"I know it makes websites not work."
A desktop that sells for more than a certain amount of money. At one time the borderline was about $5000. Nowadays, it is about $1000.
Just like a used luxury car becomes "pre-owned."
Let's get with the program and remember to wear your tux when ordering.
HP DX5150 series officially supports SUSE Linux and is available with AMD chips. Very nice computer. I am standardizing on this model for my office. Dell is terrible. The Dell's are failing left and right and their entreprise support is not like it used to be.
Dell is out to make a profit. There is no money in selling Linux desktops.
Let me clarify that. The amount of profit/marketshare in selling Linux desktops is far outweighed by the cost of promoting them. It is a stupid business move to spend advertising resources snubbing one of your biggest business partners (Microsoft.) It is a stupid business move to spend millions advertising a free product that will not help you move yours. It is a stupid business move to introduce a factor into your business which will exponentially increase the number of support/service requests that you are neither prepared or willing to support (because people will call out of ignorance.)
Microsoft told them to
//+1 concise?
I bravely predict that Ubuntu Dapper Drake will be milestone in GNU/Linux desktop accaptance (including OEMs, like Dell) just like Firefox was in the browser world. For the last two years Linux gained stability and "final touch" that user need, but it is still missing "something" big, that would compensate to end users for huge task of switching OS platform. I think that combination of Beagle maturity, XGL coolness and Eclipse for power users might be just that "something".
839*929
Everyone knows you can't try to make logical conjectures from anything Dell does.
Why doesn't someone tell me why Dell screws my company out of hundreds of thousands of dollars each year selling them overpriced server equipment? Or why the Dell reps attempt to bribe our IT department with cash and free laptops if they'll continue to purchase only Dell equipment.
Or howabout why our Dell contract reads that installing any non-dell equipment on our network violates our warranties? Or how we can't put non-dell ram into our desktop machines, even when Dell has no ram available to sell us.
Dell can go fuck itself. It makes all its money by ripping off companies, bribing those that do know better and lying to those that don't. Not to mention the shit hardware they deliver...
Go ahead and order 10 identical desktops from Dell. You'll get 10 boxes that look identical on the outside, but you'll be pleasantly surprised to find they've got 10 different motherboards and ram configurations in them. This is AWESOME for imaging disks! fuck dell.
To make it more personal I'll mention that my company is one of the largest fast food chains in America, so depending on how you look at it, Dell is directly responsible for high priced fast food. Revolt!
Big ones, small ones, some as big as yer 'ead!
Give 'em a twist, a flick o' the wrist...
Look, I like Linux in a lot of ways. It's definitely a great server OS. And the desktops have come along way. I love seeing the progress and I love playing with them. But given a choice, despite all my frustrations with Windows, I simply find Windows easier to use in a number of ways.
.exe file and run it. On the other hand, with Linux, you usually have to get the executeable for your specific CPU if not your CPU and flavor of Linux. Or, God forbid, you actually have to download the source and build it yourself, which has happened with me with a number of apps because I simply couldn't get the package to install for some reason or another (maybe I couldn't find one of its dependent packages or I couldn't install one of the dependent packages). Installing apps in Linux, especially the less popular ones, can be a very trying experience.
It doesn't matter which version of Windows you run (okay, not necessarily with '95, '98 or something even more ancient) you can install the same
Just to give a single example, something as simple as a CPU temp monitoring app, turned out to be a nightmare. I spent 3 days trying to get a couple of them installed. Never managed to pull it off, despite passing tons of messages back and forth on linuxforums.org
There are other things about Linux that simply aren't ready as well. On the other hand, there are areas where Linux has excelled beyond Windows, and that's terrific, but I generally see the failings in being the areas that affect your non-tech users. Ease of use, ease of finding apps, ease of installing said apps.
These issues need to be addressed and I have no doubt they will be. MS, for all of their faults, have done a pretty good job of making stuff easy to use. It comes, in part, from spending a great deal of time and money doing usability testing of their software.
Another failing in Linux is that, a lot of apps aren't terribly easy to use. Many Linux developers, especially for smaller apps, still have a tendency to focus on command-line apps. MPlayer, for example: An app for watching movies, is command-line. That makes no sense to me. Sure, I can get a front-end for it, but why don't they just include one so I don't go have to find one that: A> I can manage to get installed and B> That doesn't suck? Command-line should be the secondary method, not the primary method.
Most non-tech users don't even know Windows has a command line. They don't need to know. That's a good thing.
The pricing on these systems is really strange. Do this: Go to the Dell Linux workstations link in the article. There are three systems there. Now navigate back to the small business Dell Precision desktop workstations, and you'll find an almost identical page, with the same three workstations, but with Windows XP Pro installed. How much do you have to pay for Windows -- or rather, how much do you save by getting a Linux workstation? Nothing! Two of the three systems are exactly the same price regardless of whether you get the Linux or the Windows version. The other system is actually a few dollars cheaper with Windows XP.
Now how can that make sense? And why would anyone buy a Linux workstation from Dell if they're paying the "Microsoft tax" anyway?
From the article they seem to be workstations. So why promote them in the same way they promote consumer machines? First and foremost Dell is a brand name as much as anything, and their goal is to give their customers similiar experiences regardless of which Dell consumer grade machine they buy. And part of that experience includes Windows.
However, businesses are a different story. For the most part(cue cynics) you are going to have people who know what they need and will go straight for it. Why should Dell spend a lot of money with "promotions" that won't mean anything to their target audience?
It's nice that Dell is selling Linux machines, but lets not pretend this represents any sort of great ideological shift at the Dell corporation.....
Monstar L
I think that people at dell are having a hard time to find out who could be interested in a linux desktop. Basically, from the mob point of view, linux has only "mee too" features. So why bothering? ...
My opinion is that the eubuntu project is reallay going in the right direction: if you are considering an os education purposes, then this one was made for you, and you must check it before taking a wondows/mac/linux decision! Only very specific targets should be adressed. Some examples:
* Distro for the very young ones (simple interface, nice educational games...)
* Distro for the elder ones (no configuration, only net, chat, voiIP and letters)
*
Then linux could make a difference.
Comparably outfitted n series optiplex's and precision workstations both come out equal, or slightly MORE expensive than their windows laden counterparts. Why bother buying it with pre-installed linux, or some crappy freedos disks when I can just reformat the harddrive and put linux on anyway?
Dell would need to do only two things, at minimum cost:
When your Linux isn't customized, everything in the original distro applies, so customers would be served perfectly adequately by generic documentation on the net.
And the community is more than happy to run its own support sites, especially when they are friendly wikis that are easy to update and the server is paid for by a patron.
"The question of whether machines can think is no more interesting than [] whether submarines can swim" - Dijkstra
The interesting thing to me is that the Linux version costs the same as the identical Windows version. In past Linux system offerings from Dell, the Linux system was actually more expensive than the Windows system!
There are plenty of rational reasons why they might not want to advertise it to the mainstream and just leave it to those (geeks) who are looking for it (IE: support is a bitch to grandma who bought the wrong scanner). But I'll give you one better: why should they have to?
They are a company. They can do the hell they want with their products. Michael Dell is making more money than you are, is making more people more money than you are, is making more people more money than any other hardware manufacturer to date, let him play his game. As mentioned in the paragraph prior I see at least 1 damn good reason to do so. Its his company, let him do what he wants with it. His right to do what he wants with his company supercedes your right to see the word "linux" on the front page of dell.com.
I've never understood the stupid "xyz vendor recommends Windows XP" campaign. It's not as if desktop users have much of a choice when they buy their Windows XP desktop. What's there to recommend to the user? By the time they have their machine... they have no say in the matter!
READY.
PRINT ""+-0
Any business savvy enough to know the benefits of using Linux as their OS of choice, is also going to be savvy enough to buy decent hardware. Well, that leaves Dell out. Why? Because Dell chose not to have an AMD option.
I suspect that most potential Linux users ask this question:
Which OS gives the user the biggest bang for the buck?
And those same people are probably going to ask this question:
Which CPU gives the user the biggest bang for the buck?
"Put your message in a modem, and throw it into the cyber-sea." - Rush
just for fun, show me where microsoft is mentioned on their root page?
every day http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Random
It's true -- Windows is definitely easier to use. The network transparency makes it really good -- I can fire up an xload on my remote machines and see how they're doing, or even tunnel my Windows connection over SSH for complete security. Oh, wait, you don't mean X Windows?
In seriousness, reading your complaint I think that you may simply be trying the wrong technique. You shouldn't be trying to install novel apps yourself, that is for hobbyists and tinkerers only. You should be using prepackaged user-friendly distros like Mandrake or Fedora, that have nice GUI installers. For a non-command-line movie player, don't use MPlayer -- use Xine, which way doesn't suck.
This is probably the biggest problem facing those who would adopt Linux: there is such a huge morass of options it's hard to tell which path is the easy one.
- The Microsoft argument, made in the article, is tired and probably has some basis in truth. And while there is an additional cost for the end user to deal with a Microsoft Tax, since all vendors force you to pay it, it becomes part of the built-in price of the computer; and as long as that price is still both lower than people are willing to pay and high enough that the vendors can make a profit on it, the makeup of the pricing for the components will continue to be irrelevant.
- Linux is free. If you want it, you can get it.
- Linux attracts the technical. Odds are no matter what distro(s) are offered, some rabid fanbois of other distros will be unhappy.
- Linux attracts the technical, who tend to have specific ideas of how their systems should be partitioned and set up. (I know the first thing I do with any box I get, Sun or Linux or Windows or whatever, is to do the OS install the way I want it done.) Tie this together with #2 and #3, and there is a very low likelyhood that any initial Linux install would survive shipping; therefore there is no perceived added value to the customer in preconfiguring and preinstalling the OS, and therefore no business case for spending additional resources making it happen.
I now stand back and await a detailed explanation as to why I am completely wrong.you should read everything on the internet as if it had "but I'm probably talking out of my ass" appended to it.
With my experience with dells servers they are extremely reliable. Even if a server part broke down. The part got shipped next day . If I was a business and depended on my servers I would pay more to have them reliable.
Why is NO OPERATING SYSTEM INSTALLED not a choice when you buy one of their laptops?
Clearly, that would include no software support either.
Why do we have to continue to pay the Microsoft Tax on laptops?
Your comment on "cpu flavours" is kinda moot. There are versions of Windows for non-x86 and I can certainly build SSE3 applications that won't run on your Athlon XP etc, etc.
:-), etc, etc, etc.
...
The fact that Linux can (and largely does) work on non-x86 platforms is not a bad thing. I've yet to find a significant problem installing any random application... of course gentoo builds from source for me.
As for the hardware sensors... on non-intel motherboards lm-sensors *usually* works. You can thank non-standard hardware vendors for that one though. In this day and age there should be a trivial serial protocol for reading temps/fan speeds/etc that all motherboards adhere to uniformly. That isn't a Linux problem just your hardware sucks.
Imagine if in the 80s and 90s each vendor had their own take on UARTs. Yes, there were some variations but more often than not a RS-232 device "just worked". Because of that many devices were created that extended the computer era. E.g. modems, mice, printers, plotters, joysticks, primitive networking
If you had to buy a modem for your Compaq computer and then later it didn't work in your whitebox that would be pretty useless now wouldn't it?
So why is it now that we put up with vendors who clearly don't implement anything remotely approaching standard? Why can't they agree on some uniform base for things like sound cards, graphics and sensors?
Tom
Someday, I'll have a real sig.
Why not? It can't be that hard to train technicians on how to remove temporary internet files and delete cookies in Linux.
the knee jerk response is because they can't afford to lose whatever deal they have with microsoft, but I'd hope that isn't the real reason. All I know is that I tried to buy a desktop w/o an OS from them (ok, you have to have a naked drive with FreeDOS included, close enough) but of course that one was more expensive with cheaper add-ons than their 'speicals' with XP Home! SO there ya go, I paid the MS tax by saving 150$ on a better machine from Dell. It frustrates me to no end, but I don't know what I can do about it save for complain, which I have to them. I know, buy from someone else, roll your own, etc...but I've done that in the past, now I want some kinda 'just works' hardware that I can buy and trust. (and ppl wonder why I'm so excited about the new apples...dual boot osx/linux and I'll be a happy camper)
fak3r.com
I would really like to listen to the phone calls when a customer purchases with this link a Dell Precision Workstation With Linux and they are unable to get any of the bundled software to work.
From the mentioned website, during the configure process, you have choices of business software you would like to add to the workstation. Last time I checked, none of these ran on Linux systems yet. Choices include :
1. Avid Express DV
2. Adobe Video Collection Standard 2.5
3. Adobe Premier Pro 1.5
4. Adobe After Effects Pro 6.5
5. AutoCAD 2006 Standard
6. Avid Technology Avid Liquid 7
7. Alohabob Pc Backup
8. Alohabob Pc Essentials Suite
9. Alohabob PC Relocator Ultra
The program isn't debugged until the last user is dead.
I've had two Dell Linux boxes (a 370N and a 380N) under my desk for months now. This is like "discovering" that you can get ketchup packets at Arby's, even though they're not on the menu.
Simple. It is all about locking-in the computer vendors to Microsoft.
Microsoft says to the vendor, "If you will put this 'We recommend Microsoft Windows' line in ALL of our advertising, we will pay you $$$ out of our advertising budget." The amount paid is large - large enough to pay for a good chunk of the vendor's advertising.
However, the catch is that ALL ADS, bar none, must have this logo. So even is what is being sold is a Linux server, the "We recommend Microsoft" has to appear. Also, the vendor is STRONGLY discouraged from advertising anything else - they cannot, for example, say "We recommend Microsoft Vista or RedHat Enterprise Linux" (emphasis mine).
So, vendors like Dell receive very large sums of money for those blurbs.
In short, it is a way around the banned practice of "per CPU license fees" that Microsoft used to do before the anti-trust decisions.
www.eFax.com are spammers
I agree and I would also like to add that the majority of the people buying a Dell are buying it for a couple of specific uses... Writing email - ok, Linux can do that.
Surfing the web - yep, Linux can do that too
Running Turbo Tax - There is some open source tax software out there but the people buying a Dell aren't going to go out and search for it much less understand how to install it. Also, personally I would not trust any of them with my finances.
Microsoft Word - Most people don't know there are other word processesors in existence!
The majority of people who buy a Dell are not the technical savvy. Sure, there are some - probably a lot who are, but Dell's cheaper PCs are targeted at the people who know nothing about computers - that's why Dell has so many advertisements stating you don't have to know anything about computers, they will walk you through the decision making process.
Just kept drivin'. Didn't even look back.
ok were all thinking about this from a geeks perspective (if youre reading slashdot u are one!)
now think from a advertisers / marketing persons perspective
"how do you sell a pack of penguins to john doe??"
dell make alot of money because their adverts are EVERYWHERE!
In the FA the author details Michael Dell's investment in Red Hat and the Dell Corp's bigtime deal with Novell. That's where it gets sticky sticky because Novell owns SUSE and, if you're a Novell customer, you have to keep your lips shut pretty tightly unless you want a widdle spoony woony of SUSE shoved in your wittle mouth.
Moderation in All Things... Especially Moderation - gurutc
For at least a year (that i can verify), Dell has offered linux preinstalled on their entire Precision line. Use the customize option, build a machine (via the wizard, not the combos) and you will see. I have one sitting on my desk, this is nothing new. What they do not do is make a big deal out of it.
I am sure their linux desktop sales are less than 5% of their annual sales and thus not important enough to pay attention to. Wait 12-18 months, until udev/hal/dbus/*DEs are polished, the vista hype has subsuisded and then Linux will honestly be a viable option, and thus worth advertising for.
Are you intolerant of intolerant people?
It is the same margins that is forcing OEMs to stick to dealing with MS currently, that will eventualy make OEMs switch to Linux as desktop OS at some point in the future. Wether you think Linux is currently more suitable as Desktop OS than Windows or not, it is an unstoppable force.
Think about it, the two major obstacles right now are probably hardware support (manufacturers not disclosing their schematics, or only supplying closed-source drivers) and certain applications not being available such as Flash, Photoshop and most games. I think that at some point, be it in 5 years, hell, maybe 10, a snowballing effect will develop as the number of Linux users grows, where more hardware and software companies will consider availability on Linux worth the effort.
And before you know it, you have a very usable and well supported desktop OS, free of charge. Now what do you think what those OEMs - which have been sticking to MS all this while to keep their precious margins wide enough - are going to do? They are going to give MS the finger and supply Linux, increase their margins or become more competitive with their pricing. I can't tell you when it will happen, but when it does, MS won't know what hit them.
Check out these screen shots ( http://www.extremetech.com/article2/0,1697,1931945 ,00.asp) regarding Windows Vista. The Linux folks have a whole lot of catching up to do, again. While they have been busy bringing the Linux desktop up to modern (ie Windows XP circa 2002) standards MS has been busy raising the bar significantly higher. There are some really nice features that will make the desktop much more friendly for novice users (the crowd LInux needs to capture). The good news is now Vista can be copied too! And since it's alot easier to copy than it is to lead, I expect Linux to catch up again in relative short order.
I'm sure you're right that Dell is keen to gently discourage the "average" user from buying these Linux boxes. Just look at the descriptions on the linked page: they're described as "workstations" (message: not one for Mom and Pop), and have suitably intimidating subtitles ("Elite", "Performance", "Advanced").
Then there are the descriptions of "ideal owner": "Demanding, price-conscious users requiring the power of a workstation over a desktop for specialized tasks". Again, it's a "get lost, n00bs" message.
. . . SUPPORT would cost much, much more with every Linux based system that they sell.
Thanks for all the proof you provide to support this claim. I've been wondering when someone would just stop spouting "support costs more!" gibberish and provide some evidence that it does.
Microsoft is to software what Budweiser is to beer.
Posting as AC for good reasons.
Most of the posts have focussed on whether linux is ready for the desktop of not and have the technical flavor.
The most likely reason why Dell won't promote linux desktops is their "Marketing Agreement" with Microsoft. These agreements are of course "voluntary" and have a clause that says, approximately, "we will promote and prominently display product X and none of the competing or potentially competing products will get marketed/advertised anywhere near the level of product X, in exchange for marketing dollars from the manufacturer of X." And these are a LOT of marketing dollars to keep the product X marketed/advertised at a MUCH more significant level than other products. These agreements may also have a confidentiality clause in them, that's why Dell is shy to talk about it and keep it "under the radar" of the Microsoft marketers/lawyers, but still be able to sell Linux desktop products. So the bottom line is, Dell wants to and can sell Linux desktops/products, but due to "the deal with the devil," it has to be kept low profile at least from a marketing perspective.
Regards.
How many years has Wal-Mart been selling a dirt cheap Linux system online without generating enough demand to bother putting it on store shelves? Dell isn't promoting the Linux desktop because there isn't enough demand for a Linux desktop to make it worth the bother. Linux nerds already buy Dell machines and install Linux themselves, so there's no point marketing to them, and the last thing Joe Blow on the street wants is to try and learn to use another operating system after finally learning how to use Windows update without paying the geeks at the Best Buy service counter to do it for him.
Most consumers don't care about Linux. They definately aren't asking for Linux. And that's not going to change, because for the most part, the Linux/Open-Source community is a bunch of *NIX hackers writing code for themselves.
>> Ease of use, ease of finding apps, ease of installing said apps
;)
I really have to say, install Ubuntu, enable Universe and Multiverse and fire up Synaptic, then come back here and say that
Plus the fact that 99% of drivers come pre-installed.
There are still areas that are unnecessarily difficult I'll grant you. Multimedia configuration for a start, but I've now reached the point where if someone I'm going to have to support, my parents for example, wants a new OS, I'll try to move them to Linux. Once it's set up right I think it'll work much better for them.
This of course assumes the apps are available, but tbh for most PC users I think they are. Open Office 2 is dandy, Firefox, Thunderbird or Evolution, media players, PDF viewers, instant messaging and so on and so on, it's all there.
Plus, as a Gnome user, I personally now find most of the apps I use to be far superior in terms of interface to the equivilent Windows apps.
It still has to catch up in some areas, but I think Linux has already overtaken Windows in many areas, and yes I do mean for the desktop user.
"Just to give a single example, something as simple as a CPU temp monitoring app, turned out to be a nightmare."
Funny. I just did sudo apt-get install mbmon
My other processor is big-endian.
This is probably the biggest problem facing those who would adopt Linux: there is such a huge morass of options it's hard to tell which path is the easy one.
I think your first point generally addresses that: most vanilla installs of the bigger distros (Debian / Ubuntu, Red Hat / Fedora, Suse) pretty much take care of those choices for you, unless you want to start exploring. The adventurous user has the option to explore, while the generic user just uses the stuff that's installed.
The adventurous user is in for quite an adventure, though.
Microsoft is to software what Budweiser is to beer.
next...
It doesn't matter what version of linux you run, if it has a package manager, you can find the right package and the right executable. I can install a new version of a program just by knowing its name; tell me how Windows provides anything even remotely that easy. Running a linux distro without a good package manager? You can download the same source code as everyone else and create the "Right" executable yourself.
"something as simple as a CPU temp monitoring app, turned out to be a nightmare."
Hmm. "apt-get install ksensors ktemperature". Or do it through Adept if you want a GUI; search for "temperature", click on the package you want (it shows the descriptions), click on "install", click on "commit changes". Again, far, far simpler than installing things in windows.
"Ease of use, ease of finding apps, ease of installing said apps."
If I can find and install the apps you are complaining about in less time than it took to write this comment, I think you are spreading FUD.
"MPlayer, for example: An app for watching movies, is command-line. "
You're right, mplayer sucks. Now how about Totem, VLC, Kaffeine, or Xine, all of which I have installed and all of which have nicer GUIs than Windows Media Player? This is not 1998; Linux *has* easy-to-use applications. Easier than the windows equivalents, in many cases. Examples:
K3B: CD/DVD burning, easier and more user-friendly than Nero
JuK: music collection player/manager, on the same level as iTunes, and *far* better than WMP.
Adept: package manager. windows equivalent: the "add/remove programs" dialog box, which is stone age.
Konserve: easy, simple backup tool. Windows equivalent: none?
A couple of other things: removable USB drives work wonderfully in linux (ubuntu, at least); to remove such a think I right click and choose "safely remove". The equivalent action in winXP takes at least 4 clicks through a bizarre and confusing popup that shows USB hubs. CD/DVD drives are treated just as easily in linux.
While my list is KDE-heavy and ubuntu-heavy, that is because I use KDE/Kubuntu. a Gnome user could likely list even more apps that are just as easy to use (Totem, for one).
"Most non-tech users don't even know Windows has a command line. "
Indeed, I can do everything from my GUI desktop in linux as well. Again, this isn't 1998; the linux command line is still present and is still invaluable, but in 2006, Linux *is* ready for the desktop.
Dell are not a boutique. They want volume. If your order was big enough - millions of bucks big enough - they'd probably install your pet chipmunk as an OS. In the meantime, they do offer Linux for those who want it. However, this is for the few folks who want and need Linux for a reason, in the same way that some folks might need a Sun workstation. It is absolutely not about offering the same stuff cheaper just because it has Linux and not Windows. Hence I would imagine, RHEL in the equation rather than some geeky DIYish offering that would result in a tsunami of support calls.
This market is a niche and it's always going to be very particular. At present there is no hard evidence that a mass market for desktop Linux will even exist, since desktop Linux is still not good or widely available enough to allow Joe User a fair crack at making an informed decision. Just my 2 cents, but I'd choose a nice Sun Workstation with an Opteron inside it over a Dell offering any day, then put on the distro of my choice. And the Sun stuff at this level is, as they say, surprisingly affordable.
Las qué passoun
tournoun pas maï
Why Novell doesn't make his own PC?
-A PC where everthing will work out of the box.
-Where I can play my mp3 and my DVD without reading HOWTO or adding repositories?
-No drivers problems
I think Adobe/Macromedia, Autodesk etc... will port their commercial apps more easily if there is a PC like that. And it's the best way for Linux to conquer the Home User market.
So I, for one, think that the real reason Dell keeps the Linux desktop at arm's reach is that it doesn't want to tick off Microsoft.
Wow. Maybe he should read one of his own links? If Dell did absolutely anything to upset Microsoft, even sneeze the wrong way, they would lose their status as a Tier 1 OEM and their costs would go up exponentially. They would also lose their privileged status as being seen to be promoting Windows, and their costs would go up even more.
OS pricing: The crux of the matter. Under Kempin's tutelage, Microsoft launched the Market Development Agreement (MDA) licensing concept in 1994. The drill for hardware makers went something like this: If OEMs wanted to license Windows 95 but didn't promote or sell it, they would pay a fairly hefty price per copy. If they agreed to co-promote the operating system in ads or issue a Microsoft-endorsed press release noting they had decided to offer their customers Windows 95 preloaded on new systems, they got a better price. The Windows 95 MDAs listed a dozen or so criteria through which OEMs could lower their per-machine fees. Those agreeing to preload the operating system on at least half of their PCs each month got a knock-off. Those agreeing to display the Windows 95 logo prominently on their advertisements got another benefit. Hardware vendors who okayed the whole list of Microsoft Windows 95 marketing criteria got a "bargain" rate of, on average, $60 to $70 per Windows 95 copy. That's for those who were considered tier-one hardware makers, committing to move a lot of Windows 95 copies. But there were then-and are still now-only a handful of tier-one vendors, including Compaq Computer Corp. and Gateway 2000 Inc. The next 12 to 15 vendors, constituting tier two, receive a slightly less favorable per-copy rate, even if they agree to the bulk of the MDA criteria. Tier-three players-the rest of the OEMs with whom Microsoft does business-get an even less attractive rate because they sell fewer boxes.
Look at the description of one of these linux systems:
Ideal owner: The most demanding users requiring elite dual-processor power, cutting-edge features and plenty of room to grow
"Elite dual-processor power." Hrrrmmm... Something tells me they aren't aiming this at your average home user. This is aimed at the basement hackers that have been bitching about Dell not selling anything but Windows on their desktops. It's a way for them to still sell hardware to geeks that don't feel like building their own system. It is not a way for them to push millions of additional sales to their desktop division. It is a reaction to the geeks that complained about Dell not selling anything but Windows based PC's. Just my thoughts.
Windows is to Linux as AOL is to the Internet.
Once you get enough experience, you take the training wheels off.
AOL is dying as users become more sophisticated. Windows will too. It might take longer, but it is just as inevitable.
My five year old daughter uses a Linux machine almost every day, and does not use windows.
Software Wars
Imagine if in the 80s and 90s each vendor had their own take on UARTs. Yes, there were some variations but more often than not a RS-232 device "just worked". Because of that many devices were created that extended the computer era. E.g. modems, mice, printers, plotters, joysticks, primitive networking :-), etc, etc, etc.
Funny, I have a quite different memory of the '80's! Most of the "standardization" you seem to feel was obvious wasn't accomplished until the latter part of the decade. Prior to that, modems used a number of different communication protocols, you had a number of different networking protocols and connectors, printers frequently needed to have new cabling made from scratch and drivers written, and joysticks were dependent on the particular brand of computer you bought. That doesn't count the number of different cards (and novel connectors)needed. Even something as "simple" as a monitor connection wasn't simple.
Yes, that all changed fairly quickly, but it wasn't that way in the beginning. Today I don't have to worry about telling my computer to use a dialup modem with so many bits, stop bit or no stop bit, echo or no echo, set the speed, etc. I just tell it to connect. But, I remember having to do that.
In some ways, Linux is where we were in the mid-to-latter part of the 80's. Yes, a lot of it was starting to standardize and become easier, but there were still a lot things we'd have to customize on occasion. It didn't bother the tech-savvy people all that much, but it drove the people who were just starting to use computers absolutely nuts.
Dell is probably the most worthless company ever to exist anyways, so who cares? Anyone who volunteerily buys a Dell computer should get his head checked.
I ran BBSes when I was 11-12 (1993 era) and modems then were mostly AT compatible (e.g. standard AT commands). It was also the case in 1990 when I first started connecting to BBSes.
:-). My BBS ran on a 25Mhz 386SX with a whopping 4MB of ram and three ISA 9600 modems (later upgraded to 14.4). We ran my BBS (I wrote one when I was 12) for a bit before switching to Renegade then proceeded to host Tattlenet (we were the north american gateway for Canada to Europe), TransCanada hosts (we were at the top of the hub chain) and a FidoNet hub. Used Desqview to multitask and some mailer (can't recall which) to handle the lists.
As for "stop bits" and all that jazz... you're a moran. Once you get it going you're set. Usually 8-N-1 was the default and worked with the modems I used (both internal and external). Those settings were only between you and the modem. The modem had it's own protocols which were also ITU standards...
Maybe in the early 80s when modems were still relatively new they were non-standard but that wasn't the case in the later 80s and early 90s.
You're talking to a kid here who build 386 boxes and knew what an IRQ was before I could solve trig problems in school
Computers were A LOT more standard back then then now.
You're confusing "it just works in Windows" (which often is not truly the case) with "it follows a standard".
There are standards for sound cards for instance. Creative set it with the Sound Blaster. Now we're all into MMIO so the AC'97 spec defines a chipset which has 5.1 capability and bi-directional ports. The cmipci chip is an implementation (a standard conforming one) of AC'97.
Similarly VESA 3 defines memory mapped overlays and other 2D enhancements which very few graphic card vendors conform to. At best they support VESA 2 with maybe linear frames.
Then you have IDE controllers, network devices, etc, etc...
How things are implemented underneath and how you interface are not the same thing. You can have two companies implement the same network device interface and still have two cards with different niche markets. The only reason they don't get a standard going is because they realize that they can always hire some newbie intern to write the windows driver they need.
Instead if they settled on a spec you could write one driver (hint: OSS folk would gladly do it for free) and you'd save yourself hiring that yuppy intern.
Tom
Someday, I'll have a real sig.
But given a choice, despite all my frustrations with Windows, I simply find Windows easier to use in a number of ways.
Having recently had to start using Windows after 5 years of not touching it, I can tell you that Windows is *exceptionally* unusable from my point of view. It's just nowhere near as userfriendly and capable as Linux.
On the other hand, with Linux, you usually have to get the executeable for your specific CPU if not your CPU and flavor of Linux
Yes, whereas Windows is far better because it only supports 1 type of CPU (x86)... I'm not sure what you're complaining about here - of course you can't run a program on an incompatable CPU, nomatter what OS you're using.
ease of finding apps, ease of installing said apps.
Yes, I too find typing "yum install foo" very taxing... no wait, I don't...
MPlayer, for example: An app for watching movies, is command-line.
Mplayer comes in both commandline and GUI versions. You can't tell me that giving the user a choice of whether they want to use the GUI or CLI is a bad thing.
I for one make a lot of use of the command line version.
but why don't they just include one so I don't go have to find one
They do - I get gmplayer installed with mplayer.
Most of the time I use the commandline version directly, on the odd occasion that I actually want to use a GUI version I tend to use Xine though.
Most non-tech users don't even know Windows has a command line. They don't need to know. That's a good thing.
I'm sorry, I can't see how you can complain about this stuff - if you install something that's designed to run from the commandline you can't complain that it runs from the commandline - if you wanted a program that runs from the GUI you damned well should've installed one instead.
http://blog.nexusuk.org
come on man, its not as user friendly as windows. windows isn't so great, but linux is far far worse. its just reality, as powerful as it is, its useful only to the technically competent. supporting such desktops would indeed be a nightmare.
wake up linux geeks. theres no conspiracy. linux is free and people still don't use it, that should tell u something.
Dell support varies widely depending on if you are a corporate (even a small business with more than 5 system purchases a year) or a consumer. The margins just aren't there to give good consumer support. As a small business with gold service, we get fast response from a English-speaking US-based service tech. They listen and are willing to replace parts as needed.
Gold does cost a few bucks more and the the machines are probably 2 to 5% more expensive than the consumer versions.
Also, if you buy the corporate machines (Optiplexs) rather than consumer (Dimensions) you don't get all the crapware pre-loaded.
Interesting for me to read that list.
I worked for IBM, for a while, some time back. Everything on that list was practiced by IBM.
I wonder if it isn't just common practice within the industry.
The Register covered this in October.
As I understand it. And a lot of techs in India know Linux.
If you configure two Precision 380 machines, one with Windows and one with RedHat, they come out to exactly the same price. So.... in one case you at least get an XP pro license if you need one, and in the other you just pissed away an extra $150 for nothing.
Buy the Windows one, download distro of choice, and go from there.
And those out there that own one too can back me up on this:
Dell not promoting Linux to run on their machines is a net positive. Not that Linux won't run on them, it's just that most of the hardware is really bad stuff. You can't polish a Dell turd by sticking Linux/MacOSX/*BSD on it.
Even Walmart tried to break in on the MS monopoly and failed..just think the company that had enough power to sink Rubbermaid and other manufactures could not even make in roads in the PC business. This being so, how can one even hope to see real competition in the PC and tech world? Dell knows this and will continue to run a middle ground..their survival depends on it. Hell they were forced into letting out AMD based low end stuff, because Microsoft started to jerk support from Intels 64 bit processors.
Dell still sells one heck of a lot of server units and the advent of Microsoft turning away from Intel hit the Dell server line hard. All this because Intel released a compiler for 64arch Linux that put Windows based servers to shame! It could very well be that Apple moved to Intel so that 64bit arch for the high end consumers will become more affordable. The small time recording and the video industry is demanding high end, quiet, 64bit equipment and Apple is there to fill the gap left by Microsoft and their shitty software and cheapass proprietary hardware.
Actually I think you nailed it. The problem isn't that there isn't anything out there that is windows like, it is that there is SOOOO much stuff out there for linux that people can't figure out what is the best for them (which usually means the easiest to use, gui wise). That and the stupid names.
No offense, but you post like somebody who does not buy, or support, desktops at a major corporation.
Big companies don't usually give a rat's ass if a desktop has a pentium or amd chip. It's all about support contracts, reliability, ass covering, and the like. Big companies feel much more comfortable working with other big companies.
thats funny. so thats why the best new cutting edge games only run on windows eh? windows doesn't have professional development tools/media creation applications like photoshop, 3d studios max or whatever etc? u joking? you imply the experience is neutered. well in most cases of relevance to any normal person that would describe linux actually.
http://www1.us.dell.com/content/products /compare.aspx/precn_n?c=us&cs=04&l=en&s=bsd
Note the "bsd" on the end of the URL, but, the pages borf up "Linux" instead of "BSD".
Dell needs to fix that first...
So why did Dell refuse -- no matter how we tried to word the question -- to admit that they really had moved a bit further toward offering Linux on the desktop?
5 1.htmrel=url2html-6618http://www.usdoj.gov/atr/cas es/f205700/205751.htm>
k eting/partner_initiatives/marketing-fund/
Or, better still, why doesn't Dell just start offering one Linux distribution as an option on their complete desktop line?
The reason is that, when push comes to shove, "Dell recommends the use of Windows XP Professional" on its desktops.
So I, for one, think that the real reason Dell keeps the Linux desktop at arm's reach is that it doesn't want to tick off Microsoft.
The reason is that Dell and others won't receive the kickbacks, oops, marketing funds provided by Microsoft if they advertise Linux or provide other non-Microsoft software on a Windows desktop (Firefox, openoffice, winamp etc.).
From the article here: ahref=http://www.usdoj.gov/atr/cases/f205700/2057
Pursuant to the MDA, Microsoft provides marketing funds -- in the form of discounts on the price the OEM pays for each copy of Windows -- to OEMs whose print advertisements and websites promote Microsoft's operating systems in a manner specified by Microsoft.
From Microsoft, http://www.microsoft.com/uk/partner/sales_and_mar
From the 1 February 2006 you may qualify for an important new benefit from Microsoft: the System Builder Cooperative Marketing Fund. If you qualify you can accrue funds that can be used to reimburse eligible marketing activities. This flexible funding is offered to Microsoft Partners for every Windows® XP System Builder licence you buy for: Windows XP Professional, Windows XP Media Center Edition, Windows XP Professional 64-bit, and Windows XP Home Edition.
Enjoy,
It's just the normal noises in here.
It's not Dell's problem to get some random 3rd party hardware working with a Linux-based Dell box, especially if it's running a standard release from RedHat or whatever.
3rd party manufacturers are getting a free ride from Linux, currently. It's time for that to stop, and for them to do some work themselves if they want their equipment to be "Linux-ready".
"It doesn't matter which version of Windows you run (okay, not necessarily with '95, '98 or something even more ancient) you can install the same .exe file and run it."
d /199877142828 Here is a list from symantec of which versions will run (and in this case NOT run)on different Windows Operating Systems. There are many.
I disagree. For example, my company uses pcAnywhere. Version 8 will not run on XP. http://service1.symantec.com/SUPPORT/pca.nsf/doci
Another one: pfs FirstChoice. Without a lot of tweaking it won't run.
There are more, but I've proven my point.
Squidward: "Spongebob, If I had a dollar for every brain you don't have, I'd have 1 dollar."
Where I have attempted to compile from source and run into difficulties, I emailed the developers and what's more got a reply. The problem being that I didn't RTFM Nonsense, for the average user they can Browse, Email, Edit documents and burn CDs without the danger of wiping out their C:\Windows folder into the bargan. Have you actually tried to do real work under the default desktop in XP. To do a search you have to click start->search, disable the talking dog, select from: 'search for pictures', 'search for files', disable the talking dog, 'on this computer', 'on the lan', 'the C: drive', 'the D: drive', 'the internet', subselection, search by date, disable the talking dog, browse folders, select folders to browse etc
Under bash type
I can think of nothing an average user might need that they cannot do through the GUI.
davecb5620@gmail.com
Our customers in some cases demand Dell hardware. In some other cases they require three years of next-business-day hardware support, and about the only manufacturer from which this is available at a reasonable price (in places like downtown Bangalore, for instance) is Dell.
Dell have been extremely unhelpful when it comes to supplying systems with linux preinstalled. For an example, see Exhibit A showing various Dell Precision systems, clearly showing a choice of operating systems. Then click on the Precision 380 (Exhibit B) which conveniently removes the choice.
Should you actually want to customise and buy a system, you get a screen looking like Exhibit C clearly providing you a choice between 'Genuine Windows(R) XP Professional, SP2(NTFS)(+Media) [Included in Price]' and exactly the same thing installed on FAT32.
This is, perhaps, Dell UK's definition of 'Choice'.
Let's see... Dell makes how much money reselling Win-dose versus how much providing free Linux? How many of their support staff are qualified to provide Linux support for the dipsticks that have trouble with email, but want to jump on the Linux bandwagon without troubling themselves to learn anything about the machine and how it works?
Nah, better they should keep making it not-easy to buy one of their machines with Linux; keeps prices down for the rest of us :-)
--- Asking inconvenient questions for over 30 years...
lol every reply against him makes it all the more obvious how not ready for average users linux is. and truely a nightmare for tech support. sometimes ..u gotta realize not everyone is a geek. yea really u know. steve jobs knows this and look what his ipod did.
This is slashdot, talking about linux. You're supposed to be talking about conspiracy theories or how everyone involved is just too stupid to realize how good linux is or how Windows is virus-ridden and insecure.
http://lkml.org/lkml/2005/8/20/95
The cost: The increased volume of support calls from the clueless n00bs that accidently bought one because they were stupid.
The benefit: Zero, because anybody smart enough to use Linux is able to figure out how to purchase one without a small link on their home page.
Microsoft could immediately put a nine figure dent into Dell's earnings, just like they did to IBM in the 90's.
Per-processor licensing is still happening.
I've got only one question to you: why do I, and many tech and non-tech people alike, feel uncomfortable with the Linux desktop if it is so ready? It's free. Why aren't more people just scrambling to use it?
Personally, I still feel that the Linux desktop is just eye-candy on top of the CLI where you have to go if you really want to do something. I can't drag and drop objects, click-and-point configure the system to the extent I can on my Mac or even on Windows. The integration, consistency (for instance, where in the application menu bars I can find Preferences) and usability just isn't there.
The owls are not what they seem
Let's face it, if Dell pushed the Linux line more aggressively, they could tick off M$, which could result in less favorable contract terms when it is time to renew their vendor relationship. Even a small increase in OS pricing multiplied by the number of machines produced would have a significant impact on the company's bottom line.
I use irony whenever I can, but my shirts are still wrinkled...
they can use this as a tool to hold their customers. They can sell specific hardware that have linux drivers so their customers won't go to buy (say scanner) from any shops but dell's?
I am harvesting funny/good quotes. Please help by putting them in your sigs
I read Slashdot daily. Ok, no, hourly. Actually, more than that.
I'm constantly amused that apparently no one on Slashdot except me has spent any time in a marketing department. Everyone here ought to be forced to do a 6-month-to-2-year marketing hitch as basic training.
Dell uses "Precision" to denote its workstation line, no? And "Optiplex" to denote its office desktop line.
Selling "Precision" workstations as "Desktops" sort of pantses the whole ridiculous idea that workstations are anything more than high-performance desktop machines, removes the veil of high-performance marketing, and makes any company that says what it's marketing as workstations are in fact desktops...drum roll, please...HAVE TO SELL THEM FOR LESS MONEY!
The reason they're not calling them desktops is that they want to charge workstation prices for them. No conspiracy needed - it's just typical marketing!
(and with apologiges to the "biggest fast-food chain" guy, if you buy an Opti, you get the same guts for the same model - you must be clowning around with the cheaper home-oriented "Dimension" desktops if you're getting different guts with each build. This is teh diff between Optis and Dimensions: the Optis are suitable for doing a standard image).
Than a bunch of news / blogs / other anti-MS sites? ;)
Seriously though, walmart has been selling linux PCs for a while now without hyping them as much as the anti-MS crowd would hope. If you feel a company has a good product, give them some of the best advertising they can get... word of mouth!
Prevent linux based DDOS's!
http://linux.denialofservice.org/
It's running now (MBM something, forgot the name), but it's just exemplary of the sh*t people tend to forget when talking about the userfriendliness of windows programs. Furthermore I just spend several afternoons installing "normal" programs on the windows pc of a friend of mine, she couldn't do it because there are too many things to consider! The default-installed aspi version wouldn't work very well with the cd-burner, the firewall gives pop-ups where you should sometimes ignore them, sometimes not, etc. etc. You need to be just as a computer-savy person for windows as for linux nowadays, with the difference that linux is only a pain during installation, but windows is a continuous pain, because you always have to be careful that some window might pop up that is either a security risk, or actually necessary. Most people in my family wouldn't know how to react correclty to these things, even I have trouble with it sometimes!
Furthermore I guess the GP was a troll anyway, goes all the way to say that linux isn't ment for the desktop but how does that explain that a big-bucks company like DELL introduces linux desktop machines in the first place?? As GP doesn't mention one single word about DELL's decision it sounds too much like a copy-paste of the standard MS fanboy answer in any linux-on-desktop topic.
Is linux more userfriendly then windows? Not yet. But if a PC builder the size of DELL starts making cautious moves towards linux desktops that might just be the sign linux is almost there. Also take into note that TFA mentions that some people might want to switch the moment the 6-version Vista arrives.
molmod.com - computing tips from a molecular modeling
My first x86 system (a pizza-box-shaped Dell System 220 with a 40MB hard drive and a 3.5" diskette drive) purchased in the fall of 1988 used a 20MHz Harris 80286 CPU and had one (1) MB of 60ns RAM.
That machine was a screamer for the time (Intel was only making 16MHz 286 chips), and Dell was making headlines in Byte and PC Mag for the high-quality 286 and 386 machines they were producing that ran rings around their competition performancewise.
"Cheap" was never their motto, at least in terms of hardware quality. There were a number of no-name PC vendors that claimed that title. If anything, Dell was the Porsche of their day. You got a fast PC, but you paid for it. It could be less expensive because Dell sold their product directly to the customer (no dealers like IBM and Apple had at Computerland), which cut costs down, but the kit itself was top notch, at least at that time (four years after they opened their doors).
Mainframe/UNIX Bit Twiddler and long time Windows/Linux Hobbyist.
The Theorem Theorem: If If, Then Then.
Unix is legacy. It is dead. Born by accident in the late 60's, never matured in the 70's, surpassed by VMS in the 80's, ditched by AT&T and the University of California, Berkeley in the 90's, ridiculed by Microsoft in the 1000th.
Why? Because Intel owns our collective asses. The only way we make a profit is from Intel paying us back (something called DPA) for every processor we sell. Without that DPA we might as well buy from retail stores and online vendors at retail price so they get the DPA's and profit. If we tried to stray from this partnership, they'd remove our DPA's and what little profit margin we have.
I'm certain Dell is under a similar partnership.
Why would Intel care then if Dell promoted Linux? That's where Microsoft comes in. For every Intel system sold with a MS OS on it, Intel gets a kickback. If the system sells without an OS or with a non-MS OS, then Intel doesn't make as much money.
All hail the freedom of choice in our capitalist Monarchic System.
lol every reply against him makes it all the more obvious how not ready for average users linux is. and truely a nightmare for tech support. sometimes ..u gotta realize not everyone is a geek. yea really u know
Please tell me which bit of my reply tells you Linux isn't ready for average users? The only thing I can see there that could be a problem is that users get a _choice_ as to whether to use the commandline or the GUI. I guess choice is confusing for some people, far better to force everyone into doing things in a particular way even if they don't like it.
I think there are 2 stumbling blocks that stop Linux being ready for the average user:
1. Lack of hardware support - this is getting better, but still if you don't buy the right hardware you're screwed. I'm not sure what can be done about this short of encouraging binary drivers (and this would be a very bad thing for stability)
2. People can't buy $random_software from PC World and install it. That's because most software companies only publish for Windows (to a lesser extent, Mac users have the same problem). FWIW, if you look around you can usually find an alternative piece of software (often free), but the average user would prefer to hand over a bundle of cash and buy a boxed application.
http://blog.nexusuk.org
Maybe I need to try Kubuntu, because I still can't get half of my peripherals working right and software installation is a big PITA for me. I think the last time I tried Ubuntu, it wouldn't boot, but maybe it will now.
Procrastination -- because good things come to those who wait.
The interesting thing about retail versions of Linux - they offer minimal savings at best over the more common Microsoft platform. Looking at Dell's offerings, I am reminded again why it is that Microsoft is the platform of choice for the majority of workstations in commercial, residential, and educational venues. Users know and are comfortable with the Microsoft interface, and without a massive cost savings, there is no need to force them to use something unfamiliar and different.
You're calling Windows98 "ancient"? Microsoft is still issuing security patches for it!
FYI: most unix systems run code that's 30 years old. For example, Berkeley LPD, sendmail, UUCP, many others. That's one of the virtues of OSS - you don't have to constantly flush investment down the toilet like you must with Windows. You choose what you run instead of being forced to abandon working solutions due to lack of OS support from the vendor.
Only old people in Dell use Linux? o_O
I figured that I would give http://linux.dell.com/ a shot and see if I got anything. And indeed, it led me to the Dell Linux Community Web. Check it out.
Thats why Dell won't promote its Linux desktops.
You promote excellence to protect your reputation. No amount of collusion can keep Microsoft afloat forever and then Dell will need it's reputation.
"Dell recommends the use of Windows XP Professional"
Would you? You already know it's wrong, because you know that people who know computers want free software. You know all the benefits of free software, ease of use, features, security and stability that Microsoft has promissed since 1995 and never delivered. Free software has buried non free software performance. Outside of a minority of legacy encumbered users, could you recommend XP to anyone?
Do you understand the power and consequences of Dell's recommendation? People who don't know any better trust Michael Dell as a reasonable and impartial source of technical knowledge. For some reason, they view him as a person free to recommend the very best. Evil prevails when good people do nothing. As long as major vendors continue to recommend sub standard software, Microsoft will have money to sue public schools and promote the anti-social worldview that non free software requires. The cost of promoting Microsoft is an insecure future without privacy, a censored, non participatory internet and a slavish belief that sharing is wrong, you don't own your computer or your culture.
Your own actions have the same consequences. Everytime you use non free technology to share, you force your friends to chose between collaborating with you and their software freedom. Everytime you avoid conflict and conform to the "Windoze is good enough" message, you give Bill Gates and everything he stands for a vote of confidence. The future is what we make it today. If you free yourself and promote freedom, that is what you will have. If you surrender to NDAs and those who would put dongles on your hardware, that is what you will have.
Friends don't help friends install M$ junk.
...Is Long.... Choking the Industry by the Gonads... Bah!
In the cited Dell article I find no reference to the religious bullshit mentioned in the slashdot article.
Well, to start with you are forgetting that apt, yum, etc. (and all the GUI front ends for them) manage the DL process for you. Even better, they'll manage the process of updating their list of software and the process of upgrading software cleanly. (Something that's only possible on an app by app basis with Windows). IMO that's the true strength of the package management tools over standard MS Windows app management; centralized control of app upgrades saves a HUGE amount of headaches.
I personally believe many people would be better served by dabbling their toes in distros like Ubuntu and Knoppix but convert to Debian before they get too serious. Why? Several reasons, actually. HUGE repository. Easy to use GUI (Snyaptic) for package management available. Install is relatively painless now (if still kind of ugly). Get it working once and forget about it. Run Debian unstable if you want the same level of instability that Suse/ RedHat/ Slackware/ Gentoo gives you. IOW, hardly any to speak of.
Mind you, I say this as a dedicated Gentoo user. I've got two desktops and a server running Gentoo that I've had up and operational for 3 or 4 years. I still put Debian on my wife's laptop, though. Why should she worry about maintaining CPU cycles and drive space for Gentoo portage when Debian is so much less resource dependent?
... and supported. Here are the Dell Open-Source Desktops. But, as you read the fine print you learn that there is nothing "Open-Source" about these desktops except the included FreeDOS media kit.
There are two ongoing problems with selling and marketing Linux "desktops".
#1. Support. If you stop selling the $100 piece-of-crap desktop as your "Linux product line" then you wont have so many people buying it simply because its the cheapest thing around. This causes your support issues. Not because of a learning curve, but because if they bought a $100 PC they probably havent the first clue what is in front of them, or even know what an OS is. Bringing us to #2.
#2. When you wise up and then realize that no self-respecting Linux user would buy one of those desktops, you also have to realize that if they know better than that, they probably also know well enough to just build their own for a better price and arguably better quality.
So theres the rub.
http://www1.us.dell.com/content/products/compare.a spx/desktops_n?c=us&cs=04&l=en&s=bsd
I have 4 dell computers, 3 bought with Winblows, 1 with no OS. Selling computers without the M$ tax is probably going to be the best deal going for Linux sales. I don't like Red Hat or Windows, my company doesn't like Red Hat or Windows, so we buy what we need (and can afford), and install what we want on it.
I use Slackware and Debian at home on my Dells, at work, we use FreeBSD on our Dells. Dell doesn't have the ability or perceived financial motivation to promote whatever people want, whether it be Unix or Linux. Offering a factory Red Hat install to businesses is a step in the right direction, but only to make mass alternative OS sales to companies that don't know what's out there, or just want to buy pre-installed systems with included tech support from the manufacturer.
By selling Linux PC's (not workstations) to the average consumer, they're sure to piss off M$, but considering they can hide under the "the user may have their own XP at home" guise while selling blank HD's in a new PC, then there's not really much that can be bitched about by the powers that be. As long as they're sold with either the easily deletable freedos, or with blank HD's, I'll continue to buy them that way.
Until the public decides that they want to demand alternatives, it's not going to be financially reasonable for Dell to piss off M$, and as long as M$ carries a huge market share, the public will never move to Linux. It's sort of a self-fulfilling prophecy of sorts that will keep M$ on top while the select few of us run Unix on our servers and Linux on our notebooks and home pc's. As far as Linux goes, there's not enough easily accessible software in the public eye to make people want to switch and not having many people to sell to, companies aren't going to spend the time and money developing software and advertising it to make people want to switch. I've used Slack forever, and I've never seen it advertised in Wal-Mart next to windows. Same can be said for Gentoo, Debian, Ubuntu, or whatever distro you use at home. I saw Red Hat Pro Server there once, for like $399 next to a Windows XP Home box for like $199. Which one do you think Joe Average is going to buy for his "puter"?
Honestly, before the flamewar starts, I have nothing against Red Hat, I just don't choose to use it. After all... Linux is all about choice.
Evil Walrus >83=
You have to pay for the support and updates of the include Red Hat distro, concidering that windows users split this bill with a billion people there really is no reason why Linux should be any cheaper than Windows.
People who buy Linux because it is cheaper are clearly not the targeted audience (and neither should they be, because they're all cheap bast&#ds) You should buy this system because you want included red-hat support on a tailored system without pissing away $150 on software you'll never use.
despite all my frustrations with Windows, I simply find Windows easier to use in a number of ways.
I had a unique chance last year of setting of the first computer systems for a rural church. I put them on Xandros 3.0 Deluxe with an HP Laserjet.
It took the secretary several months before she realized that Xandros wasn't some kind of special version of Microsoft Windows. She just thought that "the icons seem kind of different" from the ones at home.
In other words, for people with a simple level of expertise just about any modern GUI will do.
From the Dell Precision page:
Smart for businesses with proprietary software images or special Linux needs
That's one hell of an advertisement. Basically they're saying "buy these things so you can wipe them out and reinstall your site licensed copy of Windows".
It doesn't portray much confidence in the product.
Dells Linux URLS are http://www.dell.com/linux and http://linux.dell.com/
Sorry but any OS that expects users to understand that a file called Book, is different to BOOK or book or booK wont make it onto my mothers desktop :-)
http://www.dell.com/linux/ and http://linux.dell.com/
How so? Linux, or any Unix system, is the perfect OS to configure so that a support tech can more simply ssh into the box, look around, fix things themselves, and tell the user what not to do again.
Obviously it'd be a nightmare if you assume traditional methods of support, which are to try and get the user to communicate in detail what's going on (when they don't have a clue), and then try to get the user to do certain things (that they don't understand).
> Support will be an absolute nightmare.
This is simply wrong. When Dell ships an OEM copy of Windows XP, part of the OEM contract states that Dell assumes all support responsibility. All. The current machines being shipped with Linux are bundling Red Hat Enterprise Linux WS with a three year support agreement. Not being privy to the deal between Red Hat and Dell it is impossible to say what the terms are, but I suspect Red Hat, not being a convicted monopolist, is having to do more than simply supply rolls of serial number stickers and cashing Dell's checks.
And it isn't like Dell supports Windows either, they walk you through running the restore program. While that crappy support probably won't fly with these higher dollar workstation customers, if they started selling desktop class machines it would.
Democrat delenda est
But, wait. Think of all those windoze boxes which keep dropping in price. Dell's markup and premium USED to be nice, in the old days, as it was for the stronger competitors and some of the mom and pop shops.
But, now that u can get a windoze box from Dell for say $450 (assuming you steadfastly DON'T let Dell upsell you...) when Dell would LIKE to get $950, then that sharp cut is also excising (removing) meat (money) Dell or others want or need.
Most-- no better not say "Most"-- SOME Linux users DO know Linux enough to not be a thorn in Dell's side.
If Dell WANTS to be neutral and just sell the Linux boxes, they could put up links pointing to LUGs in the zip or area codes or post codes of the intending consumer. mshaft will SURELY hate that, it would be all about strengthening sales, helping the consumer, offloading unrelated or undesired consumer problems to the LUGS, AND, helping Dell gain better respect it surely wants AND needs.
C'mon Dell, u can do better.
It won't mean Dell is "endorsing" the LUGS; it just tells the intending consumer to go see a LUG after purchases. But, ahh, it might also signal the customer to see the LUG BEFORE purchase, meaning the LUGS might steer the shopper to, say Emperor Linux, or those who sell Linux-ready laptops PROVEN to be stable running Linux STABLY. Since Dell and others are loath to publish their internal findings, the Emperors and other specialty shops then would get the uptake Dell obviously doesn't want them to have. So, maybe Dell IS just playing "lip service", hoping to sputter out the Linux desktop market to a controllable level, and maybe to keep those mshaft marketing dollars rolling in.
Ahhh, there you might have it: ms MARKETING subsidies keeping the hardware makers afloat. The money, like crack to an addict, is too important to just "come clean", I suppose...
An, probably, another problem is that Dell -- like any IT department-- and any company-- would have to retrain existing or hire NEW Linux-capable IT staff AND employees. That would just have baldmer hurling MORE chairs, probably at Michael and crew. I'm sure they don't want dents in their heads and their arms and legs broken...
I didn't hit all the bases, but these might be a few of them.
Previously: "Linux... Toward the Sunrise..." Now: "Linux... Toward the-- No, now, part of Every Sunrise"
Sheesh...
I meant to put that under DogDudes' "Support" post. I guess, like Dell, I posted it in a manner that would obfuscate it's availability...
Previously: "Linux... Toward the Sunrise..." Now: "Linux... Toward the-- No, now, part of Every Sunrise"
You mean... You can't run Alpha or MIPS binaries on your x86 machine! Well, Windows surely doesn't have this kind of problems.
Rethinking email
Go here to configure one of those linux machines and scroll down to "DIGITAL VIDEO AND CONTENT CREATION OPTIONS." There, you can choose from an array of Windows software for your linux machine. I wonder if they preinstall it...
No, I'm not kidding.
Point 1 is a non-issue. Security holes wouldn't be any worse than they are presently -- if anything, a remote administration system could roll out updates to PC's much more quickly and easily. If you're really paranoid, by all means give the user a switch to flick so that a remote admin can't touch their system unless they're allowed in. Obviously you'd want a remote administrator to be properly authenticated, but that's not exactly hard to do these days.
Most people I know (not including the linux geeks) would prefer to have someone else administering their system because they don't have the time to do it themselves, nor do they understand or care about everything they have to take seriously to run their systems properly. They'd very seriously even consider paying a little for a service where someone else could keep their applications running, keep their computer working, and keep it in a state where they can use it for what they actually what to do. How many times have you gone to fix a friend or relative's PC when they've just thrown their hands in the air because they can't cope with all the crashing and spyware?
Windows is definitely improving with its remote administration systems, and perhaps such a system could even work via Windows in the near future, but linux (and most Unix-like) boxes are at least as easy to administrate remotely and have been for a long time. They're generally easy to lock down so that users can't break things as much accidentally, and they're also likely to be easier to keep predictible configurations for, if they're managed properly from the start.
Point 3 is also a non-issue, or at least no more of an issue than it already is under current systems. If anything, it'd be possible to help users with network problems much more easily. Obviously remote administration wouldn't be an option if the network broke, but that's only going to be a small proportion of calls anyway. It wouldn't exactly be much worse than existing calls for fixing network connections, and in rare cases where the network config was fried, users could even be provided with a pre-configured boot disk that would let an authenticated tech onto the system, assuming the physical connections were in place properly. Or hell, if they're really concerned, why not just an emergency boot disk that would re-install the operating system and applications but keep the main bits of the configuration and user's data intact?
Besides, if desired, a company like Dell could easily write their own network management interface for Linux that would give users at least as much direct control over and information about their network settings as they have in Windows, as long as people didn't play with the configuration (and most users wouldn't).
As for point 2, I could only disagree with that. It's 100% a trust thing, but it wouldn't be the first time -- it's necessary to trust service-people to do their jobs properly all the time. Businesses have to trust their IT employees all the time, so what's the difference here? Strict procedures about protocol for looking at other other user's systems, appropriate tracking of what happens, are really all that should be needed to keep insurance companies happy. If Dell discovers that someone in their employ has been abusing the position, then by all means take the appropriate actions. If users don't trust Dell, or some other designated administration company, to manage their systems, then by all means they should do it themselves... but they shouldn't let techies into their homes to fix their computers, either.
Yes, whereas Windows is far better because it only supports 1 type of CPU (x86)... I'm not sure what you're complaining about here - of course you can't run a program on an incompatable CPU, nomatter what OS you're using.
*cough* OS X *cough*
And before that, MacOS 7-current will run programs designed for 680x0 CPUs on PPC CPUs. In fact, if you can run Classic on a x86 Mac (not sure if that works...) you could conceivable run 680x0 apps on x86.
Comment of the year
www.dell.fr offer various flavours when you select a server. M$ Windows Server 2003 R2, M$ Small Business Server 2003 RedHat Linux 4 ES RedHat Linux 3 ES SuSE Linux Enterprise Server 9 Novell NetWare 6.5 with 5 User Licenses French - Novell NetWare 6.5, NFI, I purchased one a couple of years ago with RH9 Last time I opted for "No OS" and installed RHFC
try http://www.dell.com/vista/ and you get a page titled 'Microsoft Clarity. Dell's Vision.'
He who knows best knows how little he knows. - Thomas Jefferson
dell is not a linux advocate. if you're expecting them to push linux to try and build a market for it, well, that's not their interest.
That with your dozens of examples you're just proving the point that Linux is not friendly enough for the average computer user? I'm tech savvy but have no experience with Linux. I recently installed Fedora, but I don't know what half the things mentioned in the posts above are or how to use them. I'm still trying to figure out why I can only get the most recent version of firefox I downloaded to run from the commandline and not the desktop, let alone how to "install" it. Yes, that's sounds pretty sad, and I'm sure I'll figure it out given the time to sit down and mess with it. But lord knows my mother and her friends wouldn't know what to do, it's taken them years to get use to Windows.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
I had a few Amstrad systems back then (PC1512/PC1640 8086-based). Some of them had EGA displays, some CGA and some mono (Hercules?). All of these had different monitor connections.
I am TheRaven on Soylent News
GNUstep allows the creation of NeXT-style multi-platform binaries in a single bundle. It's possible to distribute a GNUstep app in a bundle that will run on Linux x86, FreeBSD SPARC and Linux PPC (picking a completely random example) - and just needs downloading and launching (with openapp from the command line or from a GUI).
I am TheRaven on Soylent News
Tell that to those people who ran NT 4 on MIPS or Alpha...
I am TheRaven on Soylent News
JuK? Wow, you're really missing out.
amaroK is so much better. It's got so many more features, like automated lyric search and cover management. It's even skinnable and extendible, and can connect to kde-apps.org to find new scripts.
Why is it that when you believe something it's an opinion, but when I believe something it's a manifesto?
I'm not really trying to offend you mate or anything, but noone really cares what you think. I certainly don't, and neither does Dell. Whether Linux is "ready for the desktop" is a completely personal opinion and simply doesn't matter here. Dell isn't going to read Slashdot, see a bunch of obsolete truths and say "STOP ALL LINUX PRODUCTION!!!" since how good Linux is actually has nothing to do with this topic. The issue at hand is that people actually want to use Linux, even if you don't, and, more importantly, there are a lot of those people. We are wondering why Dell isn't trying to gain money from those people, rip them off, do what good companies do.
Vista
Get thee glass eyes, and, like a scurvy politician, seem to see things thou dost not.--King Lear
Dell PrecisionTM open-source n Series (1) workstations deliver maximum workstation performance. Smart for businesses with proprietary software images or special Linux needs, these systems are available with factory installed Linux.
(1) In order to boot this system, you must install an operating system. A FreeDOS media kit has been provided which will allow you to boot your system once installed. Please note that many common applications will not run and/or fully function using FreeDOS, and in order to run these applications, you will need to install the appropriate operating system and/or device specific drivers. Consult FreeDos.org or your chosen operating system vendor for compatibility details. Customers interested in a Microsoft® Windows® solution should purchase a Dell Dimension(TM) desktop, OptiPlex(TM) desktop or Dell Precision(TM) workstation pre-loaded with Windows XP Professional.
Forget support, all that I really want is for an OEM like dell or someone to sell a range of PCs where all the hardware inside is gauranteed to work with linux (or "linux" as shipped with the PC).
:)
Just sell it with "no support other than replacement parts under warranty" and go.
Especially this would be nice for Laptops (which are traditionally the hardest to get working with linux)
Basicly, it would mean you could get a machine from a big name OEM with a well known distro on it and you would be sure that when you set it up that all the hardware in the machine has been tested and is working under linux as installed. Link it to the "automatic update" services that the distro has so that you can keep your box up to date and you have something that would be quite popular amongst people who like linux and want to run it but dont want to spend hours trying to get hardware working. Simply having a machine where all the hardware components have functional usable linux drivers that actually work would be nice
As for "stop bits" and all that jazz... you're a moran. Once you get it going you're set. Usually 8-N-1 was the default and worked with the modems I used (both internal and external). Those settings were only between you and the modem. The modem had it's own protocols which were also ITU standards... Maybe in the early 80s when mode
Hmm.. I know how to spell "moron". I also don't suffer from your reading disability. What part of the "first part of the decade" and the "'80's" did you miss? All of it, apparently.
By the time you were getting into BBS's, things had pretty much standardized around the Hayes command set (the "AT" commands you mention). Just to give you hint, all the things I mentioned are things I actually did, to arrange data transfer between computers and to access BBS's back in the early 80's. It was by no means 8-N-1 as a "standard." There were quite a few that used a 7-bit system, some required even or odd parity settings, and even setting flow control method.
When you got into the 386/486/586 era, Dell was more famous for shipping fast machines at incredibly low prices. Of course Dell's plasticy machines were considerably more slapdash and less-refined than the steel Compaqs and IBMs of the day.
Ultimately Dell's allegiance to Intel put the in the #1 spot. While Compaq and HP mucked around with special crippled components, no-name chipsets, and "non-standard" BIOSes, Dell was the best of the clones -- basic, very average in all ways, Intel-Everything, and mostly non-problematic. The cases are still cheap plastic, but so are everyone else's nowdays.
Whenever I hear the word 'Innovation', I reach for my pistol.
"The page you requested may no longer exist on Dell.com"
"Just to give a single example, something as simple as a CPU temp monitoring app, turned out to be a nightmare."
Just to give a real world desktop example - which 3 desktop user give a fuck about CPU temp? Yeah that is what I do with my desktop time (and expect my 300 staff to do) - monitor CPU temp. What will it fail the solitare test too???
"but I generally see the failings in being the areas that affect your non-tech users. Ease of use, ease of finding apps, ease of installing said apps."
Dear PR wanker trying to be a slashdotter,
You are a wanker:
yum -y remove negative-ms-lovin-pr-wanker
No match for "wanker" found.
The Dell System 220 I owned had a steel case, as did all of the Dell models I remember from the time. Not plastic.
Mainframe/UNIX Bit Twiddler and long time Windows/Linux Hobbyist.
The Theorem Theorem: If If, Then Then.
Unfortunately volumes are still not there when it comes to commoditized Linux desktops. Most Linux desktops are still somewhat custom, with custom distro, custom support requirements etc. I think for a while Linux desktops and laptops will be mostly provided by boutique Linux expertise houses like Linuxcertified.
I have to say - Debian-style OSes have spoiled me. I can grab and search for any type of package and install it and all dependencies automatically. Much easier than Windows or OS X or even other Linuxes. I use Ubuntu, and have never had to build a package from source. There are thousands of packages in the default 3 repositories, and they are searchable. You are telling me that it is easier to go to the store, pick up a box, make sure that it works with your version of Windows, bring it home, pop it in the tray, have it installed (perhaps without the ability to remove it via the Add/Remove programs "package manager") and then roll as opposed to : Opening syanptic, doing a search, marking for install, and clicking install - then using? Give it a shot some time - it really is perhaps the most sane system I have ever used or seen for package additions / deletions. apt-get all the way, baby!
It doesn't matter which version of Windows you run (okay, not necessarily with '95, '98 or something even more ancient) you can install the same .exe file and run it.
So actually, you can't.
On the other hand, with Linux, you usually have to get the executeable for your specific CPU if not your CPU and flavor of Linux.
With windows you *also* need this. It's just that windows isn't availible for very many CPUs. Try running a 64 bit windows app on your pentium pro.
Same thing with windows versions. Apps usually don't work across all windows versions.
Once again, you'd don't really have a point.
Or, God forbid, you actually have to download the source and build it yourself, which has happened with me with a number of apps because I simply couldn't get the package to install for some reason or another (maybe I couldn't find one of its dependent packages or I couldn't install one of the dependent packages).
You should be using software that manages dependencies for you. What are you running, linux from scratch? Seriously though, you're compaing about things that don't make sense. Tools exist that handle this, yet you're implying it's a universal truth about running linux. It's BS.
Just to give a single example, something as simple as a CPU temp monitoring app, turned out to be a nightmare. I spent 3 days trying to get a couple of them installed. Never managed to pull it off, despite passing tons of messages back and forth on linuxforums.org
Did you never get them installed, or did you never get the actual drivers configured? Somehow I suspect it's the later... something which is a non-issue if you're buying a preconfigured box from Dell.
MPlayer, for example: An app for watching movies, is command-line. That makes no sense to me. Sure, I can get a front-end for it, but why don't they just include one so I don't go have to find one
It does include one!
I use it all the time. Type "gmplayer".
If you're gonna suck at Linux fine, but don't go around pretending it's someone else's fault!
Life is too short to proofread.
I've tried AmaroK, and prefer JuK because it does everything I want it to do and doesn't have bells and whistles that I don't need. I've dealt with far too many zealots pushing their favourite widget-polisher; it's great that you like amarok, but don't try to convert me.