Why Dell Won't Offer Linux On Its PCs

derrida sends us to an article in the Guardian by Jack Schofield explaining why he believes Dell won't offer Linux on its PCs. In the end he suggests that those lobbying Dell for such a solution go out and put together a company and offer one themselves. Quoting: "The most obvious [problem] is deciding which version of Linux to offer. There are more than 100 distros, and everybody seems to want a different one — or the same one with a different desktop, or whatever. It costs Dell a small fortune to offer an operating system... so the lack of a standard is a real killer. The less obvious problem is the very high cost of Linux support, especially when selling cheap PCs to naive users who don't RTFM... and wouldn't understand a Linux manual if they tried. And there's so much of it! Saying 'Linux is just a kernel, so that's all we support' isn't going to work, but where in the great sprawling heap of GNU/Linux code do you draw the line?"

Comments

Stop it!

[Anonymous Coward]

More importantly, isn't anyone else tired of hearing about why or why not? Enough already, no one really cares.

Re:Stop it!

[Mateo_LeFou]

"90% of computer users who just want to check their e-mail, surf the web and write a few letters"

This is why it is *stupid as *hell for 90% of users to spend more than $400 on a computer and more than $0 on the software.

So how come the average price of a desktop is $700. "Vista-capable" ones probably average over $1000. Add $200 for MS software and you've got *almost *all of the market paying three times what any sensible person would pay.

Bullshit

[JoshJ]

"Start your own company and do it yourself?" The market is saturated- there's already a large number of major OEM computer manufacturers. Trying to reach that level from scratch isn't going to work. That's like saying "You don't like Coca-Cola or Pepsi? Start your own soda company then." It's wholly impractical and simply dodges the issue.

Re:Bullshit

[PinkPanther]

Dodge the issue? Which one is that, that Dell is out to make money?

His suggestion of starting a company is simply to highlight that there is A LOT of effort involved and that even a company like Dell likely can't see much business benefit in trying to go down this road. If Dell cannot do it with their cookie-cutter approach to most everything, then a completely different approach is needed and the author is suggesting that the collective figure that part out.

And by "cannot do it", I mean "cannot come up with a viable business plan". There is a very limited market for Linux on cheap PCs; what market there is would have extremely small profit margins; what market there is is further fragmented between the distros and desktops; and the training for a support organization would be next-to-killer to set up. How many Linux gurus do you know that want to either man phones or want to write up support scripts?

I'd love to see reasonably priced PCs come out with a stable, robust, well documented Linux distro. Unfortunately at this juncture, I don't know of one (yes, I run Ubuntu and Fedora...no they aren't well enough documented for a corporation to venture into supporting a disperate class of users).

The majority of people I know that run Linux exclusively are very picky about the boxes they run on. Most either built their own or completely spec'ed them out themselves. Dell simply would not be a place that these folks would buy from. Myself, I run Linux on just about any kind of box...but I'm not out to run bleeding edge apps on them, I simply want a shell, a text editor and some server software.

I would gladly buy a Dell with Linux, but there aren't enough of me to support a business model for Dell. I don't know what the overhead of them setting up a product line is, but I suspect that they'd have to yield many hundreds of millions of dollars to make it worth their while.

Re:Bullshit

[mrjohnson]

Not to mention... Penguin Computing already does this.

What people want are a large computer firm to sell name brand computers with Linux, not generic boxen. (I don't know why though -- I bought my last workstation from Penguin and it friggen rocks.)

Re:Bullshit

[magarity]

"Start your own company and do it yourself?" The market is saturated- there's already a large number of major OEM computer manufacturers.
 
But there are no companies that are selling support to a Linux distro on Dells. Here's how it plays out, in familiar slashdot formatting:
 
1: Pick several models of Dells
2: Pick your favorite Linux distro and get make an image tweaked for models in step 1
3: Sell support contracts for said install image to others whose favorite distro is the same as your
4: Maybe make a little profit but more likely spend half your time explaining why you picked distro X instead of Y and the other half of the time trying to figure out what when wrong when the users heavily modified and recompiled your carefully tweaked image in bizarre ways without admitting to doing so when they call for support.

Good point

[Anonymous Coward]

Linux isn't really for the faint hearted, and is an absolute nightmare to maintain if the user is used to MS bloatware.
Many MS users don't know what a driver is or where to find one, what do they do when their new printer doesn't come with linux-compatible drivers?
He brings up a good point with the difficulties of providing tech support. Maybe Dell should offer computers with blank drives and let the buyer select a distro cd to ship with it, with the explicit instruction that tech support relating to software issues won't be availible.

Re:Good point

[danheskett]

The problem from Dell's point of view is touched by the author.

If you go configure the cheapest possible PC you can at Dell's website, you can do it damn cheap y just about any measure.

But they try like heck to upsell you to something, anything, with a decent profit margin.  Two of the biggest profit makers, in no special order are printers and cameras.  At-home photography is a cash cow.  HP isn't anything practically but an *ink* and paper company.   Selling you a $500 PC with a $100 printer and $100 camera is a great sale to Dell because that $200 of add-on's is a whole different margin category than the PC.  Plus it leads to years of sales opportunitis for ink, batteries, paper, etc.

So, when you say you had to research which printers worked well and which ones did not that should clue you into a big worry.  Actually getting software that is the right mix of features/ease of use for a simple needs user is also a major concern.  Selling a product which limits upsell potential for high-profit products is a really bad business decision.

I have no problem with Linux whatsoever, but hopefully Dell will think carefully about succumbing to the pressure from a highly selected, highly elite techno-saavy crowd who is probably not representative of the entire set of Dell customers.  Selling Linux pre-loaded needs to be done carefully, with carefully crafted expectations.    Nothing but nothing can damage the long term prospects of Linux than putting it unsuccessfully into the hands of the mass market.  Literally nothing can undo the perception of a product as a cheap "knock off" of something else.  It is the kiss of death for a generation or more to a good brand name.

Finally, though there isn't what I would call a great track record with MS, oddly enough, there is a certain stability to Windows in terms of release schedule.  Even compared to other commerical OS'es, Windows moves at a glacial development pace.  And when a new release happens it's a gigantic bang complete with lots of hype but also some carefully planning.  Honestly, with Linux, it is entirely possible that a major or even minor release could have very large implications and Dell could be left holding the bag with it's customers.  This could happen with MS, but Dell is a large enough customer that frankly pressure can be applied directly up the chain.   A reasonable ancedote goes back a few years to when I used GNUCash everyday.  It was nice.  I was working off a desktop install that I had compiled mostly from scratch.   It seems like suddenly the GNUCash people recommended not compiling yourself, and all the make scripts fell apart in my environment.  They posted a message on the site about using a binary packages as the new norm, and here are all the ones we support.  I ended up fixing the scripts myself, but that's not the point.  Things are better now and I still use it everyday.  But look at their <a href="http://wiki.gnucash.org/wiki/FAQ#Q:_What_hap pened_to_my_Profit_and_Loss_report_when_I_upgraded _to_2.0.3F">FAQ</a> page.  Compare to the closest version of that page from MS <a href="http://support.microsoft.com/ph/11403">here< /a>.  This is a product that costs, essentially, $19 - $60 bucks, depending on the version.  This type of difference in overall "polish" gets more and more pronounced all the time.  And if it's that bad for Windows v. Linux, imagine how bad it is for OSX vs. Linux.

Re:Good point

[Technician]

If you reinstall then you get a guaranteed result in a predictable time, at minimum cost.

Minimum cost? With Windows moving from an install CD to a manufacture supplied disk image CD, the cost of downtime and rebuilding is high. Take an early XP install for example. How long does it take to reinstall, install all the patches, install all the drivers for the newer printers, PDAs, Cameras, AV, restore system prefrences including e-mail accounts, bookmarks, calandars, and settings for aftermarket software packages?

My Wife's computer had the software for burning CD's corrupted. (Adeptec Easy CD Creator) It should be a simple fix. Remove the damaged program and re-install. I got the remove OK, but there is no media for the reinstall from without re-imaging the drive. Would you be willing to reinstall everything from ground zero to fix a software application?

I borrowed a copy of the CD burner from a friend and pirated a copy because there was no way to reinstall my legal copy without the cost of flushing the entire drive. This is bad software management in the worst way. These kind of expensive problems is one of the main reasons I have been looking at alternatives. I like applications that are maintainable without wipeing the entire OS installation.

The cost of manpower for downtime for a recovery on a Windows system is too great.

Re:Good point

[Blakey Rat]

I love these personal stories that are utterly irrelevant to the story, and yet get modded up.

Sure, *you* think fixing things in Linux is easy... but you also fixed it by editing the Hosts file. Do you know any average computer users (Mac, Windows, or Linux if there are any average users on Linux) that even know what the Hosts file is or how to edit it? An "easy" fix for this crowd would be, say, "I threw iTunes in the trash and then used Apple Software Updater to download a new copy of iTunes." Anything more complicated than that is a geek fix, and is completely irrelevant to this discussion.

Then the obligatory part where the advanced computer user who fixes Linux can't fix a simple problem in Windows, despite Windows having as much or more available support. I find it hard to believe that somebody who knows how to edit the Hosts file can't reinstall a scanner driver. I'm not calling you a liar as such, I just find it very very hard to believe.

Also I don't even get the point of this paragraph:

I had a meeting where the guest speaker brought a Power Point presentation. My Windows machine with Office 2000 did not display the presentation properly. The text box appeared all at once instead of bullet by bullet. Switched to the Linux partition and Open Office presented it properly. Later I found the free Power Point viewer from the MS site.

Are you attempting to communicate something, or just relaying a really dull anecdote?

Re:Good point

[TemporalBeing]

So, when you say you had to research which printers worked well and which ones did not that should clue you into a big worry. Actually getting software that is the right mix of features/ease of use for a simple needs user is also a major concern. Selling a product which limits upsell potential for high-profit products is a really bad business decision

I won't argue that do that would be a bad business decision; but, on the other hand, if Dell does have the demand for it (which there seems to be) then they could use it as an opportunity to push more manufactures to support Linux so that there is a larger upsell potential so they can take the market. This may start by first offering just stuff like they do now (e.g. FreeDOS) and then start using the sales numbers of FreeDOS based systems to show manufacturers that there is potential and persuading them to support Linux, thus growing its capabilities, and at the same time working with Linux Distros to make sure that the plug 'n play abilities (e.g. Hotplug) work better with the hardware from the vendor's they are pushing.

E.g. push the hardware vendors to support Linux and the distros to support the hardware vendors, with promises of sales for both if they do so.) They could even move their support for Linux to the distros. Example phone call:
User - calls Dell Tech Support
Dell - "Press 1 if Windows, 2 if Linux,..."
User - Presses #2
Dell - "Press 1 for Red Hat Distro, 2 for Novell Distro,..."
User - Presses 1
Dell - Please wait while we connect you to the Red Hat Technical Support line for Dell Customers
(System transfers call)
Dell/Red Hat - Hello, Red Hat Technical Support for Dell Customers, How may I help you today?".

Yeah - it can work, and Dell could outsource their support to the distros instead of overseas. Win-Win for both.

This has been answered many times

[El Cubano]

The most obvious [problem] is deciding which version of Linux to offer. There are more than 100 distros, and everybody seems to want a different one -- or the same one with a different desktop, or whatever.

This has been answered many times. The people who know enough to know that they want a different distro can figure out how to get it on there. Therefore, they can pick a noob-friendly distro (like Fedora or Ubuntu), thereby guaranteeing the existence of drivers for the hardware. The rest of us who want to be all l33t and install Debian, Gentoo or even Linux From Scratch can figure it out ourselves.

Re:This has been answered many times

[Prof.Phreak]

I think distro is irrelevant.

The whole purpose behind Linux on a Dell would be to ensure that all hardware has an easily available Linux driver.

They could install their own Dell distro for all I care. I'll buy -that- only 'cause all their hardware would work under Linux, AND, I wouldn't have to pay for Windows.

I'd imagine most folks who want Linux on a Dell box have the same motives.

In fact, if they care for support, just offer those configurations without -software- support. Just hardware.

Re:Ignorance is just so wonderful to see in action

[Anonymous Coward]

You cannot honestly think the level of Windows support necessary for the average computer user is ANYWHERE near comparable to the level of support that would be necessary for Linux, can you? The first time a technician has to explain to grandma how to manually edit a .conf file is the last time anyone in that person's sphere of influence would ever buy from that company. Linux is simply not ready to be a widespread desktop OS.

It's not about the number of distributions

[bunbuntheminilop]

It's all about hardware that works. It's great that I could buy a computer with Ubuntu on it, but you know I'm going to format it the second it comes though the door and install what I want. When I install what I want, I WANT it to work, because the kernel has supported that hardware since version 2.6.whatever.

Re:Ignorance is just so wonderful to see in action

[sconeu]

Dell supports windows all the time, as part of their business, and you presume to say they don't know how it's done?

<ANECDOTAL>
Based on my one time calling tech support (in Bangalore, I assume), Yes, I'd be willing to say that they don't know how it's done!
</ANECDOTAL>

OK, They know how it's done (let script monkeys handle the caller), but they don't know how it's done *RIGHT*.

So Windows is easy, then?

[Oshawapilot]

Yes, Linux is no piece of cake to support to naive users, but is Windows that much better?

I've dealt with so many naive Windows users who couldn't (or don't know how) to install the most basic of Virus/Spyware protection, or how fix the most basic of issues.

I guess it's a matter of the lesser of two evils. Dell would rather help "naive" Windows users then perhaps open the door to something more secure and support "naive" users there instead.

Dell doesn't provide Windows support

[Foofoobar]

Dell supports their PC's and will try to make sure the device is working but will not sit there and try to support every different Microsoft app that there is. They only try to support basic functionality and basic apps and stick to security, integration and general software maintenance.

So how is this different from supporting Linux? All they have to do is create a knowledgeable support staff, good knowledge base and they'll have pretty much the same thing they have for Windows. It's really not that hard once they make the decision as to what distro they are going to support, strike a deal with the distro's maintainers, and maybe even farm out the support to the distros maintainers or a third party. Pretty simple when you think about it.

Linux users are just like Peta.. sorta..

[Micklewhite]

It seems to me that the folks who actually want Linux are generally the sort who'd just go out and build their own computer and probably wouldn't buy a Dell to begin with.
I suppose it's like how Peta is always bugging people to switch over to a pure vegan diet despite the health benefits, it'll never happen.

Anyhow. Anybody who actually needs 'support' for an operating system is using it wrong. (that's not supposed to be taken seriously, it's a joke)

Re:Ignorance is just so wonderful to see in action

[Canordis]

I hope parent is merely a troll (Grandma + config file is rapidly turning into a troll meme) but I'll bite. 1998 called; they want their lack of GUI configuration tools back.

On my Ubuntu box, I have had to manually edit configuration files to do two things:

• Install and configure beta software
• Install and configure Apache + MediaWiki
• Configure Vi

The one other type of config file I've had to edit regularly in the recent past are xorg.conf files. A computer that comes with Linux preinstalled would never need xorg.conf twiddlery; reconfiguring it when you upgrade your graphics cards isn't a particularly difficult thing to do (If you're the sort of person who is likely to upgrade your own hardware, then you can do it).

The real reason Dell won't offer Linux PCs is plainly that it's not a good deal for them. It would mean more expensive Windows licenses, and it would mean less money for them from all the people paying them to bundle crapware with their boxes. The only way to have good, high-quality Linux PCs is to have an OEM willing to sell nothing but Linux boxes. Preferably one willing to sell well-designed, high-end computers and laptops with fully compatible hardware and pre-installed, thoroughly tested desktop environments and proprietary format support. Hopefully, packaged with a nice manual and long-term tech support for a particular set of "supported" packages too (Like Canonical does with Ubuntu).

Hey, I can dream.

Re:Ignorance is just so wonderful to see in action

[taupin]

No, Windows is not easy to support; whether users can use it is not Dell's problem. But rolling out an entirely new operating system on its machines means Dell has to train new/existing support personnel to deal with Linux problems - from serious errors to "How do I launch programs without a Start menu?" - in addition to dealing with other issues (configuration, etc). Doing this would cost Dell a fortune which they probably would not get back from the marginally greater sales offering Linux would net them.

The demand isn't really there

[sheldon]

I'm surely gonna get troll rated for this, but it needs to be said...

I've been there done that. Had an Amiga, used Linux and so forth at one time or another. I remember with the Amiga how many of us wrote letters to Software, Etc. or other companies begging them to support our computers. And then the demand never materialized as we claimed it would. So eventually, the Amiga was dropped to the dustbin of history. After buying a PC, I came to realize that the Amiga really wasn't "better", it was simply different. advanced in some ways, behind in others.

The Linux "demand" is similar. It's largely just astroturfing, rather than real demand from customers. It's people from /. going over to the polls on the Dell opinion site and clicking "Yes" thousands of times. [Or did you not realize that advocacy groups can astroturf as well as corporate groups?]

I'm fairly certainly Dell understands this. They've been around a long time. At one time they even release their own version of System V which was highly regarded in the industry. So they're not unfamiliar with Unix. They've also at various times offered machines without operating systems, or even with Linux.

But the demand wasn't there, which is why they keep falling back to the position they are in, and why despite freeping their poll they are unlikely to listen to it. Maybe they will, and if they do, you'd better start buying your machines from Dell to backup your poll answers.

As for open source advocates starting up their own company to sell machines. It's been tried. It was called VA Linux. They changed their name, abandoned selling computers and now run sourceforge.

Distro problem, eh?

[FunWithKnives]

The most obvious [problem] is deciding which version of Linux to offer. There are more than 100 distros, and everybody seems to want a different one -- or the same one with a different desktop, or whatever...

There is a horribly easy solution for this "problem": Support only one major distro, yet make sure that all hardware included with the PC is compatible with Linux. Slap a "Linux Certified" sticker on the damn thing and quite a few people will buy it. If they're more advanced, then they'll appreciate the fact that when they install their favorite distro instead of whatever the PC comes with, they won't have to hunt down a forum thread that points to an obscure hardware driver that is still in alpha, because they know that the hardware will "Just Work (tm)." If they're new to computers, or are the "A computer is an appliance" type, they won't have any need to switch from the supplied distro to anything else in the first place. It's a win win situation.

Either this guy didn't think his objections through very well, or he is just spouting FUD and hoping people take it at face value.

Re:Ignorance is just so wonderful to see in action

[westlake]

Generally speaking, Grandma's sphere of influence isn't very big when it comes to operating systems, is it?

Grandma is fifty, and working full time. Grandma is seventy, a senior volunteer at the local library or community hospital. Grandma can't be ignored.

Re:Ignorance is just so wonderful to see in action

[bky1701]

Have you used linux in the last 5 years? Save slackware, every distro I have seen had a GUI app that did at least those things, some better than others, but all did most to some extent. SAX worked the best from what I seen (much better than windows)... but I didn't go very far with ubuntu, so I can't say about that. Fedora kind of has lame GUI config tools... but fedora isn't grandma's linux, ether.

Re:Ignorance is just so wonderful to see in action

[westlake]

My guess is that Dell has some awesome OEM pricing for Windows (maybe $25 a pop or so), and this deal with Microsoft is contingent on them not offering competing operating systems.

Dell has also seen awesome OEM system sales for Windows.

---along with digital cameras, printers, monitors and HDTV, anything, really, that can be marketed as a Windows peripheral.

OEM Linux disappears from Walmart.com for three simple reasons:

Entry level for Vista at Walmart is a $500 Celeron laptop. Vista Premium is a $900 dual-core laptop from Toshiba.

OEM Linux doesn't significantly undercut Windows on price, doesn't sell worth a damn anyway and there is nothing to drive after-market sales. No iTunes for Linux. No Windows Home Server. No XBox 360. No HD-DVD. No Grand Theft Auto.

Re:Ignorance is just so wonderful to see in action

[Merusdraconis]

"The real reason Dell won't offer Linux PCs is plainly that it's not a good deal for them."

The real reason Dell won't offer Linux PCs is because the people who use Linux would prefer to build their own computer. Why duplicate the infrastructure?

Re:Ignorance is just so wonderful to see in action

[CaptainTux]

Let's face it: businesses looking at Linux aren't equally considering 100+ distros. They're looking at maybe 5. And those five distros are close enough where Dell could easily cross-train their technicians to offer support for all of them. Using the argument that there are just too many distros is silly because most of those distros are either specialized or not even considered when a business looks at Linux. The promise of "Linux on the Desktop" will never really come true until a major vendor is willing to jump in with both feet and really push a distro (or a few distros) forward. IBM had this chance and missed it. I really don't think Dell is going to be able to pull it off either because they aren't serious enough. They could, but they won't.

Re:Bad Assumptions

[Americano]

These mythical people, Dell's customers for preloaded Linux, the ones who don't demand the ability to "roll their own"? Yeah, when they're offered a choice of Windows or Linux, they're going to say, "Oh, whatever everybody else uses," or "The same thing as I use at work, of course!" And I guarantee that that will be Windows, 95% or more of the time.

The people bitching at Dell for these Linux desktops are not dear old mom & pop who just want a cheap, easy to use system. It's the Linux power users who are offended that they can't just go to Dell and buy a preconfigured cheap system that's guaranteed to work with their favorite distro. The same people that every one of you people saying "Dell should sell preconfigured Linux boxes," are also saying "would probably never buy these systems from Dell, anyway."

Do you really think that Dell doesn't realize this?

Re:Ignorance is just so wonderful to see in action

[mad.frog]

reconfiguring it when you upgrade your graphics cards isn't a particularly difficult thing to do

Bzzt, wrong answer.

I've said it before, I'll say it again:

If you want Linux to be mainstream-friendly, one of the absolute must-haves is that the user must NEVER EVER EVER, any any circumstances, have to either (1) edit a text config file by hand, or (2) use the command line.

No exceptions, no "most of the time" situation, no "power users only" weasel words. Config files and command lines are OK for developers, but not for mainstream users -- end of story.

I'll get flamed for it, but I speak the truth.

VA Linux already tried to do this

[cats-paw]

"In the end he suggests that those lobbying Dell for such a solution go out and put together a company and offer one themselves."

Then they dumped the hardware, started selling sourceforge, their stock tanked, and most of their stockholders got f*cked. I believe there was at least one lawsuit over the whole affair.

So maybe that's not a great idea for a business opportunity.

Re:Ignorance is just so wonderful to see in action

[Anonymous Coward]

Could you help me? I had my ISP tell me to ping a server, but I couldn't find the icon. Luckily, they were able to get me to a command line to use the ping command in XP. Where's the icon located?

Thanks,
Grandma

Re:Ignorance is just so wonderful to see in action

[kaidadragonfly]

Purchasing a new graphics card, opening your box, and installing it, is harder than editing the xorg.conf file. So, maybe you should also add "the user must NEVER EVER EVER, any any circumstances, have to either to upgrade hardware," in which case, I would like to where you buy your USB video cards.

Re:Ignorance is just so wonderful to see in action

[Anonymous Coward]

Oh please.

Windows:
1. Unplug everything, open up box
2. Unscrew retention screw from card
3. Remove old card
4. Put in new card
5. Put screw back on, close box, plug screen back in
6. Boot up
7. Wait a few seconds... "windows has found a new device"... "your new hardware is configured"... "the resolution is too low. Do you want Windows to increase it?"
8. Click "Yes"
9. All done.

Linux:
1. Unplug everything, open up box
2. Unscrew retention screw from card
3. Remove old card
4. Put in new card
5. Put screw back on, close box, plug screen back in
6. Boot up
7. Screen goes into power saving mode
8. Press ctrl-alt-backspace to kill X (you knew how to do that already, right?)
9. Pull out your *other* computer (you have one of those, right?) and google for help. Ignore all helpful suggestions to "RTFM n00b".
10. Try solution you found
11. Go back to step 7 until one of the solution works
12. All done!

You're right, it's *so* hard to do with Windows!

Re:Ignorance is just so wonderful to see in action

[-noefordeg-]

If anyone ever said "Bzzt, wrong answer" to my face, in person, I would have beaten them to a bloody pulp.
Hopefully for you, we'll never meet =)

Re:Seems to make sense to a degree.

[misanthrope101]

I can choose my own distro (Ubuntu, naturally) but all I really want is for Dell (or anyone else) to sell computers with hardware that is supported by Linux. Release the drivers, or at least the specs, and let the Linux community make their distros compatible with your machine. Yes, I'd love it if Dell offered the top 25 distros on Distrowatch installed and supported, but that isn't practical for anyone. But right now I have a Sony desktop with a soundchip that is unsupported by ALSA. All I want is supported hardware. Though I agree that the business model of selling Linux-installed machines is a bit questionable (the only ones who care can install it themselves anyway), the business model of selling machines that CAN use Linux can't possibly be bad, can it?

and Ubuntu's user-friendly?

[alizard]

Debian Etch:
aptitude install nvidia

OK, I could have used a GUI shell, but why make more work for myself?

Re:Ignorance is just so wonderful to see in action

[jaavaaguru]

If you want Linux to be mainstream-friendly, one of the absolute must-haves is that the user must NEVER EVER EVER, any any circumstances, have to either (1) edit a text config file by hand, or (2) use the command line.

If you want Windows to be user-friendly, one of the absolute must-haves is that the user must NEVER NEVER NEVER, under any circumstances:

1. Have to edit the registry (at least config files can have comments explaining what they're about), or
2. Have to worry about installing drivers for hardware that's been around for years (that's what auto-updates are for).

Re:Ignorance is just so wonderful to see in action

[cooley]

[i]If you want Linux to be mainstream-friendly, one of the absolute must-haves is that the user must NEVER EVER EVER, any any circumstances, have to either (1) edit a text config file by hand, or (2) use the command line.

No exceptions, no "most of the time" situation, no "power users only" weasel words. Config files and command lines are OK for developers, but not for mainstream users -- end of story.[/i]

Hey buddy, please don't take what I'm about to say personally; it's not directed at you, more at the state of the industry in general. OK BEGIN OLD MAN RANT NOW

Back during the transition from Win 3.1 to Win 95, I was doing tech support at a Big Ten University. I was showing metal workers, professors, gardeners, kids, and everybody else how to use their computers (and I was pretty green then myself).

Believe me; with proper, patient instruction your Grandma can enter, by hand, the proper command string to get her modem to work in Win3.1. She can build a batch file for proper GUI startup and such. Just because you've grown up without the need to do this stuff doesn't mean the average person can't, or never has.

I have a buddy who can't start my old Corolla (my "spare" car), and doesn't see how people could ever have remembered to pump the gas pedal once when starting their car. I have another buddy who doesn't think that normal "users" could possibly drive a stick-shift (manual transmission) for everyday usage.

Somewhere along the line everybody was convinced (I blame AOL) that you just couldn't understand how to use a computer unless everything you did was clicking on a picture. Somewhere along the way, society convinced itself that nobody could fucking read. From the controls on your devices and your car, to the things you do on the computer, to ordering fast food it just became too damn difficult for anybody to read, speak, or understand several words strung together. That became "hard". Now, I realize that sometimes pictographs make it easier to market a product globally, but we (at least here in the 'States) have gone over the edge with it.

This was also about the same time those damn "DUMMIES" instruction books came out. It suddenly became fashionable to say "Hey, I'm a total fucking idiot! Please tell me how to do everything in the simplest terms possible, or else I'll never understand".

Now, I'm not advocating a return to the days when computers were a pain in the ass to configure or use. All I'm saying is that (much like people used their car's heat and A/C before it was just "blue seated dudered dude") people tend to be as stupid as society allows them to be, or tells them they are. If Dell support tells your grandma "editing this text file is easy, here you can even cut-and-paste this", then she'll believe it's easy.

For pete's sake, our grandparents built the industrialized world and our parents streamlined it and made fit reasonably pleasant to live in. I think they can probably handle using "gedit" now and again.

END OLD MAN RANT

She is ignored.

[jotaeleemeese]

Unless you think configuring using the registry, the necessity of the installation of antivirus and firewalls (with all their arcane messages and terminology) and all what implies using a Windows machine is infused at birth.

Some folks around here seem to think that Windows is *naturally* easy.

I have got news for you guys, it isn't. But this is masked by the myriad of people mildly familiar with it.

Grandmas that are introduced to Linux as their first computing experienc (hi mum!) can cope perfectly well with the tool of the penguin, and people suggesting otherwise are patronizing ageists.

Re:She is ignored.

[westlake]

Grandmas that are introduced to Linux as their first computing experience...

The problem is that MSDOS and Windows have been around for over twenty-five years. It becomes harder and harder to find the virgin with no knowledge of the Windows PC.

I have made one call to Dell technical support in five years.

I can't remember the last time I opened the registry. I have found no compelling reason to re-install Windows XP. The antivirus and firewall package is provided by my ISP and is more or less jargon free.

Re:Ignorance is just so wonderful to see in action

[advocate_one]

Grandpa here is fifty... and has been using computers since 1975, Linux since 1999. Grandpa here was programming in Fortran using punched card stacks when he was in Uni back in 1975. Some of us grandparents have far more experience that you. Some of us grandparents are still programming. I'm a systems analyst... I write the req specs for the codemonkeys to code up...

My father is 76, he was programming back in 1965 on the BMEWS systems

Just because some of you have ignoramusses for parents and grandparents does not mean all parents and grandparents are clueless when it comes to IT...

Re:Ignorance is just so wonderful to see in action

[mormop]

"You cannot honestly think the level of Windows support necessary for the average computer user is ANYWHERE near comparable to the level of support that would be necessary for Linux, can you?"

Yes, I support both.

"The first time a technician has to explain to grandma how to manually edit a .conf file is the last time anyone in that person's sphere of influence would ever buy from that company. Linux is simply not ready to be a widespread desktop OS."

Well, I've built Linux boxes for people and installed and configured it on laptops. By the time I've finished setting it it up on a machine, it's in the same state that a pre-installed setup would be if you bought it from Dell or whoever and you know what; I've never had to tell grandma how to edit a .conf file because the people I've set the machine up for aren't doing things that require you to edit .conf files. They do things things like pick OpenOfiice writer from the start menu when they want to write a document, when they plug their digital camera in up pops digikam so they don't have to find the camera program. Plugging in a memory stick automatically pops up a file manager window and on the whole things just work. Firefox for the web and kmail/evolution/thunderbird for email and most grandmas sorted.

Even if you did want the option of giving newbs the tool to edit .conf files you could stick a button on the desktop that pops up a box asking what file do you want to edit so that a technician can then say open file x....0, "hold down ctrl and f, find this line in and hit enter, now where it says parameter=1, change that to a 0 and then click file and save. Is that really any different to saying click start, run, type regedit, hit enter, click on hkey_local_machine an hit ctrl and f, put parameter in the search box and hit enter, when you find parameter in such and such a section, right click on it and change dword value, and then change the 1 to a nought. Actually, having read that back, the Linux side sounds a bloody sight simpler, and yes, I have had mainly virus checker companies running me through the registry when someone's phoned me up because an update screwed their AV software.

And their lies the nub. Supporting Linux will only be a pain in cases where people make a special effort to screw it up, something that doesn't tend to happen unless people log in as root. Grandma will probably not have problems because gramdma's going to follow the instructions in the Kmail setup wizard rather than set it up by open up $HOME/.kde/share/apps and editing kmail's .conf files directly. No doubt if Dell or HP standardised on a particular distro, e.g. Ubuntu, a community wiould spring up providing additional software tailored to Dell's Ubuntu install with a convinient link to a repository so that Grandma can use synaptic to install stuff.

If anything has held desktop Linux back it's the lack of commercial apps, Autocad, Adobe stuff etc. Once a demand for these is detected the availabilty of one should feed the other.

Re:The answer's pretty simple

[Smidge204]

It matters because soon as a major PC manufacturer starts shipping machines without the Windows tax, we can finally get some real competition in the OS world (how ironic that if I want to try free Linux, I usually have to buy Windows - which comes with my PC - and I can't get a discount if I don't want Windows).

You're right, because it's absolutely impossible to acquire a PC without Windows these days.

Maybe nobody wants to mass market them because they're *gasp* not in demand! Shame on them for not basing their business decisions on your personal ideology. I mean, really...
=Smidge=

Re:Harder and harder?

[Toby_Tyke]

The obvious proof that it is difficult to set up a secure windows machine is the millions of Windows zombies on the net. If things were as rosy as you claim, we would not have this problem.

I'm not too sure your conclusion nesseceraily follows from your evidence. It could be easy to set up a secure Windows machine, but people might still not do it, for all kinds of reasons. Perhaps they are ignorant of the dangers posed, perhaps they just can't be bothered (I think ignorance is the most likely, by the way).

All I ever did to secure my windows machines was install Zone Alarm. It has a lovely, brightly coloured, non intimidating installation dialog, lets you choose your experience level, uses a minimum of jargon and automatically configures itself to allow standard stuff through (IE, Firefox, etc). It's as simple as anything I have ever installed.

In any case, any windows PC you buy nowadays ships with SP2, and will have a firewall turned on by default. Really, most malware is installed by end users intentionally, although not knowingly, when they download and install toolbars, smilies, P2P clients and the like. It is virtually impossible for the OS to protect the end user from this sort of thing, and Linux is no different in this regard.

Re:The answer's pretty simple

[Smidge204]

I'm sure you're the kind of person who can and does build his own PC from store bought components. (To be fair, that probably describes the vast majority of /. readers...) But I can't help but wonder; do you make your own cases out of tin foil?

Let's look at this from a business point of view.

1) Offer Windows as the de-facto OS.

1a) Easy-as-pie mass cloning of software to all machines: one size fits all. (Also simplifies inventory)

1b) Virtually no support required. OS problems get differred to Microsoft.

1c) Huge volume discount from Microsoft = profit margin on resold licenses. (Self evident? No conspiracy here)

1d) Single source for software minimizes problems with hardware revisions

2) Offer multiple "flavors" of operating systems

2a) Reduced efficiency of inventory control, stocking more types of preconfigured machines and/or extra handling for each machine sold

2b) Support will be required for anything the vendor doesn't support themselves. (How many non-Enterprise Linux distribution offer official end-user support?)

2c) Reduced profit margins

2d) Offering N operating systems requires N times more testing and tweaking with each hardware revision (And we all know how awesome Linux hardware support is, right?)

So when it boils down, is there enough end-user demand to warrant offering non-Windows computers? The answer, it seems, is "No." As a business person, I'd have a hard time justifying the costs of offering product options when so few of my sales would actually use them.
=Smidge=