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.

Re:Stop it!

[Master of Transhuman]

I AM tired of hearing sophomoric arguments from people who aren't in business themselves - including the idiot who wrote this article.

The variety of Linux distros is utterly irrelevant to anybody, including Dell. If Dell wants to sell Linux, they will deal with one of the top two or three Linux companies and that's it. It's an insignifant issue in all other respects. If there went fifty versions of Windows, does anybody expect Dell would try to support them all? Hardly - they would turn that whole thing back to Microsoft to do the support - and rightly so. In fact, they and the rest of the industry SHOULD do that - make Microsoft RESPONSIBLE for supporting their own crap, rather than laying it off on everybody else while Bill reaps the savings.

One moron on another site commenting on this issue suggested that Dell would be put off because some morons would buy a Linux box expecting to get a Windows box and then complain to Dell.

Gimme a break... While certainly there WILL be such morons, Dell is not SO stupid that they wouldn't be able to deal with this irrelevant issue. Dell has morons buying the wrong box NOW for whatever reason and bitching about it. What's so special about some moron buying the wrong box with Linux on it?

Dell can certainly offer preinstalled Linux if they want to - figuring out how to offset the negative aspects isn't rocket science.

Where people go wrong is when they suppose the fact that Dell is selling Linux laptops and desktops will make all that much difference in the uptake of Linux on those platforms.

Obviously a few new Linux users will buy the boxes. But mostly people who are already Linux users will buy them if they believe Dell has certified the OS to run ALL the hardware - thus eliminating the main issues of poor support of wireless cards, touchpads, and special keys.

The REAL issue for Dell is whether they can attract some large corporate business with this move. Reportedly, HP has made some very large deals for Linux desktops - involving thousands of units per sale. THIS is what Dell will be looking at - not whether some individuals want Linux on the desktop.

The ONLY issue for Dell is will it cost them more to set that market up than they make on those larger deals to do it - and only Dell can know that.

If there ARE large corporate Linux sales to be made AND Dell can figure out how to provide that service to those corporations, it MAY help Linux in moving to the desktop. But that's a chicken-and-egg issue - which came first, the corporate desire for Linux or Dell providing Linux? Obviously the demand has to be there, so the entrance of Dell into that market will not really improve Linux's chances for being on the desktop. The only way that would be true is if major corporations aren't moving to Linux because they can't get major hardware supplier support - and that isn't a proven fact.

The one BIG advantage Linux users may get from Dell supporting that market is that at least some peripheral manufacturers may then be motivated - or requested by Dell - to provide driver support. And that will be good for all Linux users.

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

[jinxidoru]

Even bigger BS is expecting a big company like Dell to spend a lot of money to go after a ridiculously small market. Is anyone here so deep into their geekdom as to believe that Dell would make a lot of money selling Linux boxes? I think this article makes a lot of sense with its explanation.

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

[dbcad7]

Although I agree with your point on printers, your "nightmare to maintain" is based on what ?

My Ubuntu system tells me when updates and fixes are available, and I just click yes to install them. Everything works on my system, nothing has ever broken. When I run across something I want to try out, I install it with Synaptic.. couldn't be easier. When I decided a year ago that I wanted a new printer I researched the models I was interested in on Google to see what problems there were with Linux (was running Debian at the time). I'm not saying it was a snap to get the printer working, but I figured it out. So yes I'll give you the printer thing, but not "nightmare to maintain".

Re:Good point

[Technician]

He brings up a good point with the difficulties of providing tech support.

He ignores the issue that Linux has been much more stable and problem free than Windows. I have been able as a novice to fix a couple items myself on linux such as losing the administrator privilages in Ubuntu. Fixed it with a Hosts file edit. The answer was found on Google. All my hardware works "out of the box" except a couple Windows only items such as the Dell all in one printer and a HP flatbed scanner.

On the other hand things are broken beyond my ability in the Dell desktop of my wife. A prime example is we had a software photocopier installed. It would use the flatbed scanner and print to the default printer. One day I needed to shrink a photo for posting online (100K size limit). I fired up the included photo editor for the very first time and found it was not a full program but a limited function 30 day trial which already expired. This trialware hijacked my flatbed scanner. Opening the photocopier now launches the photo editor preventing the photocopier from getting the scan. It also killed the fax for the same reason. It has been broken over a year now and I still have no idea how to fix it. I have removed the offending program. Now a scan simply brings up a nag screen that Windows can't find the photo editor. Would you like help finding the exe file? Other than needing to re-image the hard drive and losing all my settings, I have not found a fix in a year.

As a fix, I moved the scanner to the Ubuntu box. The photo editor just works. (yea gimp!) So does the photocopier. (Yea sane!)

As a novice Linux user, I have had far fewer unresolved problems on Linux. All my hardware worked out of the box without needing the manufacture's driver disk. This includes my HP printers attached to my LAN on Hawking printservers, my flatbed scanner (Cannon.. The HP didn't work) and my internal flash card reader.

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.

In a nutshell, it takes a lot of money to keep up to date with MS products. (XP or Vista and the new version of Office + updated memory to run it cost about the same as a nice laptop.) Ubuntu makes a nice alternative that works better than older MS products.

As a novice Linux user I have found Ubuntu easier to maintain than Windows. I have used Windows since Version 3.1. I have used Ubuntu since 9 months ago. I have added Flash 7 then 9, added MP3 support, am able to burn ISO CD's without buying an upgrade or searching for an alternative.. The list goes on..

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]

The last 2 words of that sentence just drove off 2/3 of Dell's customers. If you need to go to the command line or directly edit ANYTHING in order to fix anything but the most exotic problems, then the software in question is not ready for the mass market.


So how do you explain all the pre-GUI stuff such as DOS? That seemed to do quite will in the mass market.

More important is trying to find proper documentation on the beast called the Windows Registery. I would rather fix a hosts file than try to fix the above problem with my scanner by editing the registery. This brings the question, just how many Windows have random glitches, blue screens, random crashes and such that users can't fix?

There is a diferance between being able to find and use a fix and simply leaving it broken until the next hard drive reformat.

Re-formating should not have to be the single most common Windows fix.

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

[ameoba]

Honestly, I think the best thing to do would be to not bother installing Linux and simply certifying that all the devices are supported and will boot a standard kernel. Outside of unsophisticated home users and very small businesses, nobody bothers using the original OEM install of the OS anyways.

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.

FreeBSD

[dkh]

FreeBSD would solve the problem of distribution sprawl.

Re:FreeBSD

[Anonymous Coward]

BSD doesn't have distributions. At least not in the same way that Linux does, wghere its pretty much the same kernel with differet packages distributed with it.

The BSDs are all different operating systems, with diferent designs, different objectives, different philosophies, differet kernels, different stregths and weakness and different purposes. The diference between on BSD and another is far greater than say ditro X ad distro Y, where asidefrom the package manager and default packageset, its the samething under the hood. Take FreeBSD vs. OS X for example. They're indeed both BSDs, but they'recompletely different OSes, not distributions of BSD4.4.

Back to the point:
Ruling out OS X, FreeBSD is the only BSD geared explicitly to desktop/workstation/server use, as is developed primarily on x86. The rest focus on uber-specialized roles (OpenBSD = paranoid security, netBSD = it'll run on anything under the sun, but since they only need it to run on Dells, who cares?, MicroBSD/PicoBSD = embeded devices and boot floppies, OpenDarwin isn't developed anymore, MirOS/PCBSD/DesktopBSD are all FreeBSD spinoffs, and still in their early infancy, e.g. also ruled out).

Ergo, GF is right. FreeBSD does solve the "distribution sprawl", since its the only one built for the role in question.

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.

Seems to make sense to a degree.

[TibbonZero]

The logic seems to make sense. I'm not sure why they don't just partner with one Distro and just go with it however. If someone really knows the diffence between distros then that person changing them wouldn't be an issue really. Dell doesn't NEED to support all the distros as I think the community already supports them pretty well (although I've had my share of Linux-based headaches too).

However, while slightly OT... I wouldn't want to be the IT manager at a company that I allowed everyone in a 10,000 person company to decide what distro and software they wanted to run. I mean if someone has a problem with something... supporting (as the acticle says) 100+ different distros, different kernel versions, different package/install systems, different windowing systems... hell even different text editors. It would be HELL for an IT department to support, so i could see how Dell would have a similar issue. Even simple things would become nightmares to support. Even asking the users what version they are using would confuse many.

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?

Re:Ignorance is just so wonderful to see in action

[Anonymous Coward]

I support a bunch of Windows boxes, in addition to a bunch of OpenBSD machines.

As far as Windows and daylight savings goes, XP/2003 boxes were all patched by standard patch-tuesday patches. For win2k it took me a grand total of 15 minutes to research it on MS's website, write (+ copy/paste) a few text files, and roll them out on the Active Directory Domain. Not really tough. There are lots of problems with Windows. Daylight savings time just wasn't a big one.

Settle on one distro

[thre5her]

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.

This is a non-point; what's the problem with Dell settling on one distribution, outsourcing the support to Novell/RH/etc? The power users will install their own distro anyway, and they can find/finance their own support.

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.

Existing Open Source Series?

[femto]

What's wrong with the existing open source series from Dell, provided there is a genuine reduction in price for the absence of MS software?

If Dell is hesitant about offering Linux what the Free Software community forming a third party company and approaching Dell with a proposal that Dell simply contract the entire Linux support operation out to them?

Re:Existing Open Source Series?

[H3g3m0n]

I doubt Dell would have much of a price reduction for systems shipped without windows.

There was that article a while back about people using the EULA clause that required OEMs to refund the money if the user didn't agree to the EULA, the Dell refund was for $53. This would indicate that Dell has a fairly good deal with Microsoft to get Windows at a reduced price (This itself might be a reason for not shipping Linux, as MS could start charging full price again as a retaliation).

The other thing is that Dell can ship with spyware, adware, AOL, Yahoo! toolbar, etc... to get a price reduction, unless they can do the same for Linux, they might actually be loosing money by not shipping Windows depending on how much these packages pay Dell. Although if they pay via usage rather than the number of shipped installs then offering systems without an OS might not matter so much because the systems would probally be getting wiped anyway but if they ship Linux installs then there Windows sales would probably go down with people trying to save money.

Support

[delirium of disorder]

Dell couldn't manage to support GNU/Linux, but lets not forget that Dell doesn't really support Windows either. Sure it's impossible to explain to your average user that the Internet and their web browser are different things. This doesn't change if the browser is IE or Firefox or Konqueror. However, as a "geek" I regularly need to provide tech support to friends and family. I have a much easier time doing this once I have switched them over to Ubuntu from Windows. It's simply more user friendly and secure. If you are looking for a new PC, I would highly recommend system76, not any big OEM that functions as a division of Microsoft.

Calling Mr. Obvious.... Dell on line one

[zappepcs]

This is IMO, a problem that is custom made for the open source community. No, I'm not suggesting that people put together a hardware company to build their own. I'm suggesting that Dell give away a few of each PC they want to offer Linux on to any Linux distro group that wants to be supported.

In the end, they won't have to do the image build nor support it. Just let the Linux distro folks support it.

Example: The Ubuntu group could build the image for Dell to put on each line of machines they want to sell with Ubuntu Linux. The Ubuntu group provides software/configuration support, and Dell supports the hardware. Once the Ubuntu group provides a pre-built image, Dell doesn't have much left to do but burn it on the machine and ship.

Sure, there is a bit more to it, but that's it in a nutshell, and it is about open source support. Dell gets to sell the hardware, the OSS community supports the software, and everyone is happy. Current support for Linux comes from the OSS community anyway. Dell is just trying to limit their exposure when they shouldn't even try to expose themselves to support issues. Simply sell the machine as OSS supported software.

When it comes down to hardware issues, I'm certain that each Linux distro group will support tools to determine that it is hardware vs. software. Once that is done there is no reason not to ship boxes with Linux installed. Dell doesn't have to choose which distro to suppport. Let each distro sign up and if they don't, don't sell boxes with that distro installed.

To me it seems just too simple to be this difficult.

Pick one and outsource the support

[ownermachina]

The best I can come up with is just pick Ubuntu for instance, outsouce support to cannonical (big contract for them, perhaps several others). They would immediately become the community's champions and mass distribution will result in networks of emerging experts to help their friends out. No need for centralized support, if its everybody's os, its everybody's responsibility to help others out.

Its not about supporting distros, stupid

[ArmorFiend]

When cars first came out, they broke down all the time, and every driver was also his own mechanic. This persisted through to the 60s when men were still expected to be able to fix a car by pulling up the hood and futzing about. You also saw a lot of opining about the internals of how cars should be put together.

Then Toyota showed up, and made cars that stopped breaking down. Gradually, nobody was hyper-opinionated about the internals of cars, till we get to the point today where nobody but Toyota dealership can actually understand the internals.

Same with Linux distros. We've been so starved of turnkey solutions for so long, that we're all hyper knowedgable distro experts! Just like the early auto operator/mechanics. Of course these people are going to have fine-grained and diverse favorites.

When someone gets a new laptop and figures out that its "good enough", they'll stop worrying that it doesn't have Slack (or whathaveyou), and just appreciate its "good enough"ness. This can't happen from the demand side, the supply side has to lead the way. Then the userbase of Linux will change. Then we'll start to complain bitterly. Remember when AOL happened and the Internet started to suck? That fate awaits Linux too.

______

And anywho, nobody's asking them to support every possible distribution for their computers. They're asking for two things:

1) support SOME distro, it doesn't matter what it is
2) open source any hardware wierdness you control, stuff like sleep/suspend, software volume control buttons, and whatnot. Just put that stuff out there and all the big distros will automatically move to support you. That's what distros do.

We're not asking, say, Toshiba to create a huge linux compile farm and put out Toshutils for every distro. Just expose the API, create a reference implementation, and let the community do the rest.

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.

Re:Ignorance is just so wonderful to see in action

[anagama]

For the record, I'm a linux user slightly tainted with a mac laptop. I've been using various distros over the years as desktops and servers. I like linux a lot and I think it is more usable for real work than either windows (ME is my last experience though) or OS X. That said, the summary author (or article author) has a strong point about man pages. They are often very difficult to understand and almost always devoid of examples. The little syntax structure at the top isn't going to help a complete newb and even after 5 or 6 years of linux use, I prefer to find a "howto" than read a man page any day. Anyway, the man page criticism is quite valid.

Acer from Walmart

[dattaway]

Several months ago I bought a cheap laptop from Walmart. I found out from Acer's website they had a Linux cd distribution that I could download. What did this mean to me? Everything worked together, including wireless, sound, and accelerated video. Trying a different distribution, like Ubuntu worked without any hassles. Since then, I bought several other laptops from Walmart knowing they took time to make sure their laptops supported a free operating system. They have been the most trouble free units I have had the pleasure of giving my family. Its a shame Dell doesn't latch onto this idea.

Re:Acer from Walmart

[dattaway]

The first pulldown box under system software, "Linux Software" is listed before "Windows Software" :)

http://global.acer.com/support/download.htm

Re:Ignorance is just so wonderful to see in action

[nickcoons]

I have no evidence to support this, but it seems that this has nothing to do with technical support at all. 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. If they started pre-loading Linux, their cost of Windows may go up substantially.

However, I could be way off base, so feel free to point it out if I am.

sell without operating system

[e**(i pi)-1]

I would already be happier, if there was the option to buy systems without operating system. Dell could sell such systems cheaper not only because of the lacking windows system but also because they would not have to offer support for OS issues.

Re:sell without operating system

[Advocadus Diaboli]

I would already be happier, if there was the option to buy systems without operating system. Dell could sell such systems cheaper not only because of the lacking windows system but also because they would not have to offer support for OS issues.

I work at a PC manufacturer that sells PCs and I know the rules of the game. One problem is that there is a contract with Microsoft that says "you're not allowed to ship any PC without operating system" of course because they didn't want that you ship hardware to run pirated OS versions on it. The other side of the medal is that of course customers don't want to pay the Microsoft tax, so if someone doesn't want to order an OEM windows, then we will ship the box with a Linux-DVD. So the contract is not violated since we always ship with an OS, even if its probably not what MS had in mind.

Besides that the question is if it will be really cheaper to ship without Windows. I don't know the conditions that Dell has when buying OEM licenses, but I know from the past long ago that MS is defending themselves against firms that officially say "We offer an alternative to MS". Long ago there were shops that offered OS/2 on their systems and the result was that they didn't get the boxes from MS any more or if then at a higher price than before. So the risk is that Microsoft is rising the price for an OEM license and you gain nothing.

Lets see the support issues. As I told you we ship an "alibi DVD" with the explicit note that we don't offer support for that and its just an OS to fulfill the "do not ship without os rule". Even for that we get a lot of support questions. The problem is, that a PC without OS is like a car without fuel, it may look nice, but it is useless. So you have at least to do some statement on which OS can run on your PC, and people tend to see a support agreement in that. Face the facts: There is no official support for openSUSE from Novell and there is no official support for Fedora from Red Hat. So if people use that "free distributions" then they expect their system to work with those distros, if problems show up then they want the support from the system vendor. Of course you could recommend RHEL or SLED, but then you get support only if your box is "certified" and even worse, the Microsoft tax is replaced by a Red Hat or Novell tax.

Personally I know that Linux is fine for the desktop, but in a profit driven world the problem of system vendors is that they have to invest in ressources for an OS that has a market share below 5%. That is the real problem with it. If Linux desktop market share would be 20% then nobody would complain that offering Linux boxes means investing money for support and engineering.

Re:sell without operating system

[Leto-II]

Actually, FreeDOS doesn't come preinstalled. It comes on a CD and there is a paper that says, in a big bold font, the system can't boot until you install an operating system. This paper also says that Dell is giving you FreeDOS without any form of support whatsoever.

Re:Ignorance is just so wonderful to see in action

[timeOday]

The DST problem has been a nightmare in my company, both for Outlook and especially PocketPCs. Microsoft has released a series of patches, each of which just muddles the situation more. In the end, they recommend manually fixing all your appointments. Well gee, if I knew when they were all supposed to be, I wouldn't need Outlook, would I?

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.

Why Won't It Work?

[logicnazi]

I very much doubt the support issue is the problem. If enough people would buy it Dell could just start the Dell Computer Expert line and make it damn clear that you don't order one unless you know what your doing and their is no support on anything but the hardware. Hell if they were worried enough about their name they could just sell them under some name other than Dell.

I suspect the problem is economic.

For starters I bet people demanding linux are far more willing to voice demands than they are to put up money. I bet tons of the people who asked dell to offer a linux PC wouldn't really buy one. They might like linux but when it comes time to buy a new computer they decide to dull boot and realize it's cheaper just to buy the computer preloaded with windows. Even if this isn't the case the possibility that linux advocates make more noise than they would buy computers is something Dell must consider.

Secondly Dell doesn't have apps to sell people who buy linux only boxes printer ink and all sorts of other high margin items. If anything the problem is they realize the people who buy linux boxes wouldn't buy extended support, at least not the sort of support it was economical to offer. Dell probably has a nearly zero margin on the basic PC and makes up their money on the extras. Why bother selling a linux PC if the purchasers are smart enough not to buy any of the high margin extras?

Finally there is the concern of pissing off MS. Whatever anti-trust rulings MS is constrained by why risk pissing them off unless it would bring you a high margin business?

The issue isn't offering support it is making money!

Re:Ignorance is just so wonderful to see in action

[grumbel]

### A computer that comes with Linux preinstalled would never need xorg.conf twiddlery;

Unless that user wants to use a graphic tablet, a second mouse with some additional buttons, a different refresh rate for his monitor, a multi-monitor setup or a ton of other things. There is a lot of things that one can do with GUI tools in Linux, but I still have to visit xorg.conf *far* more often then I would like. And unless there one day comes a proper GUI configuration tool for said file that won't change, doing configuration changes without restarting Xorg would be a nice thing to have. Beside the lack of a standard cross distribution package format xorg.conf is among the ugliest show stopper issues for Linux on the desktop.

kernel compatibility is all that matters

[cab15625]

If they would just make a laptop that is fully compatible (ie, every piece of hardware, right down to the fscking hotkeys on the the keyboard and standards compliance in every single fscking aspect of ACPI) all they would need is a token distro and any linux user with a preference could at least feel safe that they weren't wasting money on hardware that they could never make use of. Put Ubuntu on it and let the user format/install their distro of preference. Who cares once the compatibility is settled.

NO (absolutely none what-so-ever) ATI cards unless ATI decides to at least produce a binary driver that works (prefereably source, but at the very least, something that actually works as advertised and works in linux, not just for Toms hardware under the most fully patched version of WinXP)

NO (absolutely none what-so-ever) Phoenix BIOS unless they're willing to release every single last detail about ACPI, etc. to the kernel devs ... ditto for any other BIOS manufacturer.

Basically if Dell could do that, it wouldn't matter what distro they put on (I said Ubuntu because it's nice and flashy and is free and has left most of the libraries reasonably unmollested, unlike some distros ... I use Slackware myself)

This much should not be hard for a company with resources like Dell or Gateway or Toshiba to pull off ...

Re:kernel compatibility is all that matters

[Stormie]

If they would just make a laptop that is fully compatible (ie, every piece of hardware, right down to the fscking hotkeys on the the keyboard..

I feel your pain - it seems that the "u" key on your keyboard isn't working at all.

Re:Ignorance is just so wonderful to see in action

[Canordis]

None of those things are the domain of "grandma" though. I agree that Xorg is sorely lacking in user-friendliness, though.

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

[rschwa]

There are lots of problems with Windows. Daylight savings time just wasn't a big one. Tell that to everyone whose MCE2005 machines are recording everything an hour late despite showing the correct time in the system clock and the program guide. At least I discovered the problem in time to record Battlestar Galactica tonight.

Re:Ignorance is just so wonderful to see in action

[arth1]

I'm a Unix/Linux guy myself, but I have to say that you miss the target entirely here if you think that daylight savings time patching is easier on Linux than on Windows.

On Windows, patches came with the standard Tuesday updates, and all I had to do was accept installation. Ok, for boxes without outbound internet access, I actually had to copy the patches and install them manually, but that was pointy-clicky-done, with no hassle whatsoever.

On my Linux boxes, I had to install (which for my Gentoo boxes means recompile) a new version of the timezone-data package (Arthur Olson time zones), then manually copy /usr/share/zoneinfo/America/New_York to /etc/localtime, then also manually copy a zoneinfo file to etc/localtime in the chroot jails for both named and dhcpd, and restart these daemons, as well as ntpd (time server).
Then I had to repeat the whole procedure again, because a new version of timezone-data came out, because of bugs in the first one. Then I had to repeat the whole procedure YET again a third time cause the bugfix release wasn't complete. All in 2007.

Then, on Sun boxes, I had to, in addition to a system update, also install a java runtime environment update, because of course java can't use the same timezone data as the system, but has to have its own embedded implementation. And with more than one jre per system, that meant one update per jre instance.

I still prefer Linux and Unix, but it's not easier, and I bet many people forgot to update the zoneinfo files manually for chrooted daemons. Hopefully, most of them will only see odd logging timestamps. (Which in itself can be bad enough, if RIAA asks who used a DHCP IP address at a certain time between now and when the "old" DST kicked in.)

Regards,
--
*Art

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

[nickcoons]

I think that's pretty much what I said, just without the genitalia reference.

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:The real problem...

[odaiba_kamome]

This chimes with what someone connected to the Japanese government told me, off the record, a few weeks ago. Japanese PC vendors have a clause in their contracts with Microsoft that prevents them from selling PCs without Windows pre-installed. If they violate the contract they have to pay MS a whole lot more for each copy of Windows. My informant told me the contracts are secret, so I have no way of verifying 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.

Re:Ignorance is just so wonderful to see in action

[billgates]

I've said it before and I'll say it again. Not only is Windows not ready for the desktop but it is an insult to the intelligence and actually makes you stupid. Linux has been ready for my desktop for 12 years. It has been ready for my wife's desktop for 10 years. It has been ready for my sons' (aged 12 and 8) desktops for 10 and 6 years respectively. I'll admit that my family members are probably smarter than you but they are not geniuses. My wife got a new laptop 6 months ago so I left Windows XP on a partition for her so she could try it out. She hates it because it never behaves the same way twice and virus checking kills the machine.

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

[einhverfr]

First, I could see myself setting up a nice command-line Linux installation for my grandma if she were still around. Of course, she used to program Fortran on big UNIX boxes when I was still in preschool... (Yes, I got a chance to see some of those systems in action.)

A better example is what happened when I migrated my parents to Red Hat Linux 6.1 (back in 1999). They had been using Windows 95 at the time. I installed it, configured it, made sure everything they needed was accessible, and set it up next to their Windows system. The tech support calls practically stopped, and they started using the Linux system more than their Windows system.

Linux isn't hard to use. There are things people are not used to ("How come Comet Cursors doesn't work?") bit in general, non-techies I know who have made the jump are fairly unlikely to go back.

Re:Ignorance is just so wonderful to see in action

[omeomi]

You haven't seen Ubuntu then, which for some reason is still lacking such a thing.

I think Ubuntu would work quite well for the average "grandma" user...setting up simple things is very easy, and there's even an update reminder thing like Windows and OSX so you don't fall behind on updates.

Re:Ignorance is just so wonderful to see in action

[arth1]

mad.frog (525085) wrote:

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.

But sometimes you have to do that under Windows too. Like editing %WINDIR%\System32\Drivers\etc\hosts to work around a flaky WINS server, or edit %SystemDrive%\boot.ini to set "/usepmtimer" if you have an AMD64 X2 where the core TSCs aren't in sync.
Not to mention editing the dreaded registry. Editing a text config file is often peanuts compared to that; at least most config files are annotated with comments.

Regards,
--
*Art

Re:Ignorance is just so wonderful to see in action

[LingNoi]

When you upgrade you don't have to edit any configuration files, you only have to edit them once to get it working for your machine.

If Linux came pre-installed (which it already does. Just not by dell) then the idea is that the configuration files would already be set for your system by the manufacturer so you would not have to edit .conf files as you mention.

Everything would be setup to go for that specific machine out the box. You could even have a disk which reinstalls the operating system still with everything ready to go specific for that machine.

Re:Ignorance is just so wonderful to see in action

[cbreaker]

I've yet to find a Linux help web site where people say "RTFM n00b."

I've seen lots of Windows boards like that, though. And lots of Xbox/game sites like that.

Strange.

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.

The answer's pretty simple

[gjuk]

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).
Basically - Dell don't offer it because - and I have to be careful here- Dell get a volume discount on the Windows licenses they preinstall. If they start to offer Linux, they'll fall into a lower discount level on Windows and suddenly be uncompetitive in the crucial Windows market.
My experience (in a slightly different sector) of such deals is that they always coincidentally have break points remarkably close to what happens when the reseller starts dealing with a competitor of the dominant vendor. Of course, MS cannot charge Dell more for Windows just because Dell happens to ship some Linux machines, but it can double the price of Windows if Dell falls below a certain sale volume - which they can vary any time they like.
The solution? Manufacturers could [be forced to] [by France?] publish the embedded cost of software which ships with each machine so MS shenanigans could be spotted, but I'm sure plenty of fellow readers will point out the impracticality of that. The alternative is whistle blowers...

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:The answer's pretty simple

[The Spoonman]

Tsk, tsk, tsk! Don't you know: people who share their religious views almost never want to share yours? Shame on you for pointing out the obvious on slashdot! Geez, just because there's lots of places you can get a PC without Windows doesn't mean we need to be telling people! I mean, if people knew that the linux community was just made up of a whiny bunch of pricks who bitch at every turn about how no one else likes their OS....why, people might just not use it!

Re:The answer's pretty simple

[TechForensics]

There is always a Windows tax, even on Linux PCs. M$ even used to charge PC manufacturers for Windows based on the number of PCs they SHIPPED, because "all of them would be running Windows eventually". Just try and find a Linux PC cheaper than a Windows PC with the same hardware specs.

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=

Re:The answer's pretty simple

[MightyYar]

Let's take your examples. From the Linspire site:

• Linspire Balance notebook - not available when you click on the link, and a crappy Via 1GHz laptop with a whole 1.5 hours of battery time.
• LinuxCertified Laptop - if this beast is still available, you get a $1400 P4 notebook from a vendor that hasn't updated the prices on their site since 2004.
• Sub300 laptop - to call this obsolete would be an understatement. Another Via 1GHz machine, this one for over $800! You could get the crappiest Dell or even an old G4 iBook and out-perform this thing. Yes, it is light - as it should be since it has no optical drive.
• "UK-based Tiny Computers offers Linspire Desktops" - yeah, until you click on the dead link! I went to their home page and could not find a Linux computer.
• "The popular Walmart.com Linspire desktop!" - another dead link. However, you can search for Linspire at walmart.com and get a single match for a $348 Sempron 2.0GHz system. Out of 28 systems, that's it, and it's "online only". Bare system, no monitor.
• "Powerful Northgate L-series sold at Staples.com. Just $499!" - bad link, and a search on Staples.com for "Linux" or "Linspire" comes up dry.
• The IBM link is interesting, until you actually click on these VERY expensive systems to configure them and find out that they are the same price whether or not you order Windows.
• The Dell link is even more interesting, as the same systems configured with Windows are actually CHEAPER!
• The HP link, like the IBM link, points to workstations/servers in the rather expensive department. In any case, trying to click on the links to buy them gave me a network timeout.

This isn't about demand or ideology. This is about shady business practices that, as a practical matter, guarantee that most people won't buy a pre-built PC without paying Microsoft. Do you really think that someone with a Windows2000 install disk from their last PC wouldn't have been perfectly happy to use that on their new PC if the new PC were $100 cheaper? This isn't demand for Windows - hang out in a Best Buy for a while and listen to what gets asked of the computer salesmen - people don't even know that Macs don't come with Windows. My wife can't even tell you when she is on a Windows vs. a Macintosh computer. I just helped a friend set up his Vista notebook, and he doesn't understand that it is not XP (though he does now after buying some incompatible peripherals and software).

Re:The answer's pretty simple

[botik32]

I don't see why it matters so much WHICH distro there is. I think the question is a red herring. I will wipe the existing OS and install my own anyway, so I am happy as soon as I don't pay the Microsoft tax.

As for the average Joe buying a Linux box, he/she will use what is given. I doubt they care much what distro they get, or if they even know what "distro" means. If it breaks, they will ask their friendly neighbour (who used to help them out with the windows machine) anyway, not go to Dell.

So, again, how difficult is to choose one distro that will work with the peripherals and get done with it? All I see is excuses.

Re:Ignorance is just so wonderful to see in action

[MMC Monster]

Mainstream users don't open up their computers. They take them to their friends or to a shop to have them done.

If people start taking their Linux PCs to shops to have them fixed, the "experts" will learn how to deal with linux.

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:Ignorance is just so wonderful to see in action

[nahdude812]

It's not exactly in your face as far as visibility, but you can avoid editing xorg.conf at all in Ubuntu by going into Synaptic Package Manager and choosing to configure Xserver-Xorg. It will walk you through a wizard and let you choose several paths based on how advanced you want to get. You can get down to authoring mode lines in it if you want to get that incredibly technical. But you can also easily specify which resolutions and color depths your monitor is capable of if it doesn't detect them automatically.

If you're stuck at a command line and can't run Synaptic, then you can also accomplish the same task with an ncurses (text-mode gui) based interface to the same wizard with:
dpkg-reconfigure xserver-xorg

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:Ignorance is just so wonderful to see in action

[Toby_Tyke]

I've been using windows since '95. I have never, ever, had to edit the registry. Additionally, I can only think of one consumer device for which I was unable to locate drivers, which was a particularly old graphics tablet a friend of mine found in his loft a few years back.

By comparison , I've been using Linux since '99. I have edited more config files than I could hope to count. I had to edit config files on three occasions while setting up the PC I'm typing this on. In addition, I have three consumer devices on this desk that I have been unable to locate drivers for. Actually, one of them I have found drivers for, it just refuses to work, and I gave up trying to figure out why.