Shuttleworth Tells Linux Users to Stop Being So Fussy For OEMs

Anonymous writes "Mark Shuttleworth says Linux users may need to stop being so fussy when putting demands on OEMs for pre-installed Linux PCs. CRN finds a response to Shuttleworth that seems to be both amusing and telling at the same time."

Comments

Fatal flaw

[xxxJonBoyxxx]

Linux users may need to stop being so fussy when putting demands on OEMs for pre-installed Linux PCs

The reason most of us got to be Linux users in the first place was fussiness: we didn't like what commercial OS vendors did with their stuff so we went to open source so we could improve upon it any time we wanted. The average user just doesn't care that much about the OS they're running; vanilla Windows or OS X is good enough for the masses.

If you Venn-ed "Linux users" and "people who can control their fussiness", you'd have very little overlap.

Re:Fatal flaw

[i_should_be_working]

To be fair to Shuttlesworth, he didn't actually tell us to stop being fussy. He said we are fussy, without making any judgements. And that this fact would make it harder for Dell to satisfy us. I don't know why the /. article claims he said that.

Re:Fatal flaw

[Richard_at_work]

If you Venn-ed "Linux users" and "people who can control their fussiness", you'd have very little overlap.
Personally I get the impression that those Linux users that are vocal about Dell et al supporting and providing Linux are not the same group that would ever use a Dell provided install - preciselly because of the issue you highlight.

Re:Fatal flaw

[jcr]

The average user just doesn't care that much about the OS they're running; vanilla Windows or OS X is good enough for the masses.

That being the case, what does the vendor have to gain by selling Linux pre-installed? Remember, if you're not talking about a million units a year in incremental sales improvements, Linux is barely a rounding error on a financial statement.

-jcr

Re:Fatal flaw

[suv4x4]

The reason most of us got to be Linux users in the first place was fussiness: we didn't like what commercial OS vendors did with their stuff so we went to open source so we could improve upon it any time we wanted.

Then improve upon it and stop whining that hardware vendors support it. You can't have it both ways.

The very reason enterprise Linux vendors today (like RedHat/Novell) can sell an OS which is essentially free, is because the open source model is way too fussy for wide adoption and support in the industry.

What works for tinkerers and geeks doesn't necessarily work for people primarily interested in carrying out a specific set of tasks with an OS, and putting reliability and predictability a lot higher than flexibility.

Re:Fatal flaw

[Anonymous Coward]

I don't know why the /. article claims he said that.

Sometimes.. when I write "Slashdot journalists" I get modded down...

Re:Fatal flaw

[BillGod]

I don't care what flavor they sell it with. Hell give me option of no OS. I dont want to pay more for a pc to come with windows so I can take it home and format the drive.

Re:Fatal flaw

[thePsychologist]

For a current Linux user, buying a computer with Linux preinstalled is less appealing than buying a computer that would have a "100% linux Certified" sticker on it (where perhaps 100% means working with the most popular distros).

And Linux users are fussy, perhaps. Although just because we are, that doesn't mean we need to be fanatical about which distribution Dell is offering. It doesn't matter too much. What matters is that there just is a preinstalled Linux on the damn thing, because that would be another small step for Linux. Hardware companies would be more pressed to work with Linux. I mean, they can already get drivers developed for their product for free. It would also increase the awareness that other operating systems exist, and for the most part computers can still function without Windows. Geeks can still choose whatever they want.

Re:Fatal flaw

[DittoBox]

You must be new here...

Re:Fatal flaw

[soft_guy]

That being the case, what does the vendor have to gain by selling Linux pre-installed? I think the one real advantage is that if an OEM could somehow get the general public to accept Linux on their PCs instead of Windows, then said OEM could eliminate the high price of licensing Microsoft's OS which would eliminate much of the cost of the PC. And the fact is that most people don't care about Windows per se, they just want all their hardware and software to work and they want a computer that is comprehensible to use. So, as Linux grows closer to this goal (and it has come a long way), OEMs have an incentive to start flirting with shipping Linux pre-installed because it could become a growth part of their business.

Re:Fatal flaw

[gfxguy]

I think the biggest complaint the OSS community has is not that we can't buy a preconfigured Linux box from a major vendor, but that we are forced to buy an OS we don't want.

And the truth then comes out in Shuttleworth's article. MS tried tying, and was told to stop. So they tried cliff pricing and were told to stop. Now it's giving vendors advertising money on a per-box basis.

There's no law against it, but aren't there laws about monopolies being anti-competitive? Isn't that what got MS into trouble all the times before? Isn't that what they're doing now?

I'm a libertarian (small "L"), and even I can see that government intervention is sometimes justified.

Re:Fatal flaw

[PRMan]

I think the true "Fatal Flaw" would be when the average user figures out that their machine won't play MP3s, DVDs, connect to their iPod, etc.

I hope Dell and other PC builders would consider ways to bring that sort of licensing to the Linux platform, that you could purchase as an option when buying the PC.

Re:Fatal flaw

[Anonymous Coward]

The high price?

What, 50-100$?

Yeah, that's ridiculously high.

Fully loaded gaming computer: ~2000.

So, what, 1/20th or 1/40th the price?

Word.

Re:Fatal flaw

[EggyToast]

But, don't all those "free," preinstalled apps subsidize the cost of new computers? Without the gigs upon gigs of crapware that comes will dells, the computers would cost more or Dell wouldn't make as much money. Sure, it would mean that Windows computers would be artificially cheaper than Linux computers, but the vast majority of people care only about that final charge on their credit card.

Re:Fatal flaw

[soft_guy]

It is pretty obvious you haven't worked on consumer electronics of any kind. A $50 item on a bill of materials is very high.

Re:Fatal flaw

[Znork]

Of course I wont be using a Dell provided install, it'll probably be outdated by the time it ships anyway, so what would be the point?

Personally I'm interested in Dell shipping linux because of two things: first, if they ship _one_ working Linux version, any version, the nature of the GPL makes sure that any other Linux version will also work, or easy to get to work.

Second: For ethical reasons I prefer not to give money to Microsoft, which means I'm through with buying products which entail payment to them.

In the end, any fussiness regarding Linux distributions simply doesnt impact Dell any more than Windows users fussiness about games, applications or desktop backgrounds. I dont care what they ship on it; I want the assurance that the fundamental product will work as expected. Ensure the hardware is supported by available open drivers, ship something reasonably (not too new, not too old) mainstream, and leave the users themselves to deal with their own fussiness.

Re:Fatal flaw

[griffjon]

I think this is mostly true; I'd rather do most of the install myself anyhow. That being said, I'd love it if I could recommend a Linux Dell to a friend (instead of Macs as I do currently) that'd come pre-installed and /working/. I don't mind (much) opening up my xorg.conf and mucking with wifi settings, but my parents would have heart attacks trying to unscrew-up an X misconfiguration problem. I, nor Dell, really has the support capability to deal with end users screaming "OMFG my screen is blinking in weird ways at me!!!"

So a few vanilla installs of the major players would work, just an extra selection button on the OS screen (there's enough Windows ones with Vista's 31-flavors approach as is, I will ignore complaints about how the consumer knows what to choose; a one-sentence intro for each OS/Distro should suffice for newbies)

What this really means, and what will cause a lot of hiccups, is hardware support. What, no more winmodems? NDIS wrappers causing problems? At the end of the day, as a Linux user, I don't care what flavor Dell installs, what I really care about is that by their installation of any flavor, their hardware suddenly needs to be supported. when I install whatever flavor I specifically want to muck with, I don't have to worry about hardware issues.

Re:Fatal flaw

[shmlco]

I think I saw a post around here recently that indicated the average OEM price for Windows paid by Dell or Gateway was on the order of $30/machine. An amount, I might add, that's probably padded somewhat, passed on, and paid by the consumer.

That being the case, it's not "much" of the cost, and what there is is passed on anyway. So what's Dell's reason again? Especially when the user upgrades to a more expensive version of Windows and Dell makes even more money on the deal.

Adding a "free" OS means all of that upgrade income goes away, and will either be lost (unlikely), or the machine price padded to make up the difference.

Further, a company like Dell probably has their drives delivered preimaged so they don't have to do the work. Adding Linux to the mix means an entire new set of drive SKUs has to be ordered and stocked and managed. Not to mention the support issues other people have already indicated.

So what's Dell's reason again? To accomodate a group of "fussy" Linux types who probably don't want the preinstalled distribution/filesystem/whatever anyway?

Re:Fatal flaw

[TallDarkMan]

Personally I get the impression that those Linux users that are vocal about Dell et al supporting and providing Linux are not the same group that would ever use a Dell provided install... As one of the voices, I'd like to point out that while I think you have a point, I also think some of us are Windows users who would like to switch, tried to switch, but spent so much time trying to get our hardware to work, regardless of the distro (I have personally tried three on the same hardware), that all we would like is an option for a decent box with Linux, ready-to-run. As much as I've played with Linux, I'd love to "go all the way." Unfortunately, until companies like Autodesk decide to provide a UNIX/Linux version of it's products, some of us are stuck (with at least dual boot).

Re:Fatal flaw

[Anonymous Coward]

$50 of $359 (Dell's lowest that I could find) is about 14%, $100 would be 28% (over 1/4) the price.

The interesting question is, does WinXP provide that kind of relative value to a computer, especially since Linux can provide the same value?

One could argue that MS spends a bunch of $$$ on each new version of Windows. But, how much of that is fixing problems they created with their architecture, how much is marketing i-candy, etc? How much is real value. I think the XP to Vista "upgrade" is showing that there isn't that much real value being added.

Re:Fatal flaw

[nine-times]

You can already buy a Dell without Windows, though. Go to http://linux.dell.com/ and look for their n-Series desktops and notebooks. It comes with FreeDOS, with the expectation that you'll probably install something else of your own choosing. I bought one and had no trouble throwing Debian on it (as long as I used the 2.6 kernel).

Now, at the time I bought it, for the price I paid, I only saved about $30 from what it would cost to get the same hardware with Windows XP Home, but I don't think Dell spends much for the Windows licenses anyway.

Re:Fatal flaw

[ClosedSource]

Surely, the acceptibility of an item's cost has to be considered in light of the overall system cost. A single item with a cost of $50 on an product that retails for $100 is very high, for a item that costs more than $1000, not so much. I've seen a number of bone-headed decisions based on focusing soley on bill of materials costs instead of an overall cost/benefit analysis (e.g. not doubling the amount of RAM in an embedded system because it would increase the BOM by 1% even though it would significantly lower software risk, take months off time to market, and potentially extend the market life of the product).

Re:Fatal flaw

[jedidiah]

The Dell install doesn't have to be useful beyond confirming that the included hardware actually works in some Linux. The same goes for their Windows installs actually.

Re:Fatal flaw

[jedidiah]

"Fussiness" has nothing to do with it.

When you're paying 6 figures for your RDBMS or your clusterware, an extra thousand bux doesn't mean much.

Novel & Redhat support an entrenched business mindset that requires certain things and other companies that are clustered around those notions. It has nothing to do with "fussiness". It's simply a matter of what the end user requirements are.

Debian is more than capable of handling the same duties (as SLES & RHEL) and is quite widely deployed where 3rd party support constraints or corporate beaurocracy aren't an issue.

Re:Fatal flaw

[Anonymous Coward]

Nope, he told us that we are fussy without making any judgements. And that this fact would make it harder for Dell to satisfy us. And then he said to "just deliver the dell laptops with ubuntu", just like every other fussy linux users who just said the same: "deliver it with my distro please?"

I asked in the survey for dell to provide support for what is related to its laptop and to then drop the rest into the hands of local solutions partners like suse, red hat, mandriva, linspire, ubuntu and whatever commercial linux there is and of course debian and whatever other community based distribution there is.
To each his job, that shouldnt be very hard for dell: manage the laptops, use your leverage to get properhardware support and get the drivers done; leave us the users, we like to support them.

Re:Fatal flaw

[Anonymous Coward]

I think the biggest complaint the OSS community has is not that we can't buy a preconfigured Linux box from a major vendor, but that we are forced to buy an OS we don't want. That is a load of crap. If you even bothered to search for 5 seconds, you could find vendors who will sell you a pre-configured Linux box (e.g. http://www.linux.org/vendor/system/desktop.html)

More fundamentally, nothing is preventing you from going out and starting a preconfigured Linux business. Don't just sit there publicly whining that nobody has dropped a preconfigured desktop in your lap.

Re:Fatal flaw

[gfxguy]

With all my searching, though, starting at dell.com, I can't find it. So you have to know you need to go right to linux.dell.com?

That right there is a problem.

Re:Fatal flaw

[botik32]

And the truth then comes out in Shuttleworth's article. MS tried tying, and was told to stop. So they tried cliff pricing and were told to stop. Now it's giving vendors advertising money on a per-box basis.

And when that is not possible anymore, Microsoft will bribe^H^H^H^Hgently persuade Dell to subtly break the linux it installs on the computers it sells, just to make users unhappy and point a finger on how bad Linux *REALLY* is. :D

Re:Fatal flaw

[HiThere]

The trouble is, they won't warrant any of their hardware to be compatible with Linux. You *KNOW* that means that if you call tech support, their first demand will be that you install MSWind. I'd rather buy somewhere else. Pretty nearly anywhere else, actually, except that many places make the same demands.

Whatever, I've got a local whitebox shop, and they don't insist on MSWind being installed before they'll service the machine. And they aren't that much more expensive. If it weren't for them I'd buy from Penguin Computing, or Pogo. Or Emperor Linux, except that I don't have that much use for laptops.

I object, but not wildly, to paying the MS tax. I object STRENUOUSLY to buying hardware and after I get it finding out it's unsupported and unsupportable. So I don't buy Dell.

Re:Fatal flaw

[HiThere]

That's not guaranteed. They could ship binary drivers that aren't available with other distributions. I'm interested in hardware that generally supported by Linux. If they won't offer it, I'll continue to go elsewhere.

I understand why so many people want Dell to offer Linux. Personally, I'm not that certain that it would be a good thing. It might be better if they just died quietly, and let other manufacturers that don't have such a tight bond to MS move into the space. Dell *COULD* make a large positive difference. It's just that I have a hard time believing that they would choose to do so. They don't have the kind of bad reputation that MS has, but they've got a long history of "bait and switch" advertising and PR announcements.

Basically, I don't trust anything they say. They've lied too often. Now it's "prove your intentions by your actions if you want me to believe you".

WRT the survey: MAYBE they mean what they say. Maybe they're collecting info for an ad campaign. Maybe something else. I'll decide after I see how they respond. I'm not going to presume that they're being honest this time. That awaits proof. Still, it probably doesn't do any harm to answer their questions about what we'd like them to do. (So I answered them.) This is not a commitment to trusting them. This is not a commitment to buying whatever garbage they decide to offer. OTOH, if they do offer something, I'll look it over.

P.S.: One interesting thing about the survey: They presume during the survey that you know what their various lines of computers are. I don't know an inspiron from a latitude, so I made wild guesses as to what the correct answers were...but this looks more like a marketing effort than a serious research effort.

Re:Fatal flaw

[bfields]

I think the biggest complaint the OSS community has is not that we can't buy a preconfigured Linux box from a major vendor, but that we are forced to buy an OS we don't want.

No, actually, I don't care. Really. That's between Microsoft, the vendor, and maybe the government if there's something anticompetitive going on.

*My* complaint is that every time I buy a computer I have to identify, for each machine, the exact model of graphics card, wireless card, etc., etc., and verify (by extensive googling) that each one works with free drivers. It's a big pain in the butt.

I want to be able to go to Dell (or HP or newegg or whoever), check the "open source drivers for all hardware included in mainline linux kernel" checkbox in their advanced search, and not have to think about it any more. I'd happily pay extra for the privelege.

(And I don't care about distributions either--if it comes with one installed, great, I'll probably use it, whatever it is--but if it *depends* on that particular version of that particular distribution, that's a warning sign to me that they're depending on some wacky proprietary drivers that may not be there for me any more in two years. No thanks.)

Re:Fatal flaw

[Anonymous Coward]

You're a libertarian? You know the government, the US government paid to develope the web, pretty close to what it ended up being right? A the UofI at Champlaign. They paid to develope the Mosaic browser. The team that left before the project had been completed basically left en-mass to form Netscape. Netscape too the code and standards, for a modest fee, and began adapting it for windows. And they had a giant head start. By the time Mosaic closed it was still the best browser, despite having all the turnover, and Netscape was starting to lose the war, feature-wise mind you, to IE. The next version of IE that came out was "good" the next version of Netscape was in polite conversation "a step back."

Given that the function of a computer is to operate on information and render it to a user, that the public's tax dollars paid for not only the internet, but to develope the form and function that made it most useful, why on earth should any OS come without a browser? And if it should come without a browser, shouldn't it also come without any kind of shell (think of the shell writing market!) or a text editor of any kind (let the free market decide vi vs emacs). And I should note, that given the variety of browsers avaiable now that kick IEs ass, and the frequency of their adoption, well there's no mystery why Netscape failed, and why Andreesen moved on to being a consultant that recommends outsourcing for everything.

Re:Fatal flaw

[Maxo-Texas]

Best Buy nerd squad actually offers a $29 service to remove all crapware from a new computer when you buy it.

LoL.

Re:Fatal flaw

[Anonymous Coward]

And then he said to "just deliver the dell laptops with ubuntu", just like every other fussy linux users who just said the same: "deliver it with my distro please?"

No, he said "just deliver it WITHOUT an OS preinstalled [unlike the fussy people who want it to come with their favourite distro preinstalled] and with an Ubuntu CD in the box [but people who don't like Ubuntu can install something they prefer]".

There's a big difference, namely that unlike the fussy users, he isn't demanding that Dell deliver PCs with Linux preinstalled - merely that they offer all their PCs with no OS, and throw a Linux CD into the box as a compromise between providing nothing (inconvenient for everyone) and providing everything (inconvenient for Dell). Obviously he'd prefer the Linux CD to be his distro, but the thing is that his suggestion would not be very different regardless of the distro chosen, while selling PCs with any distro actually preinstalled would require much more work for Dell.

Re:Fatal flaw

[Master of Transhuman]

No, he said deliver it without an OS installed but with an Ubuntu CD in the box.

Ahem, that IS saying "deliver it with my distro".

A better idea would be for Dell to just dump FIVE CDs in the box - the latest Fedora, the latest Mandriva, the latest Ubuntu, the latest openSUSE, and the latest Debian (or pick any other five - I'd include freeSpire and any open version of Xandros that might exist).

THAT would be Dell offering the user some choice without being committed to supporting any of it or favoring any given distro.

Of course, those CDs would cost Dell money. But if the distros supplied the CDs, all Dell has to pay for is the labor to unpack them and dump them in the box.

But for Shuttleworth to say put only an Ubuntu CD in the box IS advocating his distro.

Re:Fatal flaw

[The_Wilschon]

You keep wifi settings in xorg.conf? That's pretty weird and no mistake, man. Do you also store your log files in /usr/bin and keep shared libraries together with man pages in /tmp?

Re:Fatal flaw

[thephotoman]

I'm not so certain I'd trust them to do that. It's the Geek Squad: they'll probably hose the machine.

Whatever happened to the days of "build it yourself, bitch"? And editing programs in a hex editor, just to make sure things worked properly? Why are the good old days gone?

Re:Fatal flaw

[HermMunster]

The squeaky wheel gets the grease. You won't get anywhere if you don't push for it. Dell isn't going to give you Linux unless you push for it. Windows being good enough and vanilla enough is a negative thing, not a good things. It is important that we don't let the "good enough" vanilla OS be the reason that the monopoly exists one second more. Promote Linux in every way. Push every company to promote Linux. Get Linux more press than Microsoft. Bring America to Linux. The rest of the world is smart enough to understand Linux has real value and lower total cost of ownership, let's get America involved in this. Freeing us from the Microsoft monopoly can only have extremely positive effects on our economy and allow us to progress our technology further. Microsoft has done very little to progress our technology. In fact, they are centering Vista on Content Consumption instead of moving it ahead to make it a tool for the mind (they took all the innovative new features out and left consumers with draconian technologies used by content creators to control your use of the computer). They'd rather serve the big corporate content creation interests instead of driving it to innovation and new technologies. They patent the old and obvious in hopes of reaping rewards when their products begin to yellow with age.

Linux is the bright child of the future and it has the support of the world to make it a strong desktop, strong enough to surpass Windows and still allow everyone to maintain their privacy and to feel free of the draconian control that Windows exerts. Allowing Microsoft to continue to hold their monopoly is a bad thing and will harm our futures more than you can imagine. I feel pity for those that have not been around long enough to understand the drive that brought the personal computer into being. It was the very dissatisfaction with the big iron of big blue that created these machines and changed the world. Allowing Microsoft to hold onto this monopoly is to never present the world with the challenges similar to what eventually broke IBMs hold on the computer world and provided us all with these amazing beautiful tools to help us grow our minds and lives.

Giving Microsoft continued control means just that, control. They have control so they can direct other software, other OSes, even your data. Microsoft wants the DRM control so that you are locked into Windows by virtue of the DRM, just as you are locked into the ipod and apple due to their DRM. You wouldn't have anyone develop to the standards of DRM (even at the hardware level) if there was competition and unless standards boards reviewed and agreed upon them.) You get content creators making DRM only for windows and you have more foundation to keep Windows the monopoly it is. Remove DRM and you remove another beam that props up Microsoft's monopoly. That control has lead to FUD about IP in Linux, it has lead to the discontinuation of the only real gaming standard other than DirectX. So many people have said they would go to Linux if gaming was viable. Developers won't develop but for what is supported and if Microsoft discontinues OpenGL then they are going to be developing for Directx which is Windows, so to control gaming you can use it as another beam to prop up the monopoly. Remember it is the content that drives computing today. In the past two decades it was software development and those standards. Today it is what you consume and if Microsoft can lock your consumption into Windows then they will maintain their monopoly.

Fight to have the major manufacturers offer alternatives and push the likes of Dell, HP, Compaq, etc to satisfy our demands. It makes no sense, absolutely none, to consider that to be fussiness. It is simply the consumer exerting itself into the being of those that control the markets. The more Linux you have coming out from the majors the more the other companies will want to play ball. Keep up asking for Linux pre-installed. Keep those requests in the headlines and if that is fussiness then be even more so. Fight to break the monopoly and to get choice and innovation back in our beloved field.

Re:Fatal flaw

[renegadesx]

The thought of Dell supporting 50 distro's is laughable, nobody would doubt that. I don't think anyone here would think supporting 10 distro's would be reasonable. They want to support 1 distro maybe 2 (business and personal) but 1 distro would be beneficial for them. Most people would think thats fair, only if THEIR distro of choice is one of them. My idea is is Dell do deals with Novell, Red Hat or Canonical where they DONT HAVE TO support it, where the OS vendor's do their own support and part of the OS price goes to the distro. Personally I think a distro needs to blend in the best features of different distros Ubuntu has the brilliant base and has alot of support from the community Linspire has the codecs and drivers making it perfect for the home market, it is also switching to the Ubuntu base SUSE has all the office and AD compatibility that make it perfect for business, especially ones migrating away from a Windows environment An Ubuntu base with Linspie's codecs and SLED compatibility add-ons = something OEM's would probably love to embrace So far Novell seems to be in the best position to deliver this as CNR is set to extend to SUSE Linux, unfortunately SLED is not free.

Re:Fatal flaw

[drsmithy]

I think the biggest complaint the OSS community has is not that we can't buy a preconfigured Linux box from a major vendor, but that we are forced to buy an OS we don't want.

No, you're not. It is - and always has been - easy to buy a PC without Windows.

It's marginally more difficult to buy an arbitrary *Dell* PC without Windows, but no-one "forces" you to buy a Dell (or a particular model of Dell machine), for any meaningful definition of the word "force".

As a "libertarian", how could you possibly take issue with Dell selling whatever products make them the most money, so long as Dell are not the only vendor on the market ?

Re:Fatal flaw

[drsmithy]

I think the one real advantage is that if an OEM could somehow get the general public to accept Linux on their PCs instead of Windows, then said OEM could eliminate the high price of licensing Microsoft's OS which would eliminate much of the cost of the PC.

Firstly, your assumption - and therefore your conclusion - is wrong.

Secondly, if you think Microsoft won't resort to "selling" OEM Windows for $5 a pop to major OEMs before ceding ground to "free" pre-installed Linux, I have some nice real estate you'll love.

The simple fact is that Windows is a negligible additional cost to the computer. Heck, even if you're looking at businesses buying volume-licensed copies for vastly more than the OEM pays, the amount is still an insignificant blip in the context of a machine's TCO.

Re:Fatal flaw

[Mr.Scott88]

Hey, how about vendors such as Dell, Gateway, IBM, and the bunch of others just sell us users a machine without an OS without a fight of uninstalling, returning the unused OS, and then fighting for a refund?

Re:Fatal flaw

[gfxguy]

As a "libertarian", how could you possibly take issue with Dell selling whatever products make them the most money, so long as Dell are not the only vendor on the market ?

I don't, I don't see how you could read that into what I wrote.

I support the free market, but I also believe that monopolies are capable of destroying the market for competitors to the detriment of consumers. This isn't about Dell, it's about MS.

If MS is offering per-pc marketing dollars to companies like Dell, then that's not much different than giving Dell a discount for selling Windows exclusively (I know, they don't, but the fraction that they don't is very tiny). Shuttleworth points out that if that fraction increases significantly, MS might pull it's per-pc marketing dollars (I'm assuming it's per Windows license) away from Dell.

In other words, if vendors are paying $25 for each OEM copy of Windows in bulk, but companies that sell a significantly high percentage of windows boxes gets $5 back for each one, then it's essentially cliff-pricing again.... companies that comply essentially pay only $20. A reward for only selling Windows.

Now, like I said, I wouldn't have a problem with this in general, but MS is still significantly a monopoly, and if they use that to reduce consumer choices then it's anti-competitive.

And it most certainly has not been easy to always buy a PC without an MS operating system unless you build it yourself, or settle for some cheap crap Walmart machine. If you wanted a name brand with a good warranty, it's been very difficult, and always has been.

Re:Fatal flaw

[ghostcorps]

The point is that as there are so many flavours of Linus that you can't all have your taste catered for.

I'd have thought you were all used to that by now anyway.

Re:Fatal flaw

[griffjon]

Only when I'm hiding them from wlassistant ;) log files are /etc, libraries in home directories.

Re:Fatal flaw

[ultranova]

The reason most of us got to be Linux users in the first place was fussiness: we didn't like what commercial OS vendors did with their stuff so we went to open source so we could improve upon it any time we wanted.

I switched to Linux from Win98 because the latter was unstable when browsing the Web; it had to be restarted every hour or so, especially if many browser windows were kept open at the same time. I also considered XP, but decided to go Linux instead since:

1. Red Hat Linux 9 was free, Windows XP was not, so it made sense to check RH first.
2. Microsoft had failed to deliver with Win95 and Win98 (and Win3.1 too, of course, but that was never presented as anything but a shell over DOS to me), so I found it unlikely it would get it right with XP either.

After a week or so I decided I could live with Linux, and have been using that same RH9 installation ever since, updating it one component at a time after official support stopped.

So, what I'm saying, is that some of us got into Linux not because of any drive to improve things, or any commitment to open source back then, but because Microsoft delivered such horrendous quality that the pain of using the POS overcame the change resistance.

Microsoft made me a Linux user - how ironic is that ?

and then...

[malevolentjelly]

And then Mark Shuttleworth made the Linux community a glass of warm milk and sent them to bed...

Re:and then...

[pizzach]

The Linux community then proceeded to complain about there being no choice of chocolate, strawberry, cafe-mocha, or cowboyneal.

Re:and then...

[zornorph]

NO AND THEN!

Re:and then...

[cbreaker]

Then the MacOS folks said that the next version of Apple Milk is going to have a much superior Milk, that's easier than ever to drink, and it will only cost $129 a glass.

Re:and then...

[Rhodin]

Uhh, something tells me most of the hardcore geeks here wouldn't actually consider warm CowboyNeal "milk" a viable drink before bed. Though I guess I shouldn't assume anything. Nor will I confirm or deny my personal ... uhh, tastes on the matter.

  -Rho

Re:and then...

[multipartmixed]

d'ya think he drinks a lot of grapefruit juice??

Re:and then...

[Anonymous Coward]

Stop making fun of CowboyNeal. He's a normal guy who just happens to lactate sometimes. It happens to some men and is _perfectly natural_.

Re:and then...

[TeamSPAM]

Or you could get 5 glasses of Milk for $199. But most people just go for the free refills on the one glass for $129.

Re:and then...

[chris_eineke]

Karma be damned!

I'm sure that there is some homo joke/insult in there somewhere.

Re: and then...

[Dolda2000]

And the Microsoft people noted that they will go on drinking Microsoft Milk, since all they have are Microsoft Cups (from which only Microsoft Milk can be drunk) and since they've paid their Microsoft Milk-drinking licenses (which allow the holders to drink and taste Microsoft Milk, but not to look at, smell or listen to the Milk, or use it as a component in baking) anyway, they can at least go on drinking Microsoft Milk until they expire.

Dell Preinstalled Linux survey

[bensafrickingenius]

On the other hand, Dell appears to *want* our feedback:
http://www.dell.com/content/topics/global.aspx/cor p/linux?s=corp

Re:Dell Preinstalled Linux survey

[Yvan256]

They could, of course, use the answers to say something along the lines of "After seeing the survey results, the demands of the Linux community are too diverse. For reasons of technical support, we cannot offer Linux as an OS option on our computers."

Or something.

Re:Dell Preinstalled Linux survey

[NSIM]

On the other hand, Dell appears to *want* our feedback

Or at least wants you to think they do :-) I can see the /dev/null appearing somewhere in the path to save comments :-)

Wait, what?

[voice_of_all_reason]

He wants us to be satisfied with a piece of technology (likely the most complicated one you own) doesn't work out of the box? What is he, retarded?

Would you put up with that on other devices? Like an ipod that requires compiling, or a toaster that needs C statements to process bread?

Re:Wait, what?

[stratjakt]

Ya it's like shipping DVD players without movies to watch, or a video game console without a game to play, or a 200 CD jukebox - WITH NO MUSIC ON IT!?!

The computer works just fine out of the box. Pop in a bootable CD and watch it do it's thing, or have fun setting the date in the bios.

Re:Wait, what?

[voice_of_all_reason]

Ah, touche...

Re:Wait, what?

[Tony Hoyle]

It's actually quite hard to buy a console that doesn't ship with a couple of games, and beyond the cheapest bargain bucket stuff you normally get a DVD thrown in with a DVD player - retailers *know* you need this stuff so sell it as a bundle.

Re:Wait, what?

[Vulva R. Thompson, P]

or a toaster that needs C statements to process bread?

Wouldn't be so bad, just use a bakefile.

Re:Wait, what?

[Anonymous Coward]

I poured flour, water and yeast into my toaster, and I definitely didnt get bread as a result!

Re:Wait, what?

[eln]

What planet are you living on? With the exception of the Wii, none of the next-gen consoles ship with a game, and I don't think any of the previous gen ones did either (by default).

As for DVD players, maybe if you buy them at a fancy electronics store that overcharges for them, they might throw in a DVD. But that's probably the store doing it, not the manufacturer. I've never purchased a DVD player (or VCR or TV for that matter) that came with a movie included.

Re:Wait, what?

[AndroidCat]

Pop in a bootable CD and watch it do it's thing

Mark Shuttleworth can help you with that. (Except that it's a ram pig.)

Re:Wait, what?

[apt142]

To me, you and the rest here on slashdot that makes perfect sense. To the average user, they'll be upset there were sold, in their minds, a $1000+ paperweight.

And, while it would be tempting to say "tough shit, they can learn to stick in a disk", you can't expect that of the average user.

The main thing slashdotters would be getting out of this is an exemption from the Micrsoft Tax. As far as OS's go, we're more than capable of formatting and installing what we like. So, the whole choice of pre-installed or comes with a disk only matters to the rest of the population. So, why not make it easier on them? We want them to get interested in it don't we?

Re:Wait, what?

[sethstorm]

Wrong compiler.

Re:Wait, what?

[smackt4rd]

I thought that's the whole point of linux, something complicated and hard to use, so you can show everyone how smart you are. :)

Re:Wait, what?

[gfxguy]

That's what I'm saying!!! We don't really want Linux pre-installed, because more often than not we won't be happy with that version anyway. We just don't want to pay for Windows! So sell naked systems!

Keep in mind, of course; we have the right to complain, but we don't have the right to force Dell to do anything.

On the other hand, neither should MS. This whole "per PC 'marketing contribution'" is another MS anti-competitive practice, IMO.

Re:Wait, what?

[soft_guy]

It's actually quite hard to buy a console that doesn't ship with a couple of games No, it is not. When I bought my PS2, it didn't come with a game. I bought a game at the same time - AND I PICKED THE ONE I WANTED. When you bundle a game with the system, the problem is that it is likely not to be the game someone wants.

Re:Wait, what?

[Anonymous Coward]

Would you put up with that on other devices? Like an ipod that requires compiling, or a toaster that needs C statements to process bread?

Or an online music store that requires you to burn to CD then reripp it just to play on an incompatible device.

Lets face it people do put up with crap all the time. Just look at the way Windows users are expected to run antivirus software if they intend to go anywhere near the internet.

Re:Wait, what?

[Lumpy]

Yes he IS retarted.

Every "fussy" linux user I know has the gall to want their wireless card they bought with the laptop to work. Also how dare they want working 3d on the video card in that laptop, who do they think they are.

Damn Fussy linux people.

Re:Wait, what?

[Penguinisto]

To be fair, I believe the Atari 2600 I got at a young age came with two cartridges in the box: Breakout (for the paddles) and Combat (for the joysticks). Intellivision also came with a Football game, I think. Forgot what the C64 had, or even if they did...

/P

Re:Wait, what?

[ronanbear]

or iPods with no music on them.

oh wait.

An iPod comes ready to go. You don't need to format it, if you have iTunes already you don't need to install software. Sometimes there's a firmware update required but that's not ideal.

If you buy a Dell you can pop in a CD or DVD straightaway. You can connect to the Internet, setup most printers etc. It's not that hard to get Linux up to (and way beyond) that level of functionality. But there is a considerable advantage to having a distro imaged on there. For one thing you don't have to choose a distro. One has already been installed. You can change them easily.

Ultimately, unless an OEM with linux pre-installed is cheaper (even slightly) it's a waste of time. If I get Windows pre-installed I can always put it on a partition for the odd time (like today) when you need to update the firmware on your phone/GPS etc. and the tool is Windows only.

Of course, pre-installed Linux means driver compatibility has already been sorted. That's useful even if you don't install their linux.

Re:Wait, what?

[Frohboy]

Forgot what the C64 had, or even if they did...

The C64 came with "BASIC V2" and "38911 BASIC BYTES", free!

Man I loved that game.

Re:Wait, what?

[Anonymous Coward]

Yes, he wants you to be happy with it. Instead of you only being happy when every possible Dell box that you can order can come with any possible Linux distribution, with whatever kernel you so choose.

Of course, you also don't want to pay for Dell to be able to afford that at their current margins.

Honestly, I think everyone needs to learn that the Linux community will never be happy with "the industry". And I believe deep down, that's what Dell knows. They are just trying to expand business a little, and see if they can get a chunk of the Linux community.

Afterall, that's all you can really ask for. Getting them all to agree without degenerating into petty insults and egotistical rants is just about impossible. The final step to world peace will likely be to get the Windows, Linux and Mac communities to get along. The ego-maniacs in each group will keep that battle going long past I'm buried and gone.

Re:Wait, what?

[apt142]

My point is, if you're technically capable, and an OS is installed you can change it.

But, if we want Linux to be introduced to the masses then we have to assume the masses won't know enough to install it themselves. So, sell them pre-installed. The cost won't be any different from a naked system. And it'll serve the lowest common denominator of buyer. If you don't like it. Change it, you can. They can't. That's my point.

Re:Wait, what?

[Scarblac]

We're not talking about average users, we're talking about people who might buy a HP or Dell system with Linux pre-installed if it were available. They're not quite the same type.

Re:Wait, what?

[Scarblac]

But, if we want Linux to be introduced to the masses then we have to assume the masses won't know enough to install it themselves.

Fuck the masses, they're not what this is about.

What the people asking for Dell and HP systems with Linux want is:

• A guarantee that there are open source drivers, hence available for every distro, for every single part of the system
• Avoid paying Microsoft for an OS license I won't use.

More mass exposure for Linux would be a welcome side effect, but it's not where this demand is coming from.

Re:Wait, what?

[0racle]

To the average user, they'll be upset there were sold, in their minds, a $1000+ paperweight.

Why would they think that? They have to assemble things that they buy when they get them home all the time. Why suddenly would they expect a computer to magically work exactly they way they think it should without any work on their part?

Re:Wait, what?

[Penguinisto]

hehe - I know the C64 technically wasn't a game console, but to most of the families buying it, it pretty much was. (besides, I couldn't resist. Should've included the TRS-80 and TI-99/4A in there just for giggles).

/P

Re:Wait, what?

[Woy]

That's an easy one, you just copy over the bread from your windows partition.

(i kid because i love)

Re:Wait, what?

[Anonymous Coward]

No, he just forgot to setup the correct cross compiler. He needed to code for the breadmaker, not the toaster, then pipe the output of that back into the toaster...

Re:Wait, what?

[Blakey Rat]

Xbox 360 ships with Hexic HD on the HD. Technically, it ships on the HD, because stand-alone HDs have Hexic HD pre-installed on them also. But either way, I was pleasantly surprised, I wasn't expecting.

I don't know about PS3.

Not that this has anything whatsoever to do with the topic at hand...

Re:Wait, what?

[ady1]

or get the Visual Studio 2005 Food Edition.

Re:Wait, what?

[nine-times]

Of course, that's exactly the difference in perception of "computer" between a geek and a general consumer. Geeks might see a computer without an OS as a complete product because operating systems are part of the content you put on it. Most people view the OS as "just part of the system" and the content is all the web sites, documents, movies, and music.

So while you see a Dell without Windows as a DVD player without a DVD, most consumers would view it as a DVD player that doesn't play DVDs out of the box. In fact, I don't even mean this metaphorically, I mean many consumers see computers as a hybrid DVD-player/MP3-player/Internet-applicance/word-pro cessor, and so by coming without an operating system, it is literally a DVD player that, doesn't play DVDs, an MP3 player that doesn't play MP3s, and Internet appliance that can't view web sites, and a word processor that can't... er.... process words. It does nothing it's "supposed to do" out of the box.

Re:Wait, what?

[apt142]

Why suddenly would they expect a computer to magically work exactly they way they think it should without any work on their part?

Because up until this, it always has. It's always been Windows.

Re:Wait, what?

[apt142]

No, we're not. At least not in the short run.

In the long run we'd better be thinking some average users are going to cash in on it. Because it won't remain profitable if they don't.

Re:Wait, what?

[apt142]

Pre-installed or blank you gain both of those things anyways.

With a pre-install you get a few more advantages:

• A work PC out of the box.
• Guaranteed Driver Support. Dell (or HP) would look stupid if their pre-install didn't work with their systems. So, instead of an offering and a promise, you actually have leverage to hold them to it.
• If they have a preferred Linux, they'll be more apt to buy parts for future computers that are more friendly to open source. Buying power does a lot more persuading than merely asking for compliance.
• A significant percentage might even like their OS. (They are polling to see what we're asking for.) It'll save them an hour of installing.
• Of course mass exposure.

There is no added disadvantage. If you were going to format and reinstall, you're not hindered at all. Hell, you still get to benefit from the driver support they'll be held to.

Re:Wait, what?

[east coast]

Honestly, I think everyone needs to learn that the Linux community will never be happy with "the industry". And I believe deep down, that's what Dell knows.

it's not hard to see. just look at the postings here, most are less concerned with linux than with having to buy something that has a ms os on it. i understand that compatibility issues are a regal pain but if the pc is linux friendly and costs less with windows and than without what's the problem? it has nothing to do with linux being better, it's all about linux cry babies have a stick so far up their butts that they can't just buy a piece of hardware, install linux and be happy with it. they need to have their pet project's name stamped on the side of it in bold letters to show everyone that they're so cool that it hurts.

the linux community is full of suckers and malcontents. this is the reason i don't even bother to discuss technology with most of them. for them it's not the tech but the ego factor of being a linux user that gets them into the game.

they can keep their little clique of goofs, i enjoy the technology i work with.

Re:Wait, what?

[jmv]

To me, you and the rest here on slashdot that makes perfect sense. To the average user, they'll be upset there were sold, in their minds, a $1000+ paperweight.

If I'm not mistaken, the Dell survey was about "What do *you* want?", not "What do you this the average user wants?". They hoping to know the latter by collecting lots of the former. This is generally more reliable...

Re:Wait, what?

[Frogbert]

Come on no, the sega master system had Alex the kid built right into the box. Turn it on without a cart and there it was.

Re:Wait, what?

[thephotoman]

Actually, you do have to format your iPod if you're using Windows. Out of the box, it'll work, sure, but only with a Mac, unless you happen to be sitting on some Windows HFS+ drivers that I don't know about.

Re:Wait, what?

[thephotoman]

Ah, but I prefer the GNU food compilers. I don't have the money for that Microsoft crap. Besides, with them, I know what I'm getting.

Re:Wait, what?

[lordlod]

But when you buy your Wii you expect it to play any Wii game that you put in.
You don't expect the controller to stop working when you put the latest game in because the controller is only supported by the one game that came with the system.

That's currently the case with computers, laptops in particular. Your laptop not only comes with Windows preinstalled, it also comes with hardware which will only work with Windows.

Having hardware that is designed and guaranteed to run a GPL OS will fix this problem, that's essentially what they would be doing by providing it preinstalled.

Re:Wait, what?

[Anonymous Coward]

Come on, of course they want us to buy boxes that don't work--that's what MS OS's create.
And millions do buy them...so why should they not expect the rest to go along?

I'm converting my customer base to linux as fast as I can before some of them start "upgrading" to Vista.

He's wrong anyway, maybe most CURRENT linux customers are picky, but the FUTURE is for people who are only "picky" if that is defined as: I want my machine to WORK RELIABLY ALL THE TIME.

As the computer customer base gets more educated, they see that a machine which doesn't work is not a bargain.

Funny about that.

wizodd

to lazy to log in....

Re:Wait, what?

[dwater]

> Pre-installed or blank you gain both of those things anyways.

If it isn't preinstalled, I wouldn't be so sure all it's h/w was 'linux compatible'. With it pre-installed, I can be more sure.

Yes, they could say 'we tested it and everything worked', but if they actually sell it with some linux installed, then that would be better, in my mind at least.

I'd vote for Ubuntu, then probably wipe it and install Fedora.

Re:Wait, what?

[dwater]

> ... unless you happen to be sitting on some Windows HFS+ drivers that I don't know about.

There are such things. Wiebetech drivedocks used to be shipped with a free(beer) version, IINM - not any more though (again, IIMN).

How does that response answer anything?

[jojoba_oil]

If nothing else, that "response" seems to be more of a paraphrase than anything else, with a few links that are on the original anyways. And obviously the comment quoted by CRN doesn't understand the problem from the shoes of the OEMs.

Re:How does that response answer anything?

[John Harrison]

Agreed. That wasn't a response. It simply quoted a few paragraphs and then made NO COMMENTARY on them. Instead it cited a few facts that have little to do with what Shuttleworth said. The /. editors and submitter should be ashamed.

Pre-installed? o.O

[Anonymous Coward]

Part of the Linux "experience" is installing it. If people can't do that, then they don't need to be using Linux.

The people begging for pre-installed Linux are probably the same people who would, upon receiving a PC from a vendor with a pre-installed OS, immediately wipe that OS and install it from scratch anyway lest they be left with an OS that has tons of cruft.

Re:Pre-installed? o.O

[jimstapleton]

In some ways I agree - definetly that those who want it preinstalled would reinsall it anyway.

For all I'll complain about, most Linux distros these day have one thing that they without argument do better than any other OS - install.

Their installers are some of the most effective, useful, and asthetically appealing installers around. Not to metion they are fairly fast. Installation may be part of the experience, but more importantly, it's one of the /easiest/ parts of the experience. I won't say they are much of an experience though, more of a non-experience, which is what a installation should be. They are a good example of how-it-should-be-done.

That being said, getting it working may not be. Great it installed, but if the hardware doesn't have good Linux drivers, you are SOL, unless you /like/ writing drivers. I think that's the issue here. I could care less what OS the machine comes preinstaled with. I just want to know that there's drivers available for the hardware in my OS of choice.

Which is one of the reasons I'd rather them supply OS drivers for Linux, or well documented blobs that can be accessed by the developers as they choose - I run FreeBSD, not Linux, and if they do everything to get ONE distro of Linux working, there's little chance it'll help me with my use, but if they provide OS drivers and say "chosoe your own distro", I'd be much happier, the BSD crew is good at porting Linux drivers over.

Re:Pre-installed? o.O

[solevita]

Part of the Linux "experience" is installing it

This is posted from my linux laptop, a computer that I use pretty much all day every day. I'd just like to say that I much prefer the experience of browsing Slashdot than I did the experience of installing Firefox. No, it wasn't hard at all, but I still find your statement strange. I run linux largely because I can have as little installed software as possible, as opposed to having to run all the crap needed to support Windows.

It's easy to take a snobbish attitude and say "if you can't install it you shouldn't use it", but I know people that have bought Dells and use them only to run the default browser. Put linux in their computers and they'd never know any difference. If I was Dell I'd just rebrand Fedora or Ubuntu and market it as "Dell OS" or something similar. For most people this'd be great and for us /. readers that demand something different, we can install it ourselves.

Re:Pre-installed? o.O

[dvice_null]

The point of pre-installed Linux is that if there is a pre-installed Linux, then most likely the hardware is well supported in Linux also. This is why I would buy a computer with pre-installed Linux, rather than one without.

Also having pre-installed Linux would most likely increase the Linux user-base.

Re:Pre-installed? o.O

[locofungus]

The point of pre-installed Linux is that if there is a pre-installed Linux, then most likely the hardware is well supported in Linux also.

Definitely - infact I'd settle for a no-OS laptop with a live CD that supports all the hardware.

That way I can install it exactly the way I want but if I can't get something to work I can boot it up with the live CD and find out how it can be made to work.

Tim.

Re:Pre-installed? o.O

[bunratty]

The people begging for pre-installed Linux are probably the same people who would, upon receiving a PC from a vendor with a pre-installed OS, immediately wipe that OS and install it from scratch anyway lest they be left with an OS that has tons of cruft.

That was my thought exactly after reading the article. Dell should not try to satisfy the fussy people, but instead satisfy people who don't know about Linux. They should put together a system that our parents or grandparents can use out of the box. They should pre-install a whole set of software, including Linux, hardware drivers, office applications, a browser (along with common plugins), an email program, and whatever other kinds of software that most people use. Anyone who doesn't like what they pre-install can format the hard disk and start fresh, or just pick and choose among different software options.

Re:Pre-installed? o.O

[nosfucious]

That's almost exactly what I want too.

If it was available, I'd likely buy it. I'm looking to replace/supplement an ageing desktop in about 6 months.

No Microsoft tax is a 'must-have' also.

Re:Pre-installed? o.O

[Technician]

The people begging for pre-installed Linux are probably the same people who would, upon receiving a PC from a vendor with a pre-installed OS, immediately wipe that OS and install it from scratch

Exactly! Getting a laptop with one of their printers bundled with Windows only drivers and no support for the wireless adaptor and only low res in the video sucks. Getting something that works is important. Pre-installed Linux is a gurantee of compatiblilty.

Not haveing the time to hack a wireless card is the only reason my laptop is still running Windows 2K instead of Ubuntu. My desktop machines are either dual boot or Ubuntu all the way with everything working.

Re:Pre-installed? o.O

[thephotoman]

For all I'll complain about, most Linux distros these day have one thing that they without argument do better than any other OS - install.

You can say that again. After years of being told how beautiful the OS X installer is, I must say that I was mildly disappointed. It took an hour and a half to run on a MacBook that I hadn't even gotten home from the Apple Store yet (what, the mall had power drops and open wireless). On the other hand, I'm done with the installer disc after about 20 minutes with the average stock Linux install (well, not on the MacBook, as that's not really a stock install yet).

I agree

[stratjakt]

I don't get the fuss about pre-installed linux. Isn't it enough that OEMs will ship a PC with no OS installed? There's just too many flavors and dickitry and infighting in the linux world, and I guarantee what Dell pre-installed on their boxes wouldn't be "the linux I want". Maybe it'll have KDE, and I want gnome, maybe it'll have gnome and I want fwvm, etc.

Pre-installing Windows makes sense from a volume licensing standpoint - the consumer gets windows cheaper than retail. And the first thing I (and many others) usually do is flatten and reinstall anyways, to get rid of all the preloaded settings and software I don't want.

But (most) distros are free, so whats the big deal? Install ubunto or gentoo or whatever by yourself.

Re:I agree

[Taevin]

I don't get the fuss about pre-installed linux. Isn't it enough that OEMs will ship a PC with no OS installed? There's just too many flavors and dickitry and infighting in the linux world, and I guarantee what Dell pre-installed on their boxes wouldn't be "the linux I want". Maybe it'll have KDE, and I want gnome, maybe it'll have gnome and I want fwvm, etc.

This is true, but you forget that there are many people that would not be quite so picky. Many existing Linux users would likely be happy with an OEM OS install, especially if it was a popular distribution like Ubuntu or RedHat.

I think that the real issue is that if a major OEM like Dell started offering pre-installed Linux that Just Works(tm) right out of the box, it would be a huge boost for Linux as a desktop platform. If Dell could offer a computer with Linux for less than a computer with Windows (should be possible once you remove OS licensing costs, and costs for extra but common add-on software like Office), people would be more likely to go with the Linux box - especially if their wiz-kid son/friend/nephew/neighbor/random-dude-on-the-stre et said Linux was better than Windows. I think we can all agree that a well configured Linux install with Firefox and/or Thunderbird, Open Office, and a printer driver is probably more than sufficient for the average person who just wants to surf the web, check email, and print some photos.

Re:I agree

[asphaltjesus]

1. Business guys like Shuttleworth view success in terms of volume adoption and profitability.

2. The vast majority of users don't understand that the hardware is separate from the OS. They can't comprehend that another OS will actually run on their hardware. PHB's included.

Which leads us to the conclusion that resellers like Dell are a gateway to _very_ many end users.

Re:I agree

[SmokedS]

Many that are not capable of installing either Windows or Ubuntu would chose the free alternative if they could do so easily and without fuss. That choice is not available today. That is the big deal.

Re:I agree

[ErroneousBee]

I think just as long as it ships with a decent distro, it doesnt matter. Just supporting one distro should maen that drivers are available for all of the hardware.

Just as long as the drivers are freely downloadable from somewhere, other distros can come along and check thier releases against your hardware.

Re:I agree

[db32]

I don't care what it has on it. Preinstalled linux means that the hardware works. It means that I know regardless of distro, the kernel will make all my crap work without wanting to kill myself. I won't be fighting stupid driver issues, nonstandard hardware, etc. If you can order it with Preinstalled linux, it means your hardware is going to work with relative ease in linux.

Re:I agree

[LeedsSideStreets]

I also agree, mostly.

But, if Linux is pre-installed it can be reassuring to know that a certain distribution, Linux kernel version, or Linux OS feature works with a certain hardware configuration, even if you wipe it immediately and put on your distro of choice.

I will probably continue to buy parts one by one, researching each one for good Linux compatibility, no matter what. But when I first started with Linux, I would have liked to see a big red stamp of "100% Linux Approved" on a complete system, so I wouldn't have to worry (much) about unfriendly components. If an OEM offers this by selling a machine that ships working with some kind of Linux, that would probably make some people more comfortable with making the switch to whatever distro they think looks good.

Re:I agree

[skoaldipper]

I don't get the fuss about pre-installed linux.

Recognition? No. I take that back. Verification. Proof that the "linux is not desktop ready" argument can be retired.

Isn't it enough that OEMs will ship a PC with no OS installed?

It can, as Mark suggested by changing the business model and dropping a linux CD in the box.

There's just too many flavors and dickitry and infighting in the linux world, and I guarantee what Dell pre-installed on their boxes wouldn't be "the linux I want".

Does anyone really think (the majority of) linux users _ultimately_ care what distro flavor gets preloaded? That's not what motivates some of these responses. I would argue that Dell could just as easily preload their own linux distro - Dellinux (a fork off Ubuntu tailor made for Dell hardware).

Pre-installing Windows makes sense from a volume licensing standpoint[...]But (most) distros are free, so whats the big deal? Install ubunto or gentoo or whatever by yourself.

I agree. Actually, it's a bonus getting Windows for so cheap. Then, slap some linux loving on it at your own leisure. Win! Win!

FTA, concerning fussiness and Dell offering a matrix of possibilities,

This is an expensive proposition

I disagree.
1. That linux fussiness (in part) stems from being traditionally locked in with just one OS - Windows (and all it's caveats of operation).
2. Now, Dell has a wealth of options and alternatives, and can retool and craft a new profitable business model. Compare that with lockin.
3. Mark assumes Dell has to offer the entire Matrix to _appease_ that fussiness -> expense.
4. The fussiness (in large part) comes from no OEM linux supplied vendor. Period. Pick any distro or make your own. From 2, you could just as easily save money by offering NO support agreement, NO cost of OS distribution, and/or a LOT of cost savings by even offering older unsold Dell models collecting dust in the warehouses, which traditionally, linux has supported older hardware very well.

What Mark calls "fussiness", I'm willing to bet most linux users would agree is no different than bolting on all kinds of applications to a standard windows install - various AVs, skins, music players, firefox, etc. Sure, you have KDE or Gnome fanbois, but honestly, does anyone really think Dell limiting it to just that one DE will deter most migrating from Windows to linux to begin with? "Dude, you're getting linux certified Dell hardware."

Re:I agree

[Belial6]

The real solution is to include a LiveCD that has all the drivers for the hardware. When we talk about OS support, we are generally really talking about hardware support, but you can't prove that the hardware works without software. I've never bought a Dell, so I'll have to ask. Would they really help you install Half-Life? Would they walk you through changing your OS theme? How about removing the pre-installed AOL software?

A LiveCD would be perfect for verifying that the hardware is not the problem. You could test it without erasing your existing hard drive install, and the user would have a bootable OS available to download any other OS they might want to run. The issue with Linux support isn't about supporting the OS. It is in verify that the hardware isn't broken, and that there are drivers for it.

Re:I agree

[Andrewkov]

Unless Dell uses some proprietary binary drivers to make that hardware work.

Re:I agree

[thegnu]

2. The vast majority of users don't understand that the hardware is separate from the OS. They can't comprehend that another OS will actually run on their hardware. PHB's included.

I am going to avoid the phrase "all Apple's fault," but I notice how they have ALWAYS equated PC with Microsoft. Which is patently fucking absurd on many many levels. They rarely qualify their statement (eg, "Windows PC"). Since they don't qualify their statements, all statements of superiority are bunk/bull(ocks/shit).

I talk to Apple cultists, and they say "PCs..." and then proceed to describe Windows. Even after I point out that, hey, I run Linux on a PC. And it's "better" than OS X (quotes denote the figurative, not the emphatic). They even talk about hardware as if there's any competition whatsoever between PCs and Macs. It's a completely different market.

And while I'm ranting, Apple lies and distorts the truth equally to Microsoft, which means they do it as much as they can/need to derive maximum benefit.

Bleah!

Re:I agree

[asylumx]

If you give a mouse a cookie....

Huh?

[Anonymous Coward]

CRN finds a response to Shuttleworth that seems to be both amusing and telling at the same time.

You mean the quote at the end? Yeah, it's "telling" -- it's telling of how thoroughly garden-variety forum idiots can't even conceive of the possibility that there's something about Dell's business that Dell understands and they don't, and not vice-versa. You'd think that if nothing else, the editors here, as employees of a failed Linux box provider, would understand that.

That's not fair...

[physicsboy500]

But I want it now!!

No fair... you love Microsoft more than me!!! he gets to have all the fun!!1

Razor thin gets wider with Linux

[garcia]

First, margins on PC's are razor-thin.

That changes a bit when 50% of the PC cost is eliminated when a free OS is installed with free office software.

Re:Razor thin gets wider with Linux

[Rycross]

Well, assuming we're talking about Vista, the entry level is $200, which for a lot of PCs isn't 50%. But the fact of the matter is that Dell doesn't pay $200 for a copy of Vista. I'd be surprised if they payed over $50 for it. I think XP was something like $15, right? I know I payed $5 for it from my university.

But one also has to figure in the cost of supporting the transition to Linux. Software systems updated, maybe hardware swapper out, staff trained and informed at every level. I doubt its as expensive as some people want to make it seem, but its a non zero cost.

Re:Razor thin gets wider with Linux

[Anonymous Coward]

50% of the PC cost? That's a bit of an exaggeration.

Most OEM computers don't even come with Office, just Works which costs significantly less (~$40). Dell packages the cheapest computers with Vista Basic OEM (~$95 on Newegg). That's a grand total of $135, hardly 50% of the cost of most computers. Dell obviously can purchase these software for a lower cost than Newegg is selling it and they also preinstalls a ton of unwanted software which subsidizes the cost somewhat.

Re:Razor thin gets wider with Linux

[xenocide2]

I don't get how this got rated insightful. The margins on computers aren't thin only because of costs. They're thin because of competition. Gateway, HP, compaq et all, they're all competitors to Dell. And all of them are equally capable of making the cost saving switch as Dell. So even if Dell did reduce the price, competitors will easily step in and force Dell to reduce margins.

Re:Razor thin gets wider with Linux

[kjart]

That changes a bit when 50% of the PC cost is eliminated when a free OS is installed with free office software.

Wait, so you're willing to pay more than $CostOfWindowsPC - $CostOfWindows? That does not appear to be the vibe on other threads here that I've read.

Re:Razor thin gets wider with Linux

[big_gibbon]

From TFA:

Microsoft co-marketing funds are a substantial portion of the profit margins for many large PC retailers. Tweaking the nose of the giant might be fun but it's risky. If Microsoft reduces the per-PC marketing contribution it makes for a particular reseller, that puts them at a huge financial disadvantage relative to their competitors.

It's not the costs of the OS that are the issue, it's the fact that Microsoft may take their ball and go home. Once that happens, you could be stuck with narrower margins, even if you're saving on the OS.

Re:Razor thin gets wider with Linux

[n6kuy]

Not quite.

Actually, the "Windows Tax" gets offset by vendors paying the manufacturers to install all kinds of demo crap on the Windows computers they sell. Remove the Windows Tax, and you also remove the Windows Tax Credit... A PC with a free OS will prolly cost more than the one with Windows on it.

Re:Razor thin gets wider with Linux

[xtracto]

The problem with offering Linux ready machines is that buyers will cry loud if the cost of the system is the same as the one *with* windows included because they will reason on the lines of "WTF Linux is free blah blah".

I would be very happy to buy a complete desktop PC to Dell, HP or anyone else with whichever Linux distro they choose given that I can personalize the machine (in one or other way what you can do now) before buying it including things like webcam, scanner, printer and other devices that are KNOWN to work with Linux. It is similar to my rant in the MythTV vs Tivo article, I would gladly pay them to offer that. Gosh, they could *even* Include CrossOver office or Cedega as an option (similarly on how they include MsWorks, antivirus and other crap now). I would buy it.

What I want is a complete solution, for me and for my dad, mom, brother, etc. A solution which is *guaranteed* to work.

For that, as I stated in another post, Dell would have to create their own Distro, based on Fedora, Ubuntu or any other distro. Why? because that way they will have more "control" over the content. It does not have to be a very different fork, just Ubuntu with some personalized Dell shit and personalized drivers for the offered machines that JUST WORKS. Now THAT would make Apple shiver :)

Re:Razor thin gets wider with Linux

[Anonymous Coward]

> That changes a bit when 50% of the PC cost is eliminated when a free OS is installed with free office software.

Well, the issue is that, if you don't sell your quota of windows OS, the price of windows goes UP for ALL you copies of windows. Hence, you may get a margin on the linux box, but ALL YOUR OTHER WINDOWS PC are going to have SKYROCKETTING PRICES. This is how Microsoft maintain their monopoly.

What Dell is doing right now is bargaining Microsoft. They have no desire of pushing linux. They want the threaten microsoft to get cheaper windows licenses.

Re:Razor thin gets wider with Linux

[garcia]

Actually, the "Windows Tax" gets offset by vendors paying the manufacturers to install all kinds of demo crap on the Windows computers they sell. Remove the Windows Tax, and you also remove the Windows Tax Credit... A PC with a free OS will prolly cost more than the one with Windows on it.

That will quickly stop when all the PC companies start offering it which will force MSFT to eat their own shit. They won't be the single game in town any longer which will force them to continue to "compete" by offering their discounts.

Re:Razor thin gets wider with Linux

[bensafrickingenius]

This is not insightful, it is moronic. "50% of the cost"?!?! I work for a school district, and I get Windows licenses for about $54. I wonder what Dell pays?

Re:Razor thin gets wider with Linux

[nuzak]

> They won't be the single game in town any longer which will force them to continue to "compete" by offering their discounts.

Thus further driving down the margins, driving the smaller players out of business, leaving only a few larger vendors who can then sit on their thumbs when it comes to continuing support, while any new players in the business will think better of the strategy that destroyed their predecessors.

I'd be all right with paying slightly more if the vendor were honest enough to say that all the demoware on the windows PC partially subsidizes the cost.

Re:Razor thin gets wider with Linux

[squiggleslash]

If a significant number of PCs were sold with GNU/Linux (or GNU/Solaris) installed, instead of Windows, do you think that:

1. Most makers of the kind of "demo crap" that installs with PCs would go "Oh noes! Now we can't ship anything with a significant number of PCs! Our entire business model is now obsolete because of the OS that's shipped with a lot of computers!"

2. Most makers of the kind of "demo crap" that installs with PCs would port their software to GNU/(Linux|Solaris) (presumably using the free Wine libraries) and make the same kinds of deals they always have.

I appreciate there's a short-term jump to overcome before we get to that point, but it may actually work in the favour of Free operating systems. Most of us don't want that crap in the first place. A perception that a computer is more valuable, as evidenced by its $50 higher price, because it comes with Fedora or Ubuntu or Nexenta pre-installed, may undermine much of the "Free software is just cheap knockoffery" perception, and people who buy such PCs early on will, as Mac users do today, unquestionably praise the ease of use, speed, and lack of confusing crap, that a modern GNOME based free operating system generally has.

Re:Razor thin gets wider with Linux

[Lumpy]

Yes it already does. Dell Latitude D620 with windows is cheaper than their "open source" version identically equipped.

the windows ones have a mysterious "instant rebate" on them that is missing from the open source ones.

Re:Razor thin gets wider with Linux

[DragonWriter]

Actually, the "Windows Tax" gets offset by vendors paying the manufacturers to install all kinds of demo crap on the Windows computers they sell. Remove the Windows Tax, and you also remove the Windows Tax Credit... A PC with a free OS will prolly cost more than the one with Windows on it.

Why? Lots of the demo crap on Windows computers is for online services, etc. Some is for commercial applications. Linux users can use commercial online services, and commercial applciations exist for Linux. Why wouldn't a set of Linux-using eyeballs be worth just as much as a set of Windows-using eyeballs as a demo target? Certainly, in many cases, they would be different product demos, but so what?

Re:Razor thin gets wider with Linux

[Anonymous Coward]

The guy that managed to get a refund from Dell for an unused Windows XP was reported to have gotten $53 back

Re:Razor thin gets wider with Linux

[SanityInAnarchy]

This is already true. I believe their "Open Source" offerings do cost more, when you can even find them.

Worse, if you remember, Dell once asked how much we would pay for computers not to come with crap.

I really wish there was some legal way to end the demo crap and simply have computers cost more, for everyone.

Begun the flame wars have.

[Anonymous Coward]

n/t

I still don't get it

[Anonymous Coward]

Why would someone (I'm talking to you, guys) want an open operating system in a closed computer??? They rivet the cases shut on Dells!

Any other computer maker, sure, but for the life of me I can't figure out why an open source guy would want a Dell. Dell and Windows are a perfect fit.

From TFA:

you are not a "Linux" user, you are a user who wants version 6.06.1 of Ubuntu, or 10.2 of SuSE, or Fedora 6. You want a specific distro, and in many cases also a specific VERSION of that distro.

I don't get this, either. KDE or Gnome, sure, but when KDE is on my desktop I don't see a lot of difference between Suse or Mandriva, and one's German while the other one's French.

I hate feeling stupid, someone please enlighten me!

(A/C because I'm too embarrassed at my ignorance to log on)

Re:I still don't get it

[stratjakt]

I don't get this, either. KDE or Gnome, sure, but when KDE is on my desktop I don't see a lot of difference between Suse or Mandriva, and one's German while the other one's French.

That's fine until you want to install something. Then you find out that there is no package for what you want for your distro, and your off compiling by hand, or trying to hack something else, etc.

Maybe you want PPTP server, but your distro only has client support. Or for commercial products on linux (I'm thinking Sybase right now), you need certain versions of certain libraries, and you can only get support for certain versions of certain distros. A Dell box running Mandriva may be useless to people looking to run Sybase ASE and turf MS SQL Server.

As for why people care whether OEM's ship linux or not, I have no idea. I think most of them are just assholes.

Re:I still don't get it

[Anonymous Coward]

Since when have they rivited the cases shut? I have yet to see one, you just must not be smart enough to figure out how to open the case.

Re:I still don't get it

[Anonymous Coward]

Any other computer maker, sure, but for the life of me I can't figure out why an open source guy would want a Dell. Dell and Windows are a perfect fit.


(Disclaimer, I do work with a number of dells at work, so I'm slightly influenced by choice but only because I support them and like the dell support I do get... BUT, I do NOT work for Dell in any way/shape/form, etc..)

Obviously the Post was tongue-in-cheek, but the above statement is rather true... I will TELL someone who wants an easy computer: "Use Dell, Dude.." Prices are not too out of line, etc...

But for myself, or someone who can really "USE" A Power system, I build my own. And I have a few that I've put Linux on. (HTPC + Knoppmyth for friends, etc..) I don't see a REAL Linux person wanting an OEM Install on a consumer PC. (THAT IS WHAT IT IS... CONSUMER PC... You figure it out...)

In My eyes, it's tooo little, TOOOO LATE... If this was 1990 and we had a choice between Win3.1 and OS/2 and the Choice was kept in play for consumers until 2007, then yeah it would work for a few power users... But I (We) have been shunned for so long and predicted to be an unimportant market, that they created a self-fulfilling prophecy.

The only exception to this would be in the business world... Here, Dell and other mass market computer manufacturers have an advantage of speed of delivery and warrenty of product. If my company depends on computers, I don't want 1000 computers from "JOE SCHMOE" to slowly trickle into the company... Time is Money.. $$$ I WANT 1000 Computers 3 weeks from now delivered to this office... Put this image on there - Period. Done.

I Don't know about the Licensing and Windows, etc... Dell USED to make us buy our windows through them, with the PC... But they would put our image on the PC (extra charge, of course) even though each PC came with a seperate license key for XYZ-Pro MS Product. Why not the same image with Linxu, and just leave out the Windows? Not hard, right...
(I don't know if this is still an option, we quit that, and now do image casting via zenworks when the PC's come in, so we no longer pay that xtra charge for Dell imaging..)

Just some thoughts...

Re:I still don't get it

[Volante3192]

They rivet the cases shut on Dells!

Baloney. Having worked with Dell systems that are up to 5 years old, I have to admit that while the parts themselves are crap, you can field strip a Dell desktop in under a minute. They are VERY modular and have only gotten better in that respect. Desktop models hardly use screws anymore, just tabs and buttons.

Taking a hard drive out of a Dell Inspiron? Two screws under the PCMCIA slot. Four screws to remove the HD from its cover guard. That's it.

Taking a hard drive out of a Sony Vaio? ...Let's just say it includes popping off the keyboard and nearly every screw in the thing. And that's for starters...

If there's one thing Dell's done right, it's made cases that are stupid easy to field service. (Obviously for good reason, considering how often they need to be serviced.)

Re:I still don't get it

[nuzak]

> They rivet the cases shut on Dells!

Just where you work, to keep your grabbenmittens out. Mine swings right open and the drives slide right in and out.

> I hate feeling stupid, someone please enlighten me!

Clue must come from within, grasshoppa.

Re:I still don't get it

[russotto]

They rivet the cases shut on Dells!

The LEFT side opens.

Re:I still don't get it

[Glowing Fish]

They have gotten a little better, but all proprietary cases are still inferior to the generic "four screws in the back beige box"

Re:I still don't get it

[binary paladin]

You said "field strip." That's fucking awesome, since all I could picture was a Dell branded AK-47.

Re:I still don't get it

[Volante3192]

And now all I can think of is a call to Dell Automatic Weapons Support...taking 15 minutes to determine the gun's not working because it's out of ammo...

"Now what's the service tag on your AK-47?"...

Re:I still don't get it

[Anomalyst]

My visual is the trigger guard, chamber port and magazine slot obscured by manufacturer logo stickers.

Re:I still don't get it

[smbarbour]

Don't forget about the proprietary motherboard, power supply, and in most cases, drives.

I have an Optiplex GX240 at work. The floppy drive is proprietary, the CD-RW drive is in a standard 5 1/4" with the exception that the bezel has been removed for the "seamless" case look. Oh, and while the video card is not integrated with the motherboard, it is a half-height AGP card.

The only things that are truly upgradeable are the memory and the hard drive.

So, Slashdot readers, tell me... How many Linux enthusiasts would actually consider buying a non-upgradeable machine? (I do realize that when Linux is running as a server, you don't really need to do much to it.)

Re:I still don't get it

[GiMP]

First of all, you're looking at an Optiplex, which Dell often targets as a small-form-factor machine. While I agree that the floppy drives have the bezel removed, that is common of all OEMs, it looks nicer, and most systems I've seen don't even ship with floppy drives anymore. (and the interface was standard for those with floppies)

A half-height AGP card is not too non-standard, at least not in a machine like the Optiplex. You need to remember that this is a business-targeted machine. (word processing, not gaming) There are plenty of half-height AGP cards available.

That said, look at a Dimension, or an XPS system. They're much more customizable.

Personally, I buy a few new machines for my wife and myself every year, and even more for my company. I've found that buying OEM is easier and cheaper, and if the machine can be built big enough out of the gate, upgrading isn't an issue. (not when you buy a new machine every few months ;-)

Re:I still don't get it

[Blakey Rat]

BS. Dell Precision cases are brilliantly designed so that they are quieter than the beige box while also being more easily-serviced. No screwdriver required to do anything. The case has a latch and opens clam-shell style, the drives are all on rails, when the case is open everything can be reached easily and nothing's crammed so close to something else that you cut your fingers or risk damaging something. Why get out my screwdriver if I'm just quickly adding a PCI card?

In addition, Dell designs air-flows in their cases so they don't become big echo-chambers for noise like beige box cases usually are.

I also think Apple does a good job designing cases, although installing two HDs in a G5 is a little awkward.

Re:I still don't get it

[Volante3192]

I'm not forgetting the proprietary devices. They weren't a factor in my original post though. If you're getting a Dell, you're getting the 3 year warranty anyway. You call them, they ship out a new part. When you're servicing hundreds of systems between companies you don't want to deal with screws and cases and specs and whatnot.

When one of the Optis has a bad anything, the LAST thing I want to deal with is case problems. I want to get that user up and running so they're working again. Let Dell deal with what's compatible and what isn't. I've got enough crap to worry about with people breaking everything else. You get the part, power the case down, it's back up in two or three minutes.

Again, the above points are simply stating that Dell cases are stupid easy to *service.*

On a personal note, I love my beige box with its optical and magnetic drives securely screwed into the bays with two on each side. Sure, it takes ten minutes to pull something out, but damnit, it's a labour of love there.

Dells, on the other hand, are appliances. People keep them the way they are til they die, then get a new one. If you're getting a Dell, chances are all that *would* get upgraded is the RAM or the HD. Pick the right tool for the right job: Nina in corporate accounts payable doesn't need an AMD FX with Crossfire, and you don't play CS:S on an Optiplex small form factor.

Re:I still don't get it

[smbarbour]

I will agree that the proprietary systems are excellent for business purposes as long as they are still within the warranty phase. The one I am sitting at is 5+ years old now (purchased Oct 2001) and it is still among the newest computers in the company. Every single computer in the company is out of warranty now. If my video card fries, I'm dead in the water. You can't just run out to Best Buy (or any other big box store) and pick up a half-height AGP video card. I could try and find a PCI card, but that's not the point. If the motherboard goes, it's time to buy a new computer. It's all an issue of desktop real estate rather than convenience. I have a nice big ATX case at home that has two thumbscrews to hold the case closed and the mounting screws for the motherboard. Everything else is held in place by clasps. If the hard drive dies in my home computer, I have to unscrew the two thumbscrews and swap the hard drive. If the hard drive dies in my work computer, I have to take the 19" CRT monitor off the top of the case, finesse the case "buttons" to open the hinged case, unplug the hard drive, remove the drive carrier from the case, unscrew the carrier from the drive, replace the drive, and reverse the steps. Oh, and the case needs to be finessed to close properly.

OEM means...

[Anonymous Coward]

oh forget it

hmm

[mastershake_phd]

First, margins on PC's are razor-thin.

This has two significant consequences. Most importantly, it means that Microsoft co-marketing funds are a substantial portion of the profit margins for many large PC retailers.
 
So a PC with free software costs more than one with $100+ software? What are "co-marketing funds"? Kickbacks?

Re:hmm

[spun]

What are "co-marketing funds"? Kickbacks?

Kind of like kickbacks. Basically, company A and B do business together. Company B wants to advertise. Company A says, "mention that your product uses our product, and do it in a specific way that we like, and, because you are advertising for us, we will help cover the cost of the advertising." For example, the "Windows-ready" and "Intel inside" campaigns are both covered under co-marketing agreements.

Co-marketing, marketing together, get it?

Re:hmm

[Rycross]

Well, besides that a lot of companies like Dell will now pre-load a lot of "trial" software with their Windows installation. They get money from the software vendors for doing that, so yes a Linux based computer may be more expensive.

Re:hmm

[RingDev]

[quote]So a PC with free software costs more than one with $100+ software? What are "co-marketing funds"? Kickbacks?[/quote]

Yes. I'm not sure on how the situation is now, but I had heard that for a while MS was negotiating highly exclusive contracts. Basically, the PC distributor paid for a license to install Windows on EVERY machine they produce. Any machine that DIDN'T have Windows on it would be charged a fee under the theory that any PC with out an OS installed would likely get an illegal copy of Windows installed. So if you spread the licensing cost of Windows out over every PC the distributor built, it may be $100 for each PC, but any PC they built W/O Windows would be charged a $300 fee to recoup the 'inevitable' loss to pirated Windows.

-Rick

Re:hmm

[mastershake_phd]

Any machine that DIDN'T have Windows on it would be charged a fee under the theory that any PC with out an OS installed would likely get an illegal copy of Windows installed.

Sounds a lot like a "pirate tax" on blank cds and dvds.

For Linux, read Vista

[Rogerborg]

The worst-case scenario is a customer who buys a computer at the lowest price off your website, assuming it's a Windows machine, and then calls, infuriated, because it "won't work with the game they are trying to install".

And that's different from the problem with selling Vista boxen because...?

Re:For Linux, read Vista

[DingerX]

Because with Windows, most of the time, that game will work. With all that pre-installed crap, it'll probably work badly, but it should run. Or, if it doesn't run, the Support people can drag the sucker out and frustrate 'em to the point where the user blames something else.

With a Linux install, that's a very quick (and angry) phone call.

Yes, the assumption that "any PC" is a "windows PC" is a big problem, and at the same time, it is a bit of a red herring: the assumption has no historical basis (15 years ago, a PC was not necessarily a windows box), and if you go in, determined that people believe that way, you're never going to change beliefs (and market share).

But, heck, what exactly lies behind this Linux drive? Most Linux users would have no problem assembling their PCs from scratch (and for less money) -- all the parts are top-notch, and those with any technical knowledge tend to view "support" as hassle you go through to get an RMA. I'm sure folks at Dell are asking themselves: "The Linux $***storm, does it represent real customers, or is it an ideologial crusade by a vocal minority, who wouldn't buy our stuff anyway?"

Well?

Okay, here's what I'd like to see: the option to buy a system that works with some decent version Linux, with everything I needed to run it, in the box. I don't need front-page real-estate, and I don't need bickering over particular installs.

Would I buy it? Probably not. If I'm gonna set up a PC to run Linux permanently, I'll follow the time-honored way of doing it: take some old PC parts I have lying around the house, put them together, curse and swear over the non-existent or crappy drivers, and have some frankenstein computer around the house.

I think the problem....

[Churla]

I think the problem becomes evident looking at the Dell survey...

6) Which Linux distribution should Dell prioritize on?
        Commercial: Novell/SuSE Linux Desktop
        Commercial: Red Hat Enterprise Desktop
        Community Supported: Fedora
        Community Supported: OpenSUSE
        Community Supported: Ubuntu
        Other
        If 'Other', please specify

People complain about several different versions of Windows Vista but you just named 5 completely different builds of a Linux OS, and there are several more I know some niche market people would like to see on that list too (like Kubuntu). Since if you roll out a SuSE based Linux machine several of the others would just say "Meh, I'll order it however and flatten it once I get it" you have a much smaller target audience who would actually buy it.

And until a company can determine that there's a big enough audience who would buy a specific distro of linux on a computer they won't make efforts to support them.

Re:I think the problem....

[sconeu]

The key thing is that if it's shipped with any of these, especially a community supported distro, then wiping and reinstalling is cool, because you know the hardware has drivers available.

If you just buy a generic Windows version of said box, the hardware may not be supported.

Re:I think the problem....

[MMC Monster]

Exactly. Let Dell sell a box with a wiped out HD and a copy of SuSE or whatever. Maybe with a coupon for 6 months free support from Novell for the version of SuSE that's in the box.

If they want the software installed, charge them extra and have the machine redirected to Novell to complete the installation.

Re:I think the problem....

[Anonymous Coward]

because you know the hardware has drivers available.

I agree with this idea. I think Dell would do better if instead of trying to sell computers with insert_distro_of_the_day, they should start by taking a few hours, look at their hardware, and identify configurations that are supported on a particular kernel version.

Re:I think the problem....

[Churla]

The the problem becomes that it costs Dell more to produce and support a box when it has a more restrictive list of devices with drivers for them. If they focus on just having one hardware platform that is Windows and Linux solid then they limit themselves on the number of devices they can put into it and others who can use more device which don't have Linux support get an edge on them.

The minute you make it less profitable for Dell you basically lose their interest.

Re:I think the problem....

[Churla]

Coupon for 6 months of "free" support != free for Dell (they have to pay Novell for it)
Redirecting systems for completion at Novell = very expensive as you're adding shipping

Plus, if people buy hardware and software from Dell they will expect support from Dell. That's one of Dells big selling points is having somewhat easy to access support.

Meaning that the cost of supporting a customer support infrastructure for SuSE, PLUS two different OS installation lines in production, means higher cost to provide the system.

Would you buy a Linux based system if it costs more than the Windows based one?

Re:I think the problem....

[inimesekene]

Umm... that's what this poll is for, to get a decision from us, the people who are already using it, and aren't whining about "too many flavours". After this dell would just use one distro, those who want something else, could install themselves, but have compatible hardware. Hardware compatibility would make people buy. New people needn't know about this multiple distros thing at all, at least not at first. About window manager, just pick one, doesn't really matter, as if you are novice enough to not know about this, you don't even need to know about others, that's how all the secretaries using windows are living.

Re:I think the problem....

[ArtDent]

Except that there are many different manufacturers of all the components that Dell uses, and for many of them there is already perfect in-kernel Linux support. So, Dell just needs to choose wisely.

Moreover, I'm sure Dell has incredible clout with those manufacturers. If the choice was take up the friendly offer by the kernel developers to get the component supported vs. lose Dell as a customer, what do you think they would choose?

Re:I think the problem....

[Anonymous Coward]

Dell should just ship with an Ubuntu Live disk in the CD player, and nothing on the hard disk at all.

Re:I think the problem....

[SanityInAnarchy]

Well, for one thing, that's really 3. Novell/SuSE is closely related to OpenSUSE, same with Fedora/RedHat.

For another, if they pick a good Debian-based distro, it really isn't hard for us to switch in place to whatever we want. For instance, if they pick Ubuntu? I'm not sure you even have to switch repositories, just install kubuntu-desktop and uninstall ubuntu-desktop and you're done. If they install Debian Etch? Switch the repositories to Ubuntu Edgy and upgrade.

So, having it installed at least sometimes means it's much easier to make it the distro you want than it would be starting from scratch.

Then, too, as others have said, one working Linux that Dell supports means we at least have working hardware. The community will take care of making sure those drivers are available everywhere. If you buy a generic Windows box, it means you're not only supporting Microsoft, but there's a good chance a couple of pieces of hardware (wireless, etc) will either not work at all, won't work without binary blobs or even the Windows driver (ndiswrapper), need proprietary firmware from somewhere (probably the Windows driver again), or only have alpha-quality stuff. Or all of the above.

That's why selling us "blank" machines (or machines with FreeDOS) isn't enough, they need to actually have a working distro. It doesn't matter whether we use their distro, or even whether they offer phone support. I'd be happy if I could at least, say, test-drive it in the store and see that everything's working, without having to be allowed to bring my own Knoppix.

It would be nice if it was competitive price-wise too, but I'm willing to accept a small price hit (reasonable, like $10-20) until they can get enough crapware on there (not like it's hard to remove software from Linux) that they can make it cheaper than a comparable Windows machine.

Dell can do what they want...

[Bert the Turtle]

...but until they guarantee their hardware will work with a certain version of the linux kernel, they aren't going to get any business from me.

Re:Dell can do what they want...

[dilvish_the_damned]

...but until they guarantee their hardware will work with a certain version of the linux kernel, they aren't going to get any business from me.

I am of the opinion thats kind of what "certified" means.

It's about the money

[DeHackEd]

For me, it's about the money. If I buy a laptop with Fedora Core 6 pre-installed (for the sake of argument), that money spent on the software would go to people who actually develop code for the system I bought, even if I nuke the hard drive and install $OTHER_DISTRO later. If I buy the same laptop with Windows on it, the money going to somebody with whom I have no interest in whatsoever.

So, put some kind of non-Windows OS on it. If the software costs money, make sure it goes to the people who make the OS. Don't let Microsoft have it. Personally I'm okay with Red Hat getting a small amount of money for the system that will be turned into Gentoo. Microsoft, not so much.

This is one of the big reasons we want Linux pre-installed -- evasion of the microsoft tax.

I don't get it.

[xerxesVII]

I followed the link expecting to read a response. All that I found was a copy and paste of a few snippets and some snark at the end about just slapping an install disc in and calling it good. I am as proud a Linux user as anyone around here, but I fail to see how that kind of "response" qualifies as productive or even linkworthy. I've seen more detailed discussion around here. I agree with Shuttleworth- if we want the big boys to start shipping with linux, we need to meet them half way and explain what we truly expect. This is a very large corporation we're dealing with, not a couple of friends building computers in the garage.

Re:I don't get it.

[OneSmartFellow]

This is a very large corporation we're dealing with, not a couple of friends building computers in the garage.

Ah, but it was just that not very long ago !

Re:I don't get it.

[Anonymous Coward]

it may not be linkworthy but it sure is shuttleworthy

Re:I don't get it.

[AshtangiMan]

I have enjoyed the torture of getting Linux to work on frankenbox, but I don't have the time really to get the hardware working correctly anymore. So the last computer i got was a power book running tiger I think . . . this because I could not live with another windows machine, and XP annoyed the @&(* out of me. I could care less about the distro . . . as another poster pointed out, once in the desktop environment they all work the same (for me, it took me a while to find sudo though). So is it too hard to ask for a linux box that has the video/audio/memory/storage configuration, working, out of the box, modifiable with the apt-get or other package installation for the user tweaks?

One of the reasons I loved PCs over MACs in the 80s was that PCs were more "tweakable" than the bannana jr, which seemed like an appliance. It's interesting that now Linux is that option, but it is so tweakable it is unusable for casual, even unix savvy, users.

Re:I don't get it.

[Anonymous Coward]

haw haw haw

Shuttleworth has some good points.

[jlowe]

Obviously, Mark Shuttleworth has become a major voice in mainstream Linux. He raises some good points.

He mentions the problem vendors face with the idea of Microsoft cutting some co-marketing funds. I really do not see much risk to Dell from this. After all, they already sell some OS-less (freedos) desktops and laptops (albeit fairly hidden). That to me seems like something for Microsoft to complain about more than selling preinstalled Linux machines. It should be understood that the cost of a pre-installed Linux machine will be more than a Windows machine. The additional software Dell installs on Windows helps them make money.

Shuttleworth also brings up the valid and true point that Linux users are very fussy and picky. Linux users also are very specific with what they want. The problem being that Linux users will want specific hardware and a specific distribution. With Dell already talking about certifying several lines of machines for Linux, I see this problem disappearing completely. If the Inspiron notebook line is certified to work with Linux, then it should be trivial to have Dell install Linux instead of Windows Vista. Dell should decide on a specific distro to support, and preinstall that on the Linux computers. Then, if someone is a more "expert" Linux user, he or she can install whatever distro and version he or she wants. The main issue is that the Linux buyer is not buying Vista.

Re:Shuttleworth has some good points.

[Anonymous Coward]

After all, they already sell some OS-less (freedos) desktops and laptops (albeit fairly hidden).

What's hidden about them? Go to the upper left hand corner of their web site and select "Open Source Desktops" or "Open Source Notebooks" under the "Products" tab.

Re:Shuttleworth has some good points.

[tknd]

...Linux users are very fussy and picky

Yeah, I'm not buying anything from Dell until they can sell me some sharks with frickin' laser beams attached to their heads.

Re: Shuttleworth who

[jdgeorge]

Is this someone I relay should be concerned with telling me to settle down. Um considering Dell is actually moving towards putting Linux on desk tops, why should we settle down as it seams to be working and people are lisining. If we all sit back and just do nothing and Settle Down, then company's like Dell will not do this and we don't get linux on desk tops. Hell because of this, I may be looking at Dell for a low to medium end Linux system to replace my aging Linux system for testing and programing use. But if thye don't add linux on the system, I an't going dell, end of story.

Hmmm... I think I understand the plan here:
1. Butcher the English language nearly beyond recognition.
2. ???
3. Receive Dell desktop computer with Linux preinstalled.

Careful what you wish for...

[Bullfish]

I've only bought one pre-built system in my life and have watched others with pre-builts. So many of these are packed with so much software that isn't needed by a most users that it degrades system performance and casues all kinds of conflicts. Frankly, I would rather the companies didn't bother. When I have often fixed pre-builts for friends, it has often involved junking a good chunk of the stuff that came with it. You get a far more stable and efficient machine when you build your own and only put on the software you want. If you don't have the skills to do it yourself, befriend a geek. You will be happier in the end.

Judging by the way these companies bog down windows machines, I would hate them to do this with linux. It might give linux a bad name if inefficient systems bogged down with too much crap hit the mainstream.

Re:Careful what you wish for...

[xtracto]

But you should take a look at *what* is it that these prebuilt machines had installed. See, a "standard" Linux distribution has a lot of shit installed (in the good sense of the word). Just looking at my FedoraCore 6 Accessories menu I can see "mouth", ksayit, kandy, karm and looking at sound and video I have liek 3 different "digital audio players".

Of course the choice is fine. The difference is that, usually the programs that are "bundled" in the Windows installs are programs started at Windows start time. And some of that shit take plenty of resources (Symantec crap anyone?, anti adware, anti shitware, anti malware). While whichever program is loaded in Linux would only consume resources if/while run.

Now, maybe your experience with prebuilt systems is bitter but, from my experience with an HP Pavillion ZV5000, I've got no problems, it was quite lean. Of course I removed MS Works and installed OOorg. And also, anther issue is that "normal" people will start buying Linux computers as they are available as a solution. I know it because *my* father is *eager* of using something else than Microsot products. He hates Office (he uses excel, but unfortunately OO Calc is no replacement for him... and no, it is not because of the use-as-database-issue, it is because of other functionality). But he really needs a solution. I can not tell him to install X or Y distribution because I KNOW something (wireles, graphics, sound... you name it) wont work on his computer.

Hence, a complete Linux Desktop or Laptop solution 100% compatible (including peripherals) is going to be very welcomed. For users and for corporations too.

Re:Careful what you wish for...

[dj_tla]

I agree wholeheartedly. Pre-built systems are part of the reason why novice computer users get so frustrated when their brand new computer doesn't run as fast as it should, or are bombarded with annoying messages a month after they start up their computer loaded with 30-day trial software. Wiping the drive and installing a fresh copy of Windows (or preferably a Linux distro) is often needlessly difficult when dealing with non-standard hardware with hard to find drivers, forcing these user to just 'live with it'. While the obvious solution to custom build the PC works well for desktops, what are laptop owners to do? It's not as simple to build a laptop (yet?). There are custom laptop manufacturers, but even so you're limited to the hardware they allow you to choose from. Is there a way for less experienced computer users to avoid the annoyances of software bloat when buying a laptop?

Mark's End Game is Dangerous

[asphaltjesus]

The guy is sinking big-money into a linux-based distro and that's not bad.

But, with comments like this he is intentionally creating a winner/loser environment in the Linux distro ecosystem. Raising the visibility of desktop linux at the expense of others.

Instead of a rich and varied distro ecosystem taking each others best ideas, there will be a couple of distros and the rest will be hobby-class systems. Microsoft is helping this along by picking a winner. (Novell) Dell appears to at least be mulling the idea over. I can't see them offering more than one distro.

This gives Microsoft the tools they need to contain another competitor. More importantly, what happens to the pace of innovation when there's one maybe two distros driving adoption?

I like a million distros. I don't like Mark's end game.

Re:Mark's End Game is Dangerous

[oscartheduck]

I know this'll sound trolly but I wanted to throw this out so you know it's an option. There's always BSD. I've been expanding my *nix experience into the BSDs because it gives me the options I need in case things go sour in the linux world. The installers are completely opaque for FreeBSD and OpenBSD, but once you get used to them somewhat it starts to feel good to know your options.

Re:Mark's End Game is Dangerous

[Delkster]

Exactly how would it allow Microsoft to "contain" Linux if one or two distros were significantly more popular than others, and what implications would it have on those who want to use other ones?

As long as the code is free (and the standards patent-free), the other distros can also use it. If the hardware support is in the (GPL-licensed) kernel, the other distros can benefit from it. Assuming that Microsoft itself isn't in control of what happens in that specific distro, how does that contain anything?

If it doesn't have a rather significant effect on the diversity of distributions (and remember, there are always other free *nix systems), I tend to think it's worth it. Without some kind of consistency Linux will stay where it is: in the niche. Companies such as hardware vendors actually have to support their product and do all kinds of other wacky things to ensure that things work, and generally without too much interaction with the customer after the sale. It's vastly different than one of us geeks installing Linux for a friend and just helping them out whenever they need it. Hardware vendors can't afford to offer a hand to everyone who runs into a problem if they can't be reasonably sure that there won't be many in the first place, and since their customers paid for the systems, the vendors are accountable for making them work.

Think about it: One option is to have only one mainstream option (or two, if you count Macs), and a non-mainstream option which offers diversity but, due to being outside of the mainstream, suffers from somewhat lacking support for certain stuff (e.g. hardware), albeit not at its own fault. Another option is to have one somewhat mainstream option more, and the people who aren't willing to tweak their way through everything (hint: means most people) are better off. The diversity might suffer a little, but as long as the code and standards are (at least mostly) free, what do the users of less popular distros really lose? I'd say certainly not as much as the other group benefits from more choice and competition in the market.

By being really anal about diversity (or many other things) it's rather easy to end up hurting the cause instead of helping it. Taking a radical stance can help sometimes, but certainly not always.

I'd definitely welcome pre-installed Linux systems. It's the only way to ensure that the hardware and software play nice together -- that is, apart from making sure of that yourself, but that's not something that the aforementioned category including most people wants to do.

Apple doesn't have a reputation for good hardware support because of good hardware support in their software (which they probably don't have). The reputation comes from the fact that you can delegate the task of ensuring compatibility to Apple. The same applies to systems with Windows pre-installed.

I'm not suggesting that we have to go to the level of homogeneity that Apple has. It's not preferable and it's not necessary. But having at least some way of ensuring compatibility (other than DIY) would really be a big step forward.

Re:Mark's End Game is Dangerous

[asphaltjesus]

Exactly how would it allow Microsoft to "contain" Linux
Keeping market information out of the hands of business-minded folks like Shuttleworth only benefits Linux because then most PHB management-types don't know what to think because Netcraft didn't confirm it. Meanwhile it's use spreads. Anonymity only benefits linux.

As long as the code is free (and the standards patent-free), the other distros can also use it
Not true. The entire tivo code base is a perfect example of "free" but useless. Linux through and through but with crypto functions that explicitly denies re-use. There's a million other examples just like tivo, but that's a high profile one.

Re: Shuttleworth who

[networkBoy]

Yes and no.
We should not settle down about having a pre-installed Linux option, but we should settle down on what distro.
Specifically I want the following:
A mainstream distro with all devices that ship with the PC supported.
Whatever is easiest for Dell/HP/Acer/whatever within the above constraint is fine.
*Gnome Vs. KDE? I Don't Care (If I want "the other one" I'll change it)
*Emacs Vs. VI? IDK
*Ubuntu/FC6/Suss10.2/Slackware? IDK (though I think the slack may be a bit too geekish)
Give me any mainstream distro, with a desktop and window manager. Give me drivers for all the devices in the box. Make it "nice" to joe sixpack. I'll geek it out myself.

Now what wouldn't hurt is if the community came up with a "tweaked" distro (or even an entirely different build) if Dell would host a repository of .iso files with the good ol "we disclaim any liability from these distros, they are un-supported blah blah blah..." warning.
-nB

Umm...

[kiwimate]

+5 Insightful? Okay. But irrelevant to the actual article.

Or, if you prefer, you extend it to hardware to say you're fussy enough that you will build your own system rather than buying a Dell/whatever.

Put it the other way around: Dell did not get to be a hardware distributor to satisfy Mr. Dell's fussiness. It was to make a profit.

The rest of the article follows on from there.

Linux drivers are the real key

[IckySplat]

It doesn't really matter WHICH distro goes on the machine.
But once they start delivering Linux on Dell machines the
ugly issue of available drivers hopefully goes away...

If Dell were to certify that model xyz comes with Linux pre-installed
then I would know that most if not all of the hardware in was supported!

Yes, I will flatten the machine and install the Distro of MY choice.
But at least I'll know that the hardware in the box will go.

Note to Dell etc...
-------------------
PLEASE supply tar archives of your drivers and source!
I'm sick to death of picking apart your bloody RPMs to get what I need :(

Re:Linux drivers are the real key

[nuzak]

PLEASE supply tar archives of your drivers and source! I'm sick to death of picking apart your bloody RPMs to get what I need :(

So install alien, silly. It's one command to convert to a tarball.

Re:Linux drivers are the real key

[IckySplat]

alien is a great tool to be sure...
But many kernel drivers need to be re-compiled against
the currently installed kernels headers.

This means picking apart the .rpm or .deb
Fricking around with the source (If it's a binary blob you are usually SOL)
compiling the modules and hope like hell it works :)

Driver support

[Kjella]

In general, I assume no distro kernel has less support than the vanilla kernel, backports might be a different issue. So just chalk up the list like:

Working functionality - vanilla kernel version
Motherboard (POST) - 2.6.17
ACPI Base - 2.6.14
ACPI Sleep S1-S4 - 2.6.19
SATA - 2.6.12
RAID - 2.6.18
Network - 2.6.18
Sound - 2.6.19

Seriously, isn't that the kernels job? If all are supported and the distro version is higher than the listed version, you're all good. Maybe they can throw in some extra info on driver quality (traffic light), alternatives like binary blob, ndiswrapper, distro backports or whatever but that's secondary. Of course, they can always put up their "Works with distro $foo, version $bar" but that is really fluff.

Re:I do not

[Anonymous Coward]

The idea is that if a vendor ships boxes with Linus preinstalled that means that there are drivers for hardware in these boxes, that ACPI works OK with Linux and is not filled with MS-only quirks, etc, etc. Even if drivres initially are for specific distro they will find their way into the mainline pretty quickly.

Linux on Dell doesn't help Linux at all.....

[budword]

Dell sold my ex's Mother a P4 with 128MB of ram and Windows XP installed. It ran far slower than my old pentium 100Hz with 32MB of ram running Windows 95. You know for a fact Dell will pull the same shit with Linux, but many of those people will have no idea they forked over good cash for a crippled system, so Dell could save 40 bucks. They will blame it on Linux, which does us no favors. Just ask them to stick to selling crippled WINDOWS systems. Please.

They should just offer naked.

[gfxguy]

They don't have to even sell systems with Linux, I think the biggest complaint Linux users have is they are forced to buy windows when they buy a pre-built system (yes, I know, there are a tiny group of vendors out there that may sell Linux boxes).

One of Shuttleworth's complaints is that we even argue about which distribution we want.... again, sell the PC naked and include several DVDs of different distributions.

He complains we're fussy, but that's not entirely accurate - we do want things to be a certain way, it's true; but the difference between us and windows users is most of us are more than willing to do it ourselves.

Re:They should just offer naked.

[ChronosWS]

Perhaps I am confused... but if you are 'willing to do it yourselves' then why are you having Dell build you a computer in the first place? Order the parts off Newegg and be done with it. Most of the people who are complaining about Dell here appear to be sufficiently Linux-savvy to know exactly which hardware will work so they could trivially build a machine to spec themselves, saving them from any random headaches they might have to deal with from Dell.

Re:They should just offer naked.

[ShaunC1000]

This would also benefit windows users. What if your PC dies (with a retail version of Windows installed), and you decide to get a new PC from Dell. Shouldn't you have the option to use the existing license from the old computer, rather than being forced to buy another copy?

Re:They should just offer naked.

[Anonymous Coward]

Dell DOES offer a Naked box.. and has been doing so for quite a while..

Dell refers to them as the 'n' Series
http://www.dell.com/content/products/features.aspx /nseries?c=us&cs=04&l=en&s=bsd&redirect=1

Or for all available options http://www.dell.com/linux

Re:They should just offer naked.

[incripshin]

I like the idea of a 'naked' computer with easy access to various distributions. Much good will come of it. You mentioned that Linux distributions compete and that we don't need to buy Windows if we won't use it, but here are a few more:

It makes Microsoft compete. They've shoved competitors out of the marketplace by having their software preinstalled. That's how IE got so popular. BeOS lost out because computer manufacturers wouldn't preinstall it. Though I do not approve of any Windows version, I would love to see the price come down. $300 to install XP Pro? That's just ridiculous.

Laptops will have a set of drivers that are easy to install. Ever try installing Windows from scratch on a laptop? Don't. I can only speak for Sony Vaios, but it was a nightmare. I had to use a combination of drivers found only on the restore DVD and on the Internet. Among the drivers available only on the Internet: ethernet and wifi. Then if you install in the wrong order (most drivers don't do sanity checks), start wondering why you can't change your volume. The only solution is to start over. And the constant restarting. One .exe will install maybe a couple files and require a restart. Then the next, and the next, and the next. There has *got* to be a way to simplify this. I'd imagine each package (not an .exe installer) could have a list of dependencies of the form 'I need this package installed' or 'I need this (updated) package running'. The installer drives it all so that I can select the packages I want and it will handle the rest with minimal installs. This isn't even difficult. But enough of my rant.

Hardware compatibility.

Re:They should just offer naked.

[gfxguy]

Because Dell can build a decent system a lot more cheaply than picking parts.

I could build a cheap system from newegg with the cheapest parts, but then it would be utter crap.

I can put the CD in my own cupholder

[roystgnr]

Although I understand "i'm getting so sick and tired of hearing excuses and rationalizations.", I don't understand the amusing proposed solution of "just put the cd in the cupholder, install it and sell it. period. there's no need to analyze or certify."

Installation of any popular Linux distribution isn't hard, and hasn't been hard for many years. There are two reasons for wanting Dell to preinstall Linux, and for both of them, there is a need for Dell to go beyond hitting "Next" on a bunch of installation screens or cloning a partition image.

1. Tested hardware. I may not want to use Red Hat Enterprise Linux, but our last batch of new Dell servers had it preinstalled, which was nice to see. Linux hardware support is pretty solid lately, but it's reassuring to have a vendor stand behind Linux support for what they sell, even if I'm planning to switch to a different distribution than they chose.

2. Support for non-Linux-users. This is the big one. Seriously: if you already know that installing Linux isn't much harder than finding the "cupholder", you don't need Dell to install Linux for you, you just need them to give you a discount for the OEM Windows license you don't want to buy. Preinstallation isn't for the computer you're looking to buy, it's for the computer Mom & Dad are looking to buy. If Dell is going to sell Linux to new users, Dell is going to need to test what they sell, both so they can preconfigure things to reduce the amount of support calls they'll receive and so they can train phone operators to handle the support calls they get anyway. They'll have a hard enough time answering questions like "Why doesn't this Super Geneaology Plus CD install?" no matter what they do; they'd better at least try to nip "Why don't my Dell printer drivers install?" questions in the bud.

To be honest...

[Mizled]

Do We all really want Dell compiling our kernels for our *nix system? I'd rather do the install myself or just give me a computer with a formatted HD that I can install whatever distro I want on it and compile it the way I want.

The only people who will truely benefit from a pre-installed *nix system will be your average user (I.E. Grandma or Joe Guy) who (as someone already pointed out) doesn't care how it was compiled as long as they can send e-mails and photos of their 50th Wedding Anniversary to all of their friends.

Linux on the desktop can do everything most users want (e-mail, photos, web browsing, instant message, etc.) if not more. Everyone knows this already.

IMO the only ones being picky about which distro and version would rather install and compile it themselves anyway.

Dell just needs to pick a distro that's user friendly (Ubuntu, SuSE, Fedora) and support that on their major models of Hardware. If it comes with Ubuntu Edgy Eft and you want Feisty Fawn then I'm sure you already now how to upgrade that or recompile the kernel as needed.

Re:To be honest...

[DaveHinton]

If Dell / HP / etc sold a laptop with a linux preinstalled, I might buy one after my Apple laptop (with a BSD preinstalled) bites the dust.

anti-Spyware/Adware/Trials

[everphilski]

Ever seen a (dell/HP/Compaq/etc) straight out of the box? There are like 50 programs installed ... each vendor pays the computer manufacturer to put these things on their PC's. So the cost of windows gets paid for, mostly or even in excess, by these vendors.

Problem with Linux being, the computer manufacturer doesn't get any of these kickbacks or a % of the purchase price from a trial installation... less profit, gotta charge more for the box.

Re:anti-Spyware/Adware/Trials

[bfields]

Ever seen a (dell/HP/Compaq/etc) straight out of the box? There are like 50 programs installed ... each vendor pays the computer manufacturer to put these things on their PC's. So the cost of windows gets paid for, mostly or even in excess, by these vendors.

Yeah, I suspect it's true that the installed software is largely advertising-supported.

If linux caught on on the desktop, though, I'd be really surprised if they didn't figure out how to do the same thing--want the default firefox bookmarks to mention your site? Want some tie-in to your music site whenever something's played on rhythmbox? Want a "set up Speakeasy DSL now!" icon on the desktop? We can arrange that for you for a fee....

A truly open system, with free drivers, free software only installed, etc., limits somewhat how obnoxious they can get, since the user isn't as dependent on them for the install image that works on their particular machine. But the vendor can still get a lot of eyeballs.

Re: Shuttleworth who

[SatanicPuppy]

Frankly, if they put out good driver support, I think the best move is to gear the pre-installed linux options toward non-savvy users. I'm not going to use a damn out-of-the-box install of fricking WINDOWS, more less an out-of-the-box install of Linux, and I'm less anal than a lot of people around here.

Let 'em gear the linux installs toward grandmas and newbies, because the rest of us are almost certainly going to be unsatisfied regardless of what they do. Expecting a hardware company to support a hundred different os configurations is absurd.

It's the econ^H^H^H^Hhardware, stupid!

[Anonymous Coward]

No, it is not enough that OEMs ship no-OS systems. However, if those OEMs would ship these no-OS systems with guaranteed Linux-compatible hardware/drivers so that every piece of your computer will function just as well as it would have in Windows, THAT would be enough. So far that has not been the case.

It's all about the hardware

[FreeForm Response]

What I want from Dell is a commitment to selling a machine with hardware that is supported by the community. No Winmodems, no ndiswrapper, but actual, tested, "we put this in a box together and it works like we think it does" hardware.

Past that, I couldn't possibly care less what distribution of Linux they throw on it. If it's a distribution I like and am willing to use, then more power to me. If not, "lsmod" and I'm off and installing the distribution of my choice. Either way, I'm golden.

I own a Dell Inspiron 4100, and I remember what a holy terror getting Linux to run on that machine was (with full hardware support). If I could buy a laptop from Dell with a piece of paper that says, "The network adapter uses the 'eepro100' driver," etc., then I would be a happy customer.

Re:It's all about the hardware

[Dputiger]

Can you still realistically buy a non-Winmodem at anything near a decent price? (meaning under $50). For that matter, can you still buy modems at all? ;)

Re:It's all about the hardware

[FreeForm Response]

Although I know your reply is tongue-in-cheek, it is still a serious question.

I support several users who have to travel for business, and unfortunately, not every hotel offers ethernet or Wi-Fi in its rooms. While none of the users I support happen to use Linux, I'm sure that the problem exists for other IT folks in positions like mine.

And, even if I can't buy non-Winmodems at retail, I expect Dell has just a little more clout than I do when it comes to acquiring hardware. ;-)

Re:It's all about the hardware

[nuzak]

http://www.compusa.com/products/products.asp?N=0&N tt=modem&D=modem&Ntk=All&Nty=1&Dx=mode%20matchall

Seems like there's plenty of them even after you skip the "cable modems". The PCI ones are probably not winmodems.

Re:It's all about the hardware

[Anonymous Coward]

Exactly. Dell just need to pick a single vendor and do all their testing with that one OS. So that all who buy a Dell know that the version Dell pre-installs works with all the hardware, etc. As long as the OS Dell goes with is free, other distros can then work around these specs so they too can offer a fully compatible setup.

Re:It's all about the hardware

[replicant108]

Sometimes I wish posts could get modded to '6'.

If Dell introduced a hardware certification programme:

1. They would not have to do any post-sales linux support.
2. Such a programme would have a finite cost-per-system, and would give their product-line a clear competitive advantage.
3. It would buy lots of good karma and word-of-mouth marketing from the community.
4. It would reduce the impediments to widespread Linux adoption - and MS's leverage in business deals.

Re:It's all about the hardware

[Curmudgeonlyoldbloke]

Absolutely. When I filled in Dell's survey yesterday, that's pretty much what I said too. The community already does a better job of supporting a lot of hardware and software (not just with regards to Linux) than the manufacturers. To be fair to Dell the work that I had to do (on a Dell Latitude D810, a couple of years old) was pretty minimal. All the hardware autodetected; almost the only bit that wasn't completely automatic was the screen configuration.

The sort of thing that I object to (which happened with another PC supplier - not Dell) was that they don't accept that a problem is a hardware issue rather than a software one when it happens in both Windows and Linux on a dual-boot machine - I was told that "we don't support Linux" and to use some other means to prove that it was a hardware problem. The issue seemed to be that the support rep didn't really understand what an operating system was.

Re:It's all about the hardware

[samwichse]

In my experience, practically every new PCI modem you find is a winmodem. And finding out which chipset before buying is a real task.

There is an easy (and cheap) way to get a real hardmodem though. Just buy an external modem with a serial interface. If it's got a serial interface, it's got to be a hardmodem.

Plug it in, set your modem to /dev/ttyS0 and you're off.

One at ComputerGeeks for $10.50.

Re:It's all about the hardware

[kuzb]

They would not have to do any post-sales linux support.

Are you on crack? Give a user a root password, or access to sudo and they will find a way to break their system and generate linux 'post-sales' support. If you think Linux is some kind of end-user problem cureall, you're sadly mistaken. It doesn't matter what you put on the computer, there will _always_ be a need for post-sales support.

Re:It's all about the hardware

[replicant108]

Dell don't have to sell or support Linux.

They simply have to test and certify their hardware.

Re:It's all about the hardware

[BrynM]

1. They would not have to do any post-sales linux support.

In the industry, those are known as post-sales sales. Dell and many other companies sell that support or some sort of extended sales... er... support.

Re:It's all about the hardware

[TheQuantumShift]

So you want proprietary drivers and hardware that costs more?

Don't get me wrong, I'm all for dumping "win" anything (by which I mean software emulated hardware, I have nothing against windows, just the licensing), but Dell makes money by selling in volume at low, low prices. "Real" hardware would skew that, and people would point at Linux as the culprit of price increases (when really it's providing quality hardware), and the "community" would cry their eyes out because their precious kernel was "tainted" by code that actually made Linux usable.

I don't mean that as a flame, just years of frustration that jimjoebob's driver version 0.040 still doesn't work quite right, and the oem won't provide an updated driver because they're afraid of it being reverse-engineered.

And while I'm on the version subject, I've been wondering what a distro would look like where every package was at least 1.0 or higher... Even Ubuntu with it's limited (but great) selection, many big pieces are still pre-1.0 versions.

Re:It's all about the hardware

[FreeForm Response]

So you want proprietary drivers and hardware that costs more?

Yes to the hardware, no to the drivers. I want Dell to assemble computers that already have pre-assembled and pre-tested Linux hardware configurations, with official drivers supported by the community, along with instructions inside. I also want a pony. :-P

[...]and the "community" would cry their eyes out because their precious kernel was "tainted" by code that actually made Linux usable.

I'm under the impression that there exists at least one piece of hardware of pretty much every type that has decent, if not official, support by real drivers. What I want is a computer that has all of that hardware in it already, along with a list of what those drivers are. From that point, I could probably figure out how to get my distribution of choice running on the hardware.

[...]but Dell makes money by selling in volume at low, low prices. "Real" hardware would skew that[...]

As a large reseller, I'm pretty sure that Dell could purchase just about any component it wants in sufficient volume. If it decides to release a laptop line with non-Winmodems, for instance, I imagine they'd be able to find not a few vendors who would be willing to compete to supply them. As for the price issue, yes, the price would be a little more expensive, I'm sure, but I would personally consider it worthhwhile (and I would expect the price differential to be smaller than you'd think, with the removal of the Windows tax).

[...]I've been wondering what a distro would look like where every package was at least 1.0 or higher... Even Ubuntu with it's limited (but great) selection, many big pieces are still pre-1.0 versions.

At this very moment, I'm playing World of Warcraft with wine 0.9.32, which is not 1.0, but which serves me very well for what I'm trying to accomplish. It's all in how you look at it; there's lots of software out there at version 4 or what have you, that I wouldn't dare install on anything I cared about.

He's right.

[Bluesman]

Reading over the Dell forums and comments it seems like a bunch of spoiled, whining children over there. It's really not the best way to encourage someone to do you a favor.

The worst part are that the most vocal are the "I don't want to pay the Microsoft tax" portion. If these folks had their way, what Dell would provide is an entirely separate line of Linux PC's that may or may not run Windows.

That's not what I'd want, for a couple of reasons:

1) I use Windows and Linux, and I'd like to have a computer that will run both Linux and Windows.

2) There are not enough people interested in Linux-only machines for this to succeed financially, which would set the whole Linux on the desktop movement back another few years when we'll go through this again.

What Dell originally offered was to provide some sort of guarantee that hardware would work with Linux. This would be a huge step in the right direction, especially for laptops, but I'm afraid even that might not happen as everyone scrambles to be the most shrill proponent of their own favorite distro on the Dell message boards.

It's amateurish, it shows the "Linux community" is extremely fractured, and it shows Dell that catering to a bunch of whiners would probably be a financial disaster.

We can do better than this, I think.

Mark's perspective is upside down...

[cameronk]

Part of what makes Macs so reliable is that Apple offers the OS on a limited configuration of computers-having perhaps 100 machines that need to work with the current OSX versus millions of possible configurations for Vista. I do not see why someone running a Linux distribution, like Ubuntu, does not just publish a very detailed specification of what will work best with their OS and then allow a vendor like Dell to sell PCs which precisely map to this configuration. That way Ubuntu, or whatever, gets better distribution, Dell avoids the Microsoft tax, consumers benefit from a more accessible Linux and system administrators have a more manageable network.

Re:Mark's perspective is upside down...

[Yvan256]

I do not see why someone running a Linux distribution, like Ubuntu, does not just publish a very detailed specification of what will work best with their OS

The websites of the distros should have some sort of "What peripherals do you own", so you can select from menus (printers, mouses, graphics cards, video capture device, scanners, etc) and the distro tells you which peripherals work or not.

Re:Mark's perspective is upside down...

[spirit of reason]

It's not the best of interfaces, but Ubuntu has some level of specification of hardware support on their wiki.

I agree with him on this...

[bogaboga]

...(W)e free software fans are a fussy crowd, and very hard to please...

Indeed. We are so hard to please, but at the same time, getting OEMs to pre-load Linux would not hurt at all.

Why install anything?

[Dancindan84]

All I want (especially in the case of a laptop where this tends to be more difficult) is something from them saying "This hardware will work with kernel 2.6.20.3" and have it come with nothing on it. That way I can decide what distro to use, what desktop to use etc without having to deal with stripping everything off it in the first place. With the skill level of the average Linux user, I'd be willing to bet support isn't an issue. They'll probably get the least amount of false positive (PEBKAC) support calls from this group.

What I want

[TopSpin]

Not really interested in OEM installation of any specific distro. They'll do it wrong or pollute it as they do Windows. What good is that?

What I want is machines designed with components that are supported by mature Linux drivers. For almost any given component there are implementations that have good Linux driver support and others that don't. Select only components with good driver support, explicitly advertise this policy with adequate technical information, charge a modest premium for it if you must and give me the same hardware warranty as your other products. Seems fairly simple to me.

That's all I want. You can stop fussing about distros now. That and support lines for Linux; I won't be calling unless your hardware fails.

Re:What I want

[nine-times]

Not really interested in OEM installation of any specific distro. They'll do it wrong or pollute it as they do Windows. What good is that?

Discounted price. Seriously, why do you think Dell installs all that crapware on the systems they ship? They're paid to. When they feel like being competitive (which Dell often does), they pass those savings on to you.

I say, go ahead, Dell. Install a copy of OpenSuSE on the computer you're shipping me. Fill it with so much spyware that it doesn't run properly anymore, and pass those bribes onto me. It's easy enough for me to wipe it out and put whatever I want on it, but I don't mind saving money.

Re: Shuttleworth who

[VEGETA_GT]

I just want to know who marked this Redundant considering its getting level 2 comments which I have to admit bring up some great points.

"Open Source certified"

[Anonymous Coward]

If dell wants to offer RH corporateware desktops, fine. But what I care about is that every component in their machine has open-source driver support. If they would sell bare machines, but certify that every major component is "linux ready" with open-source in-linus'-kernel-tree drivers available, then I'm happy. I'd probably even consider buying from dell - less hassle than building my own these days.

Re: Shuttleworth who

[jcr]

Um considering Dell is actually moving towards putting Linux on desk tops,

Dell is grasping at straws to try to make up for their sales dropoff. What I think you really want, is for Linux to be available from vendors who aren't just doing it as a publicity stunt, and whether that ever happens willl depend very much on whether Dell makes enough in new sales of linux systems to make it worth their trouble. If they can only do that by offering 500 flavors, then it's not worth it, and that's the point that Shuttleworth was making.

Really, Linux on the desktop isn't about satisfying today's Linux users. It's about making Linux good enough that you don't have to be an expert to choose it and use it.

-jcr

No OS

[Anonymous Coward]

I don't even care if you put an OS on the system at least sell the system with a NO OS option, how hard can that be!??

Re:No OS

[Anonymous Coward]

> I don't even care if you put an OS on the system at
> least sell the system with a NO OS option, how hard can that be!??

Microsoft don't like it

7 years (seems like yesterday) and there's still being no antitrust proceedings over Microsoft's continuing manipulation of the OEM market.

fnord alley with this one

[Anonymous Coward]

More Linux the better, I am not fussy about what other people run, and a true geek would not buy a preconfigured piece of shite...

Re:Hardware support

[Bastian]

The big deal is hardware support. If the laptop comes with Windows preinstalled, there's no way of knowing if Linux drivers exist for, say, the wireless card.

If they sell it with Linux, you can at least be sure that Linux drivers exist and that you'll be able to get everything working when you wipe the hard drive and install your favorite distro.

Personally, I think laptops with Linux preinstalled is barking up the wrong tree. I'd much prefer if Dell, HP, etc. were to just provide a list of which of their models and hardware configurations include only hardware that is known to work well with Linux. They can provide just as much of a guarantee to me that I'll be able to get Slackware or whatever working without having to take the effort to set up all the infrastructure for preinstalling Linux.

Re: Shuttleworth who

[VEGETA_GT]

But thats just it, make it so Grand Ma and such can use Linux instead of Windows. If I get a Dell Linux box I am sure I will be changing the config FAST. but for a desktop machine, make it so anyone can grab it and just use it for e mail, text editing and such. that way more people would buy a Linux based system, save the cash, and with Dell backing it (assume 1 distro only) they can get help with the system. I see this more as a move for people to start getting Linux better prepared for General Desk Top use then anything else.

Install ubunto or gentoo or whatever by yourself.

[oliverthered]

and hope that the hardware works ok

It's the hardware, stupid!

[Ignatius]

Linux customers could care less about the pre-installed distrib, but the do care about 100% Linux compatability of the hardware, which is pretty much the same over all distribs (modulo non-free drivers). After all, even for large roll-outs, "installing" a customized system on identical hardware simply means gunzipping a prepared disk image (which can also include the partition table).

Therefore the best way to go about it would probably be to merely install a minimum system with a small footprint (1 GB max) but all hardware drivers installed and configuered in order to demonstrate Linux compatibility and to allow to check the hardware. The distrib should not matter in this case. Then, the customer can install his favorite Linux distrib and opt to keep the minimum installation as a rescue system.

In the case of Dell, this means: Replace the existing FreeDos installation (which you get when you order a Dell w/o OS - at least here in Europe) with a small Linux system, and everyone is happy.

Re:It's the hardware, stupid!

[Anonymous Coward]

I think you mean to say "couldn't care less."

Re:It's the hardware, stupid!

[pedestrian crossing]

Therefore the best way to go about it would probably be to merely install a minimum system with a small footprint (1 GB max) but all hardware drivers installed and configuered in order to demonstrate Linux compatibility and to allow to check the hardware. The distrib should not matter in this case. Then, the customer can install his favorite Linux distrib and opt to keep the minimum installation as a rescue system.

You don't even need an install, just include a Knoppix (or similar) CD/DVD...

flaw

[Anonymous Coward]

Our reasons most obtained the fact that it is the user of Linux of the fussiness beginning which is: As for us we wanted us with anytime, therefore we made the open source, whether the angle where therefore we do to that it is their raw materials it can improve the seller of commerce OS you did not like. The general user does not worry concerning OS which they are moving by any means thing mainly; Vanilla Windows or OS X is good sufficiently for becoming firm. When "the people and fussiness them" of Venn ED "Linux user" it can control a little just the repetition it is.

Blasphemy

[benhocking]

*Emacs Vs. VI? IDK

You had me until that one. Just sayin'...

Linux OEMs

[Anonymous Coward]

My company tried a promotion of shipping Linux on the box and you get a free penguin. Unfortunately the support calls for dead penguins put us out of business.

Angry customer

[Nuffsaid]

[Call to Dell sales support follows]
-Dell? You totally botched up my order! I wanted Damn Small Linux 3 on my PC, not 3 fucking small PCs and a cup of sabayon!

Any distro with fully working hardware will do

[Morgaine]

This discussion about whether to preload this distro or that distro misses the crucial point: that the only thing that really matters is that all the hardware should work FULLY under whichever software is supplied, and that full sources be provided. And the reason is the following:

If the above requirement is satisfied, then the "community support" (specifically mentioned by Dell) will very rapidly extend to making sure that all other distros also work on that specific Dell hardware. That's what distros like to do, after all.

So the initial choice of distro really doesn't matter in the grand scheme of things, although it might as well be a popular one. What matters is that Dell should have 100% committment to the principles of FOSS for whichever distro they choose, and not a half-hearted (nor closed source) one.

Supporting multiple distros would be costly, and probably would not be done in depth, so it might even be a bad thing. Choose one (any), and support it well and fully.

Hate to point this out, but...

[bconway]

Having actually read the article:

. . . (W)e free software fans are a fussy crowd, and very hard to please. You know what you are like -- you sit and configure that Dell system down to the finest detail, you want a specific model of HP laptop, you want the one that has the Intel graphics chipset not the other chipset because you prefer the free driver approach from Intel. . . you are in short an expert, demanding customer. This means, that in order to reach you with Linux, a reseller has to offer Linux EVERYWHERE, not just on a few select models.

        Worse, you are not a "Linux" user, you are a user who wants version 6.06.1 of Ubuntu, or 10.2 of SuSE, or Fedora 6. You want a specific distro, and in many cases also a specific VERSION of that distro. In order to please you, the vendor has to offer an enormous matrix of possibilities -- machine and distro/version.

He's right.

Its about the hardware stupid

[bonefry]

All those Linux distributions have the same kernel, and that is Linux.

Having the same kernel means heaving the same drivers for the hardware.
If only one distribution is supported out of the box, you can be 99% sure that it will run any other distribution just fine.

Because that's the problem we are having ... wifi cards with closed-source driver implementations that will never work on Linux, graphic cards with half-ass drivers, and a whole part of the hardware industry that is too lazy to standardize on anything else but Windows.

And companies don't care about preferences, and they standardize on what alternative is cheaper to install and deploy, and what is cheaper for a company than a preinstalled Linux distribution that's supported by your computer manufacturer ?

So I don't care what distribution Dell chooses.
As long as it is Linux, they have me as their customer.

GNU/Linux on Dell computers

[rcb1974]

Here is what I think Dell should do:

1. Give people the option on Dell's website to select Operating System Not Installed. Clearly explain in layman's terms what that means; you won't be able to play World of Warcraft unless buy and install Microsoft Windows separately (sort of like "Batteries Not Included"). Yes, I know WoW runs under Wine on GNU/Linux but that probably isn't something the average user will be able achieve easily.
2. Give people the option to receive a GNU/Linux distribution CD-ROM with their system. Dell should not attempt to provide software support for any GNU/Linux distribution since it will be too expensive. Their "Home" users are for the most part not computer savvy, and won't know what to do when their USB device doesn't "just work" under GNU/Linux. Instead, Dell should direct GNU/Linux users to obtain software support from the respective GNU/Linux distribution website (RedHat, Ubuntu, SuSe, etc)
3. Dell should Ship with the PC their excellent Diagnostic Test Software boot CD-ROM. If you've used this, you'll know that it is best PC hardware testing software out there. It tests every single hardware component of your PC. Dell could use this to provide hardware support for the systems they sell.

Here is what I think governemnts should do:

1. Make it ILLEGAL for PC manufacturers to install "craplets" -- software that just slows down your computer and wastes hard drive space. Example: AOL Free Trial! Then GNU/Linux PCs would actually have a competitive price advantage over Microsoft Windows based PCs. Currently, OEMs make about $70 per PC by installing craplets on their PCs. These craplets typically only run on Microsoft Windows. This is one reason why PCs that ship with Microsoft Windows are cheaper than Linux PCs. This would be a win-win since Microsoft doesn't want craplets on PCs either. Many craplets are not Vista compatible, and actually cause problems that make Vista "look bad" to the consumer.

I am typing this on a new $4000 laptop

[dominux]

actually a £2000 laptop, but that doesn't sound as much. It is a Novatec Blazer. It has a 1920x1200 screen, 2 gig ram, core 2 duo and 160gig sata hdd. There are not many laptops that meet this spec. It came down to a Dell XPS or the Novatec (actually a rebadged Clevo). The deciding factor was that the Novatec came without an operating system so I could run Ubuntu on it without paying Microsoft for not using their operating system. Dell just lost a sale because they didn't have a Linux option.

Re:I am typing this on a new $4000 laptop

[Anonymous Coward]

If you paid $4000 for a laptop, and then your 'selling point' was an operating systems cost, I suspect you were either trying to purchase it with Windows Datacenter (Dual processor license) or you're simply not familiar with the economics of the computer industry. Dell, being as large a customer as it is to Microsoft, gets their operating system licenses at a very favorable rate that means when dealing with a piece of kit like yours, the cost of the operating system is typically something the company is not going to pass on to end users as a saving since they'd rather just keep the price nice and round and will happily absorb the extra cents as profit.

People by and large take operating systems for granted, so when operating systems eventually become free, why will vendors need to drop the price? The computer will end up doing the same things, and the vendor will just make a bit more cash, especially with high end users like you.

Last but not least, dude, $4000? Even though you've got a very, very nice screen, you got *jacked*! My Acer Aspire has 2gb of ram, 100gb and a DVD-RAM drive, and it came to under £1000/GBP or roughly $2000 USD. This was the best part of a year ago too (Though I was in Taipei at the time).

Regards,
-Steve Gray

Re:I am typing this on a new $4000 laptop

[nil0lab]

Obviously your priorities differ.

Re Windows price:

    I personally want to give no more money to the ethically challenged monopolist. Yes, its not much, but still. It's a moral stand, I guess.

Re being jacked and your happy acceptance of inferior resolution:

    Since the screen is the only thing I see most of my days, I feel jacked by there being no better display selection than there was five years ago! Yes, there are bigger screens, but more pixels? Nope.

So I personally will stick with my four-year-old 1920x1200 laptop till I can afford to buy a Microsoft-free machine with a better display.

If we don't tolerate 300dpi from our printers, why should we tolerate 72dpi from our displays?

Right On...

[asphaltjesus]

I definitely haven't made enough money supporting Linux yet, so I'm not ready to jump. But I've already triple-booted my laptop for just this reason.

The BSD's have some excellent tools.

Re:Right On...

[heroofhyr]

If FreeBSD is easy enough for my computer-hating wife, it has to be good enough for the public. It took her about 15 minutes to remember the commands "startx" and "reboot -p." Am I missing out on all those fantastic Linux binary only programs? No, because I can run 99% of them anyway with no performance penalty. Hell, I'm using a Linux version of Firefox as we speak because Macromedia are douchebags that won't release a Flash plugin for FreeBSD (I'm also thoroughly enjoying my Adobe plugin and my Java plugin; kudos to the Linux community for badgering support out of those two so it could trickle down to the other OSs they're too lazy to support). Not to mention updating a generic kernel, the modules, and the userland is as easy as typing "freebsd-update fetch && freebsd-update install" and rebooting. Oh, and the fact that when GPLv3 comes along I won't have to pretend that it affects me in any way.

Stop me if I sound crazy, but why doesn't Dell just open the floor to the highest bidder? They don't want to lose all that sweet Windows preinstalled shitware money, right? So fire off a letter to Novell, Red Hat, Ubuntu, Mandriva, et al, saying: "This is your chance. This is your big opportunity to put your foot in the door and sell Linux to the masses. You're the ones winning, not us. We can go on selling Vista or whatever Microsoft excretes afterwards and continue buying limousines to carry our Picassos home. You can't. What does that mean? It means we'll preinstall your distro instead of the other guy's in exchange for free support for six months and zz% of the $xx.xx we are losing on the shitware." I doubt Ubuntu would be willing or could give up that kind of cash, but I'm certain Novell and Red Hat would be emailing offers to Dell the next day. And as other people have mentioned, the plus would be that if it works on one distro it'll work on any other using the same kernel version (or I assume greater).

Oh, and as much as I love FreeBSD and use it as my only operating system, it is by no means going to be a contender for Dell. Maybe in my bubblegum waterfall fantasy land that might happen, but after I wake up and stumble across the beer-soaked floor to the bathroom mirror, I'll realise Dell is only going to choose between SuSE and Red Hat. They're both similar to that guy in school who always wore a suit and carried a briefcase to class and seemed like an asshole but was predictable and knew a lot. Ubuntu is the fat kid who was kind of funny to hang out with everyday but probably wouldn't be someone you could rely on if you were really in trouble. BTW, I meant no offense to the tons of fat kids on Slashdot. I was one of you fifteen years ago.

No-brainer

[Anonymous Coward]

One issue for corporate IT departments is that they want pre-installed machines, Dell should allow these corporates to upload a drive image. Other than that, why doesn't Shuttleworth approach Dell/RH with a view to standardizing a platform. Official support could be RHEL or Ubuntu but other distros can also offer support for their OS on these machines. This way purchasers can even order Ubuntu_(unsupported) and re-install whatever they want without paying the MS tax.

It's not just DELL, other OEM's should be building retail partnerships to give consumers more choice.

Yes and no

[geekoid]

The first paragraph is also caused by not having decent support for chipsets.

The second one is not the person to sell linux to.

Manufacturs need to determine which version they want to support, and then support it.
They need the distro that works on their machines, and is user easy.

Now here is a little secret that may or may not of occured to PC manufactured:

Linux allows for lock in... what?

Think about it, create a PC for linux, how many pieces of equipment will the average user be aqle to install and get drivers for? Not Many
How easy will it be for users to change to another version of linux? Not Very
How easy wil it be to get that exact linux distro from another manufacture?

Hell, Dell could create their own Distro just for their machine. More lock in. This might be cheaper for Dell then paying MS.

Too many versions killed UNIX

[Animats]

One of the big problems in the UNIX world, and the one that is sometimes said to have killed UNIX on the desktop/workstation, was the problem of too many incompatible versions. BSD, FreeBSD, IRIX, AIX, .... And no application portability. The legacy of that is all the nonsense that goes on when you type "./configure".

Linux at least has a somewhat standard kernel, but the "distro" problem is holding back adoption.

Craplets

[rizole]

I think the word you may be looking for is "Craplets".

About number 2

[geekoid]

I think Dell should cut their own Distro for their machines.

The could create a distro that 'just works' with their machines.

Mark can help a LOT on this issue.

[khasim]

They already collect a LOT of hardware data via Ubuntu's ability to submit your hardware info to them.

But this info isn't sorted or organized or ANYTHING. And it really does come down to having drivers IN THE KERNEL for all of the hardware on your machine.

Mark, if you want to make it easier, chat with Mr. Dell and show him the stats for the hardware. Even paying the Windows tax may be acceptable if Dell can sell machines that have 100% Linux-friendly hardware.

Re:Mark can help a LOT on this issue.

[jedidiah]

Dell could simply sponsor a site that would be the ultimate resource for Linux hardware compatability (like what Suse had at one time) and then simply harvest data from that site. At the very least, they get the appearance of doing something and not just being all talk. For the hw support site, they could give minimal resources beyond server and just let the community do it.

Dell just doesn't get it. Probably doesn't want to either.

Re:Mark can help a LOT on this issue.

[mabhatter654]

Agreed, the bigger issue is that Dell has 100% of the hardware supported under linux, that they advertise it, and that at least somebody can support it properly. As long as Dell supported 1 version with source for all the drivers, the others would follow easily. The BIGGER issue is that once a big name maker like Dell supports Linux officially, then the market for OTHER companies to support software and hardware gets bigger exponentially. The biggest thing "Linux" needs is recognition... a simple "penguins supported here" sticker from somebody as big as Dell would put numbers on the map. Dell is all about selling hardware. It wouldn't HURT them to support Linux, after all, they don't make windows either.

It's amateurish? NFK!! Its a free forum.

[Anonymous Coward]

>It's amateurish, it shows the "Linux community" is extremely fractured, and it shows Dell that catering >to a bunch of whiners would probably be a financial disaster.

No, it shows that giving people the ability to express themelves freely on the net will always lead to some kind of bitchin or moaning.

That's why most forums are moderated: most people feel bolder because of anonymity, some people are idiots and some of them are kids.
Guess what? That's humanity in general.

There is a fine line between replying to a post like this in a calm manner, a passionate manner, a sarcastic manner and just saying your a dork who repeats what he reads elsewhere even though he doesnt think it through.
That line that is crossed when I type the word retard is not hard to cross. Just did it now.
Passion and sarcasm are similar to rudeness to a lot of people, I suggest you go to well, any forum on the net.
To expect anything else from this is well....being a retard.
Sort of like throwing a few thousand bucks in the air of a nightclub: if you think it through, you realize that something could go wrong.

You want democracy, you cant handle democracy.
(we have two parties in this country were some
countries have dozens if not hundreds representing ALL point of views.)

This really doesn't have to be that difficult.

[Viceroy Potatohead]

It seems to me that the best route would be to install a very user-friendly distro like Ubuntu or Linspire on all the linux-ready boxes. This would be the best in terms of selling to Joe Sixpack, and likely small businesses. Include DVDs of Fedora, Suse, Debian, Kubuntu, Gentoo, Slackware etc. for anyone else. What would that cost them, to include 8 or 10 DVDs/CDs? Not much, thirty cents, maybe. Hell, even if they just included Fedora, Debian, and Suse DVDs, with Ubuntu already installed, that would take care of the majority of customer distro choices. As long as they have chosen hardware which is supported under Redhat, Suse, and Debian, they'd have pretty much all bases covered.

Personally, I think it would be a bad move to allow a customer to have distros like Gentoo pre-installed. It won't do Linux any good to have Joe Sixpack buy a system, select a distro randomly, and then conclude that Linux sucks because he can't make a power-user distro work.

I'm not fussy

[Anonymous Coward]

I want a Linux-ready PC. I don't care if it's pre-installed (since I'll likely install an alternate distribution, anyway). I just want assurances that there is *some* named distribution that it's known to work well with, and I have the option of buying it sans O/S cheaper than the Windows pre-installed model.

Better than nothing.

[matt me]

Selling blank PC's is stupid, because they'd be useless to anyone without a second computer and broadband handy (that's most people not on Slashdot), and a operating system is necessary to test the hardware functions correctly immediately after purchase. You wouldn't want to test three different OS just to find out the graphics card is bust and none of them were to blame. Imagine customer service telling you to keep trying different ones. There has to be a standard system on which to test hardware.

Ship ANY free OS, it *REALLY* doesn't matter which, because almost every user is going to end up replacing it, but they must ship *something* that allows people to download their OS of choice (hell, this could even be windows). Computer boots up for the first time with a good list of links to various operating systems and a functioning network card. Experienced users can go download whatever kinky OS is their fetish. New users can make an informed choice. A few recent images of free OS could be thrown on for users without broadband. Maybe even links to offers to buy Windows and Mac OS at OEM prices. Wouldn't that be fair?

What matters is that the user is free to choose, rather than free to choose after they've already been made to pay £100 for OEM Vista.

Re:Better than nothing.

[Anonymous Coward]

1) Dell sells blank computers - they come with a FreeDOS CD. I don't think this is good enough to get online or test a 3D graphics card. So, Dell is stupid? They seem to be doing OK despite that handicap.

2) "they must ship *something* that allows people to download their OS of choice". Or, you know, walk into an office supply shop and buy a Windows CD (some even carry SUSE linux too)... Operating systems aren't exclusively available online.

3) OEM Windows doesn't remotely cost 100 quid. Dell sells computers - e.g. a Dimension E520 with monitor - for 279 quid ex VAT. There's absolutely no way that MS is taking 1/3 of that.

Re:Better than nothing.

[Anonymous Coward]

Now, wouldn't it be cool if the computer didn't come nothing else but a downloader/installer (not a complete OS) that would download your favorite OS (whether it be Linux or Windows)? At first you would connect the computer on the net and choose your OS and after a long time you would have your OS installed. This way you would always get the latest OS with the new computer (e.g. Windows with the latest updates and SPs). Of course MS would never agree this kind of cool thing where the customer could actually make a decision.

So my suggestion to the OSS community. Make a standard downloadable image (very small one) that can be installed on hard disk and it would let you choose which distro to download and install. Of course it's likely that distros won't be able to come into agreement how it should work.

timo

The Bundled, Bundle

[jusDfaqs]

OEMs to ship the tech support for *NIX overseas would be a huge fiasco;

Tech: "Please be thanking you for calling , what can I do for you today?
User: "Yea I'm getting a compile error when I try to build MySQL 5 with these options."
Tech: "Oh, yes, and what hell is that?"
User: "You know compile."
Tech: "Oh, why, yes, he is sitting two desks down from me. I know him very well."

Can't they (the OEMs) just ship 2 or 3 live CD's (Ubuntu, Knoppix, Backtrack :-) with each new machine.
They give us enough trial software with the Windows install.

Shuttleworth is right

[goombah99]

Preinstalled linux should come in at most two flavors. If one flavor is chose it should be the lowsest common denominator for the stupidest Windows-like user: a user freindly system with a package manager that does not fuss over the niceities of open and closed source software like Linspire. If two flavors are to be offered the other should be one that is server class with a company that backs support like RedHat or Novel or Oracle.

Nothing else shoul dbe offered as it only muddies the waters. Anyone who Likes Linux because they like to tweak and knows the difference between Debian and Gentoo and Damn Small, is also fully capable of wiping the disk and doing their own installation. Thus pre-installation is not neccessary.

Re:Shuttleworth is right

[Anonymous Coward]

Is there any option for the stupidest Linux-like user?

Re:Shuttleworth is right

[Anonymous Coward]

Yes. Shuttleworth is correct. The last thing we need is more Ubuntu installations. There are enough faggots already.

Re:Shuttleworth is right

[Anonymous Coward]

Ann Coulter, is that you?

Re:Shuttleworth is right

[h2g2bob]

In my view, preinstalled linux should be in a maximum of 0 flavours.

That is, I'd just like them to add a "no OS" option: people who use Linux generally have strong views about their fave distro, how they'd like it configured, etc. By offering a "no OS" option with no support, they can offer it for less money than the Windows one.

Re:Shuttleworth is right

[goombah99]

Something is needed for walmart grannies. Linspire will do the job. And something is needed for companies that want to delegate their server configuration managment to a vendor like Dell. Having dell provide an out of the box running linux node with all the required drivers and enterprise class packages installed would in many cases slash IT costs. ANything in between, and it's users choice: wipe it and install what youlike

It's probably easier for dell to install an OS than not since they need to test the box before they ship it.

Re:Shuttleworth is right

[Master of Transhuman]

I agree that Dell should consider providing an option for corporations who want a Linux desktop to go with their Linux servers - and of course Dell should provide Linux servers.

I'm not sure about them providing a "naive end-user" version. That WOULD be generating support problems for them. Granted, they have those NOW with Windows naive end users since Windows isn't THAT easy for naive users to handle (even Macs aren't THAT easy).

But I think they should provide a "no OS" version which the option to purchase any Linux distro you want from them directly, with the CDs being supplied by the distros themselves, and then offer paid support in concert with support deals with the distros handling at least the second-tier support. It wouldn't cost Dell the earth to supply the basic distro documentation to their help desk people with some scripts to walk people through the obvious problems Linux users may have (getting Java installed or the Flash plugin for Firefox) IF they were getting paid to provide that support. Anything more complex, they switch the call to a distro support line for those distros offering paid support. The distros can then offer that paid support via Dell and make some money themselves. Everybody wins.

Re:Shuttleworth is right

[goombah99]

The problem is the guy that did not buy the software support agreement calls up and says "hey my video card is busted". Now maybe it is busted. But unless he has a trusted distro from Dell they can't tell if it's a hardware problem or a driver problem. If they say "sorry sir you did not buy the software support" he's not going to be a happy camper. thus software support is not optional and thus they need to sell the whole enchilda.

Re:Shuttleworth is right

[turbidostato]

"Having dell provide an out of the box running linux node with all the required drivers and enterprise class packages installed would in many cases slash IT costs"

Do you really know of any "enterprise class" bussiness that do delegate their node installs to the PC builder? That don't have their own approval procedures, that don't have their own approved procedures for installing/imagining their PCs with their corporate tools and programs?

"It's probably easier for dell to install an OS than not since they need to test the box before they ship it."

Do you mean that what comes preinstalled on a Dell is any kind of testing suite?

Re:Shuttleworth is right

[Master of Transhuman]

That's why I say they should sell or resell support from the people who know Linux.

Dell diagnostics are pretty good at detecting hardware problems - at least to the point that Dell is willing to ship a replacement part. If the video card's busted, it should be possible to tell if it's hardware. If it isn't hardware, then the paid support for the distro comes into play. If the customer doesn't realize that his hardware depends on both hardware and drivers, then he's out of luck if he doesn't want to ante up for driver support.

Alternatively, Dell could certify drivers for all the hardware they sell. Then if the device fails, it's by definition not a hardware problem (if the Dell diagnostics partition doesn't say so) or the driver (since Dell said it would work.) Then again it becomes a distro problem.

In other words, this sort of thing can be worked out so the ground rules for assigning blame and support responsibility are known in advance. And if the customer doesn't opt for Linux support and uses Linux, well, that's his problem.

If he isn't a happy camper, well, there are plenty of Dell owners who aren't happy campers with Dell's Windows support NOW. I don't see that as a huge impediment to providing some sort of Linux support on Dell hardware. Again, the only question is how much will it cost to provide what level of support vs how many customer sales will they get over and above that to justify it. And again, it's corporate sales they should be looking at, not home user sales, to justify that investment.

Re:Shuttleworth is right

[arose]

Dell diagnostics are pretty good at detecting hardware problems - at least to the point that Dell is willing to ship a replacement part. If the video card's busted, it should be possible to tell if it's hardware. If it isn't hardware, then the paid support for the distro comes into play.

And if you say they can't detect that with the random distro that is now on the computer then imagine a seperate diagnostics boot partition or diagnostics live cd. Linux is flexible that way.

I don't

[Vexorian]

I don't want linux preinstalled I certainly would hate to see an OEM linux, it is just wrong, I want computers to come up with nothing installed so I could install the linux version I would prefer or whatever I'd like to install or do with a computer.
That's the reason I right now prefer to build my own comps.

Re:Hardware support

[MikeZ52]

One point........Dell, HP, etc. use pretty standard hardware across much of their platform line. They are huge customers of the component manufacturers, many of whom will not open their code to allow developers to write open source drivers. If the PC makers want to sell new machines to me, they should either:
1.) Only purchase components for which open source drivers are available, or
2.) Use their purchasing clout to persuade manufacturers to allow developers to write OSS drivers.

In this scenario, I could purchase a machine either with or without the chosen distro and have some certainty that everything can be made to work when I decide to switch to my favorite flavor of the month.

Re:Hardware support

[herve_masson]

I'd much prefer if Dell, HP, etc. were to just provide a list of which of their models and hardware configurations include only hardware that is known to work well with Linux

Exactly.

Actually, I would love to see them going just a little further by working with chipset manufacturer _and_ the OSS community to make certain that all their machines work fine on linux. I don't think setting up a small entity in charge of that aspect would cost them a lot.

Why?

[g2devi]

> And until a company can determine that there's a big enough audience who would buy a specific distro of linux on a computer they won't make efforts to support them.

Why? You're missing something basic. Let's look at that list: (I've added one item so that Ubuntu has the same options as the others)
                Commercial: Novell/SuSE Linux Desktop
                Commercial: Red Hat Enterprise Desktop
                Community Supported: Fedora
                Community Supported: OpenSUSE
                Community Supported: Ubuntu
                Commercial: Ubuntu LTS (Long Term Support)
Since RHEL, SUSE, Ubuntu LTS have are more conservative than Fedora or OpenSUSE or Ubuntu (no nLTS), then if your hardware supports RHEL or SUSE or Ubuntu LTS, it'll automatically support Fedora or OpenSUSE or Ubuntu (no nLTS). Okay, so we have three items on our list.

So far, so good. Since the Linux kernel version number determines what hardware is supported, then if your hardware supports the oldest kernel of RHEL, SUSE, and Ubuntu LTS, there's a very good chance it supports them all.

So out of the list of 6 or so distributions, Dell have a single number to work with (call it kernel 2.6.x). Look at the hardware their selling. If it's supported by 2.6.x, then fine. If not, then they need to replace (or drop) the hardware in favour of something that 2.6.x does support. They could then say "Works with Linux 2.6.x". It's not that difficult, is it?

Now let's take it to the next level. Suppose Dell gave pre-release versions of their hardware to RedHat, Novell, and Canonical in exchange for *their* work in validating the hardware and their certification mark. The only thing Dell would need to do is receive their "hardware compatibility" reports, do the necessary hardware replacements (if any), and offer *certified* RHEL, SUSE, or Ubuntu LTS CDs along with the hardware (that contains no operating system). I'm sure that RedHat, Novell, and Canonical would jump at the offer, especially since if they don't, their competitors will and they'd be locked out of a juicy market. It's good for RedHat, Novell, and Canonical who get better hardware support, and it's good for Dell which gets to tag "Works with Linux 2.6.x", "RHEL Certified", "SUSE Certified", and "Ubuntu LTS Certified" to their product with minimal work.

Now let's take it to the next level -- preinstallation. They could tack on a $20 fee for anyone who wanted "Certified Linux" preinstalled. No tech user would accept this option, but many newbies would. They've just generated an additional source of revenue for something that could be easily automated through imaging. There are tonnes of these value added services that can be used to generate revenue. Dell just needs to spend a few minutes looking at what people need.

Who wants linux pre-installed?

[pseudorand]

Who are these people who want linux pre-installed? Especially from Dell, who is well-known for pre-installing adware on their Windows boxes. I imagine they're people who aren't linux users because they can't figure out how to install it, but they'd like to be and they want Dell to do the hard part and support it when things go wrong. Personally, I only buy hardware from a hardware vendor and format the hard drive as soon as I get it.

Re:Who wants linux pre-installed?

[Anonymous Coward]

Personally i couldn't care less about pre-installation, i recently bought a HP laptop (with WinXP pre-installed) simply because it was certified for Novell SLED 10. (The laptop now happily dualboots between XP and Debian Sarge with all hardware working properly).

Now my main problem was that the only vendor that had linux certified laptops avaliable in my local computer store was HP, thus i didn't really have too many options unless i wanted to order from some small manufacturer online. (i want to test my laptops before buying to make sure the monitor and keyboard are good).

I could ofcourse have bought a laptop from any other vendor and simply have hoped that it would work to 100% or get a list of avaliable laptops from the store (that meets my needs), then go back home and research all of them to see which ones works before finally going back to buy one.... (too time consuming imo).

Thus HP got my money simply by taking the time to get some of their laptops certified.

http://h71028.www7.hp.com/enterprise/cache/317386- 0-0-0-121.html

there is a list of all hp desktops and notebooks along with what linux distros they are certified for. They only have Certifications for Red Hat, Novell, Turbolinux and Mandriva though. (and very few machines are certified for all versions of all distros), But they are far ahead of dell imo.

All I want is...

[DusterBar]

All I want is that all of the hardware is documented and working with available Linux divers/support. If that means having them preload some Linux, that is fine by me. I really don't care much as to which one it is (as long as it is a reasonably standard kernel) as I will be reinstalling anyway.

Hey, look, most of us would say the same thing about Windows - the initial install is good for validating that the system works but let me install it correctly and without the cruft. We should be the same with Linux.

This is especially true of the Laptop hardware since that is one place where building your own is really a long way away from current best-of-breed laptops.

Er...

[lemox]

What exactly is "amusing" or "telling" about the CRN blog? He just quotes a bunch of Shuttleworth's post and then summarizes a bit in between. Oh wait, the quoting of a comment, once again from the Shuttleworth's blog. I suppose that's it. Ed Moltzen, did you submit this article?

Re:I do not

[Windowser]

The idea is that if a vendor ships boxes with Linus preinstalled that means that there are drivers for hardware in these boxes

I didn't know Linus could be installed on a computer, and that he needed drivers

lame

[Anonymous Coward]

Hey Mark: Stop trying to commercialize linux, you're killing it.

Ultimate Solution

[Anonymous Coward]

O.K here it is people, the solution you've all been waiting for...

We all know that whatever Dell ships, we're all going to format it and install what we want right? After all if Dell are ever going to ship Linux boxes for less than Windows boxes they're going to need to find someone willing to pay to have crapware installed on those Linux boxes.

The solution then is to have Dell ship the box with windows and crapware but without charging us for windows. That way we get the cost benefit of crapware without the Microsoft tax. There is already a demo version of Windows server 2003 that would do just fine for this, but a nicely broken XP Home 30 day demo version would do just fine if MS want to come out with one...

Of course the real solution is not to buy Dells... They're absolute pieces of crap and the amount you save over buying or building a quality system is never worth the headaches... But demo windows with crapware would work for those people honestly too cheap to buy a decent computer.

WTF is this guy?

[MrJerryNormandinSir]

If you want a killer linux box build it yourself!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I've got a Shuttle PC with AMD dual core! It's fast! I use vmware to test new releases.
I also have a Power Mac with the dual 970 (the G5) that runs Linux and OS/X well.
I beat up on nvidia every day because they are holding up NVIDIA support on Linux/MAC
There's a reverse engineering project currently going on so hopefully soon!

Create Ubuntu Certified Program

[Anonymous Coward]

Mr. Shuttleworth might consider turning some of this around onto the Ubuntu organization. Funding chould be provided for Ubuntu engineers to qualify a specific computer model/configuration as "Ubuntu Certified." The manufacturer would be able to display a logo or badge on web pages describing that model for a fee paid to Ubuntu to offset the qualification cost, and offer that model/configuration without OS. Then buyers would know they could purchase it and install Ubuntu. If other distros had similar programs, then additional badges could be displayed.

This isn't pre-installed Linux, but it might be an important intermediate step toward that goal. Most current Linux users are capable of installing the distro of their choice, so pre-installation is not really a roadblock. Only users unfamiliar with Linux would truly require pre-installation. I am unconvinced that a large market for pre-installed Linux exists. A "certified" program as described above might be the seed that could germinate into limited pre-installs of Linux by manufacturers. It could help prove the size of such a market.

Mod parent up---Good points

[waferhead]

The MAIN issue is that preconfigured systems will be known to be fully Linux compatible.

Probably the best choice for Dell would just support ONE current distro of the Ubuntu type, or pehaps Mandriva which is a bit less anal about using binary blobs.

This allows ALL supported hardware to work out of the box, and virtually guarantees that ANY modern distro will work on all the hardware in the box, if the user chooses to reinstall.

OEM's and Operating Systems

[kubevubin]

I doubt that Linux users really want any of the big-name OEM's to provide Linux installations, unless they're truly that blind to the fact that many of the instability issues that people blame on Windows aren't actually caused by Windows at all. If you want your beloved Linux to come pre-installed on Dell's computers, be prepared for plenty of unnecessary bloat.
I use Windows, but I'd never use a pre-installed OEM version of Windows. That's just asking for trouble. And don't think that package managers will save Linux in the OEM world. Expect much of the garbage that accompanies Windows on OEM PC's to make the transition to Linux PC's, as well.

Mod parent up!

[argent]

Just provide whatever is the easiest distro for Joe Sixpack to handle, and documentation and source for all drivers, and let the bloke wanting Gentoo show that he really understands what a source code distro is about.

I agree.

[posterlogo]

Most people who want Linux can handle it themselves. Getting it "available at DELL" isn't really for the benefit of those people...it seems more like a crusade to shove it down the throats of other people. I frankly think more Linux and less MS would be good overall, but it's something that shouldn't be forced. There's been waaay too much about this on Slashdot, where it probably doesn't convince anyone anyway.

...And the solution...

[DG]

...is probably a Dell-specific distro, based on one of the big core distros.

The more I think about this, the more I realize that any big PC manufacturer who decides to get into the "pre-installed Linux" business is going to be forced into managing its own distro. It won't have any choice in the matter. It needs to be able to guarantee that the distro installed on its box works AT LEAST as well as Windows XP for similar functionality.

And in some cases, that's going to require hardware-specific patches, much the same way RedHat has distro-specific patches (even though many (most) of these eventually make their way back into the vanilla kernel or the mainstream versions of various applications.)

3D acceleration is going to have to work. There is going to have to be a functional web browser (which means functional network stack) media player, printing subsytem, and sound. Any extra buttons and widgets on the keyboard will have to work. Wireless and Bluetooth, if present, will have to work. Ditto the USB plug and play subsytem, including printers, cameras, scanners etc etc etc.

Effectively, they'll have to do what Apple did for BSD for the Macs (although one hopes, using GNOME or *spit* KDE rather than a proprietary UI layer)

If that doesn't **SCREAM** "opportunity for Red Hat!!" I don't know what does.

The upside is that if we assume that Dell hires (say) RedHat to produce and manage Dell Linux, then that means more funding for hackers to work on core OS pieces and core applications, which is Sweet Crunchy Goodness all around.

DG

Any Linux is better than none.

[Jaywalk]

Since if you roll out a SuSE based Linux machine several of the others would just say "Meh, I'll order it however and flatten it once I get it" you have a much smaller target audience who would actually buy it.

But, given the choice between a less-desirable Linux distro and Windows, wouldn't you rather get Linux? Replace it if you want, but at least you know it works with Linux and has the necessary drivers without having to guess where MS wants you to go today. And you didn't send any cash to Redmond for the privilege.

Face it, demanding a broad spectrum of distros will just mean replacing the Microsoft tax (having to pay monopoly prices) with a Linux tax (having to support multiple distros). And having no OS isn't an improvement. Manufacturers need to install something just to go through the pre-shipping burn in, so why not pick a Linux distro? There are even some people, like myself, who don't have deep-seated convictions on which distro to use. I'd rather have to deal with minor system variants than have to deal with installing a new OS after having paid for another one.

And if Dell doesn't support your preferred version, so what? Which major manufacturers support it now?

This isn't about us

[infinityxi]

Why are we making the whole idea of Pre-installed Linux apply to us. We probably wouldn't want to use the preinstalled OS (Linux or Windows) and will end up installing what we want (or if XP home came on a dell, put in XP pro free of shitware). I thought the whole idea of having a pre-installed Linux was to move towards mass adoption of Linux. Many of you guys state that one of the reasons Windows is so ubiquitous is because it is installed by default in nearly every PC. An easy to use distribution is what Dell should be going for not $MyPreference because no one can please the Linux community which is known for tweaking things to their liking.

For one example, what about the choice of rolling out Gnome vs KDE. There are big fans of both in the community and those who hate the other as a big subset. What about those who prefer a more obscure window manager + environment. These are not average user concerns and this doesn't make the average user stupid. In most cases average users are after what most Linux users are after, the best tool for the job. Skill sets may vary and as a result the average user may not have the best tool but for someone who wants to do some word processing, crunch some numbers on a spreadsheet, browse youtube, and chat on an Instant Message client. KDE vs Gnome doesn't really matter to them as long as it is intuitive, stable, and reliable.

If Dell decides to actually move forward with this, you shouldn't expect or even want to be the target market. In most cases if a Linux user buys a dell with Linux pre-installed you will at least know that everything works and that your custom install shouldn't require having to purchase a replacement $hardware_device.

I really like Ubuntu and I was actually moved to install it after my hard drive with XP croaked and the only snag I got was my resolution. Ubuntu is great at many things but still blows at figuring out your driver, resolution capabilities. There should also be a more graphical way to tweak things without having to go to the xorg.conf, however rare it is.

In short this should be more focused on more widespread adoption rather than trying to please 1000 different tastes. This isn't about you guys so much as it is about the average user getting a PC with a better* option. Bickering will only bring the Microsoft clickaround fanboys more ammunition to troll about linux being one giant bash shell.

Yeah, and that's wrong. This game is almost over.

[twitter]

He said we are fussy, without making any judgements. And that this fact would make it harder for Dell to satisfy us.

All anyone cares about is to have hardware with free drivers, from there any distro can be installed. The continued acceptance of M$'s inferior GUI and software for "hardware compatibility" is proof that the vast majority of computer users just want the system to work and will put up with all sorts of security and performance issues to get that level of "convenience". If Dell would select or demand hardware with free drivers, every major gnu/linux distribution would work - that's not hard at all. Picky people are going to reinstall the OS anyway and no one will blame Dell for that.

The of Mark's criticism that sticks is this:

If Microsoft reduces the per-PC marketing contribution it makes for a particular reseller, that puts them at a huge financial disadvantage relative to their competitors. This means that one of the biggest issues a computer manufacturer or reseller faces in considering Linux pre-installations is the impact it will have on the Microsoft relationship, and hence bottom line.

Anti-competitive pressure is what this ever boils down to. It will go away as hardware prices drop below $200 or so, because there's no room for software costs at that price point. That Dell is making noises like this now is good evidence that there's not much room for software costs at the $400 price point. The corporate price point is already there and that's why so many companies are dumping M$. The first vendor to deliver a $200 computer with nothing but free software on it is going to win big time and there's nothing M$ will be able to do about it.

Re: Shuttleworth who

[Anonymous Coward]

they probably marked it redundant because there's not a "-1 Learn English" mod.

That excuse won't work.

[twitter]

[Dell could] say something along the lines of "After seeing the survey results, the demands of the Linux community are too diverse. For reasons of technical support, we cannot offer Linux as an OS option on our computers."

Which everone knows is BS. All they need to do is select components with free drivers and pressure their suppliers to provide specs and free drivers.

Sooner or later, someone is going to sell computers like that and the price difference without the M$ tax will be great enough to blow out everyone who does not follow. The endgame is very close. That's why M$ is making noises about patents and IP like every other non free IT giant that was outcompeted before.

Re:That excuse won't work.

[Yvan256]

I was not talking about hardware or peripherals option, but rather software packages, Linux distros, etc. That's the one mess the Linux community has to work on. Of course there could be server distros and such, but people should work on a single desktop OS, a single GUI, etc.

Remember, choices are only good if people aren't overwhelmed by these choices.

Re:That excuse won't work.

[thephotoman]

Ein volk, ein reich, ein GUI!

Most people already do work on one single desktop OS and a single GUI. Unfortunately, it's Windows--which is where a lack of choice gets you. Keep the choices available so that nobody can screw you over somewhere down the line.

Piss off.

[Stumbles]

Shuttleworth just needs to STFU. Any demands the open source world has asked of the OEMs is mild compared the the DRACONIAN agreements the likes of Dell and others have signed with Microsoft giving Billy Boy essentially a FREE RIDE to DISTRIBUTE his POS software. So Marky, pull your head outa your ass.

Err...Wouldn't this work?

[esampson]

First off I have to admit that I am hardly a Linux guru. Yes, I run Ubuntu on several machines at home and have them doing little tricks like automatically downloading shows off my ReplayTV and encoding them so I can play them on my PSP the next day, but I really just fumble around with Linux for the most part, so if there's something I'm missing here maybe a real Linux guru could enlighten me.

Shouldn't it be possible for Dell to have disk images of, say, half a dozen of the most popular distros with all the support needed for the hardware options they are offering? When someone orders a computer they select the distro they want and the image is burned to the hard disk (or probably more accurately whoever is assembling the order just grabs the correct hard disk with the image already burned and installs it). When the computer is booted up for the first time a startup program is automatically run that scans the hardware, makes sure the correct drivers are installed, deletes the unnecessary drivers, then removes itself.

There wouldn't be a hardware/distro matrix any more than there is currently a hard drive/memory/CD-ROM matrix currently. The OS being installed would just be another pull down menu on the order form.

The issue is hardware support

[kosmosik]

I don't care about having Linux preinstalled since I would anyway wipe it out and install my own favourite flavour my own way (the way I need it). Linux is very elastic and can be made into lots of wicked setups - lots of options etc.

What I would like to see is Dell offering PCs that "Work With Linux". PCs that are build with parts that have good support via kernel and userland. Call it "Dell Open PC" or whatever.

The problem with that is lack of common and respected Hardware Compatiblity List for Linux (Linux itself not specific distro). I think we need a body that would take the hardware review it and give it a rating. With clear specifications on how the process looks. And then give status to PCs. F.e. Dell could make a sticker on some set that says "Works With Linux (A)", "Works With Linux (B)*". The first set would tell you that included hardware works well with Linux and does not require closed source drivers. Second set would tell you that most of the hardware works well but you need closed source drivers (of course freely aviable from IHVs) for some components (note the asterisk) and informs you what comonents need closed drivers (like nvidia card, ipw2??? wireless and so on).

Now such body could be a foundation or a commercial entity that is charging for certification process or be founded by Linux vendors. But it should be vendor neutral as possible. OSDL seems perfect for this. I don't see if it is a real business opportunitty, but it could be. With working certification process and good marketing OEMs could earn in such situation.

I think such way would be more sensible approach OEMs selling PSs for use with Linux.

Re: Shuttleworth who

[norminator]

Is this someone I relay should be concerned with telling me to settle down. Um considering Dell is actually moving towards putting Linux on desk tops, why should we settle down as it seams to be working and people are lisining.

As someone else already replied to your post, he doesn't mean we should settle down about wanting Linux, he means we should settle down about exactly how we want Linux on those Dells.

Obviously any 1337 user who knows exactly which distro and which version of that distro he/she wants, which window manager and text editor he/she wants probably already has CDs burned, and would rather do the job themselves. The exciting part of Dell offering Linux preinstalled is not that I expect to be able to get a Linux box pre-customized exactly the way I want it. The exciting part is that this means all of our parents and friends who look at a Linux command prompt and think "Why does this have DOS on it?" (if they even know what DOS is) can get a system that's fully functional, with hardware that is supported and tested. The point is that Linux can be made available to mainstream users, and can be made easy to use, and most importantly, that normal people will hear about Linux, and find out why they would possibly want to leave Windows behind.

This doesn't take anything away from the Linux power user who doesn't use a full KDE or Gnome DE, and only uses a minimalist WM with hundreds of memorized keyboard shortcuts. Those users probably won't be buying from Dell anyway, and if they do, they would rather install their own OS. The bright side of things for those users though, is that if Dell does start offering Linux as a preinstalled option for a significant number of their consumer systems, they would probably also include the option of shipping the systems with no OS.

So just be glad they're considering preinstalling Linux at all, and don't complain about Dell not giving you what you want... because if you know what you want, you're not the type of person who would normally want it from them! Also, on the last quote from the article:

i'm getting so sick and tired of hearing excuses and rationalizations. just put the cd in the cupholder, install it and sell it. period. there's no need to analyze or certify. what is so hard about this?

I don't see what is amusing or telling about this quote... Of course there is a need to analyze and certify. As I said, these PCs need to be able to go out to grandmothers, liberal arts college students, construction workers, single moms, high school kids, and anyone else that may not know how to install NVidia drivers from the command prompt. Hardware does have to be certified and working out of the box, the software does have to be customized for people who aren't "computer people", and the distribution does have to be chosen carefully. I don't think anyone's giving any invalid excuses or rationalizations. These decisions take time, and no matter what choices are made, lots of people are going to find things to complain about. If Dell takes the time to carefully study and consider the factors involved, that might just show that they care about putting Linux in a good light.

Re:and then... Missing Option

[Anonymous Coward]

Missing option: Vanilla

Know What We Want ???

[boogahboogah]

I don't want Dell to hold my hand. I don't want HP to pre-load Linux.

I want a machine without the M$ tax ($80 dollars cheaper) and I want drivers available for all of the hardware in the machine.

I'd be happy with just drivers...

Drivers drivers drivers drivers drivers !

Step 0

[labradore]

It's not that hard for these OEMs to get step 0. Pay some attention to designing your system and only put in parts that have drivers (preferably open source) available. Then you build a repository of those drivers and write some readmes. Test the drivers on a few popular distributions. Maybe Fedora, Ubuntu and another. This can't be any more work than their driver teams do already. You don't have to preinstall Linux. You don't have to officially certify anything. Just get it working and write some installation notes. Put it all up on a moderated wiki so that the customer community can do a bunch of "support" for you. Viola.

Bonus points if you, for instance, provide a first-boot installation option that gives you the choice to a) Install Windows b) Install Nothing (maybe boot to FreeDOS)

Bottom line: you don't have to support Linux users. To get our business, you just have to make it (possible) easy for us to do what we want with the hardware.

Re:Step 0

[TechnicalFool]

Perhaps it wouldn't cost much to have a little drop-down box on the order form. "What distro do you want our engineer to bung in the drive before he goes for a tea break? Suse/RedHat/Ubuntu/etc.."

Re:Step 0

[brianez21]

Put it all up on a moderated wiki so that the customer community can do a bunch of "support" for you. Viola. And viola to you too! :)

ALL COMPUTERS SHOULD SUPPORT EVERY LINUX DISTRO!

[Anonymous Coward]

For God's sake, people! Does the kernel boot, and do the drivers run? Bam, it's supported! You want Red Hat? Add RPM to our kernel+drivers base system and download. You want Ubuntu? Add apt-get to our kernel+drivers base system and download. You want GNU/HURD? We threw in a gcc compiler, go get the tarballs. apt-get KDE or Gnome. Oh, wait, we're Dell, we can afford to write a Bash script. There, when you call to order your PC just specify which distro you want and our script will slap it in before we ship it. 'WHAT DISTRO' DOES NOT EVEN ENTER THE EQUATION!

We're not retarded! We've all downloaded and tried ten different distros and had them run fine on computers we built ourselves!

It is a great thing for OEMs to preinstall Linux

[puppetluva]

OEM linux installs are good for two important reasons:
1) This could be the leverage that community needs over driver manufacturers that refuse to cooperate with the OSS community. If OEMs won't/can't ship machines with drivers that support their cards, then OEMs will stop buying that hardware to include in their builds.
2) This becomes an easy entre for new users enterring the linux market.

It doesn't really matter _which_ distro they include, as long as the driver issue gets cleaned up for commodity hardware and new users can use/learn linux without having to install from scratch.

The experts will reinstall anyway, but they will start the reinstall knowing that it is possible to get all of the components working.

The new users may eventually become experts, but they can start learning Unix fundamentals without having to start out struggling with IRQ conflicts, buggy drivers, and difficult configs (X11).

missing the point

[nanosquid]

As far as I can tell, Windows users are just as fussy: every place I've ever worked that has bought Dell computers with Windows preinstalled has blown away Windows and installed their own version. But the fact that Windows was pre-installed meant that the hardware was supported by Windows and the drivers existed.

With Linux, the problem is not about which version of Linux Dell ships, it's that they ship some version of Linux at all. Why? Because if they do it right, it means that they have selected Linux-compatible hardware and guarantee that it works in at least some configuration.

So, Dell, please pick a fairly recent but stable version of Linux and ship machines that are preinstalled with it. It doesn't matter whether you pick Fedora or Ubuntu or SuSE, just pick one and ship it. Pay some attention to required drivers (it shouldn't depend on proprietary drivers even if you can find a legal loophole).

That's all we ask.

Dell Distro

[shdwtek]

Maybe Dell just needs to make it's own distro or Linux. They could call it, Dellinux, or Dellux... or something...

Re:Yeah, and that's wrong. This game is almost ove

[i_should_be_working]

All anyone cares about is to have hardware with free drivers, from there any distro can be installed.

Yeah I agree. I may be fussy about what my computer ends up like, but I can take care of the details. All I need from the likes of Dell is for them to offer something that I know for certain will work with Linux. In that respect I don't think I am fussy at all, and that Shuttleworth is wrong here.

But you know, there's some in every crowd and if Dell were to offer Linux laptops now without doing a lot more research about what people want, I bet they would get hit hard with complaints from really fussy people who aren't ever satisfied. Especially from ex-Windows "power users" who are also fussy but don't yet know how to solve their own problems in Linux yet. But maybe the coming complaints are inevitable.

Incoming Failure?

[Goofy73]

First of all, I want to say that GNU/Linux is a fantasic OS. It is my primary OS at home, although I do dual boot, XP is around strictly for 1 game and to do my taxes on. I think all this looks real good on paper, but I'll bet they will get very few home users on the bandwagon. Not because Linux is bad, but because at this particular time, 3rd party stuff for Linux doesn't exist in any meaningful way. How much software can you buy for Linux at your favority big-box store? How many ISP's actually support linux? Buying hardware, better do your homework before you go shopping. For me, there are some things I want a commercial package for. Tax software being #1 because, dammit, if I have to essentially sign my family's life away, I want to know that the crap is accurate or someone is a phone call away to find out why it's not. Anyway, I hope they can manage to get it going. It sure would be nice for linux to have more home users. If linux could get some bigger numbers, perhaps more hardware/software vendors would take notice and produce more linux native software/drivers. Cheers

All about choices

[Anomalyst]

You are spot on. I would find it more convincing that Dell management actually had a clue about the value of heterogeneous environments and were not simply "Peter Principled" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_principle to their positions if they provided two (or more!) selections. Not an impossible task. Somebody out there has already made available a single DVD with a bunch of distros. A previous post suggested a naked box and a DVD with distros. Probably better would be have something similar on the hard drive. On the first boot the customer makes a distro selection and clicks a check box to indicate a standalone install (flushing unwanted flavors) or leaving it intact for the option of alternate installs later.
Much more likely they will make a safe "business" decision market the "sizzle" of the Linux buzzword with a pre-selected flavor rather than the meat of user choice.

Re:Yeah, and that's wrong. This game is almost ove

[Dan Ost]

If you don't mind used hardware, Tiger Direct will gladly sell you refurbished computers for under $200 with no OS installed.

Exactly:

[Anonymous Coward]

What I'd like to see all of the OEM's do is offer a Linux Certified Hardware platform based as you said around the stable Linux supported hardware because a Side effect/benefit of this is that those companies who provide no/limited Open Source support would see a real benefit to developing such hardware, thus increasing our options in the long run.

Finally, from an corporate-user perspective, they could include a support contract from Suse, RHE or Ubunta, thus completely off-loading software support to an outside vendor.

Two advantages

[jawahar]

Pre-installed Linux have 2 distinct advantages. 1. Users learn and appreciate Linux 2. Users test Linux

All I really want...

[jonadab]

All I want out of a new Linux PC is fully-working, fully-standard hardware. So that if I try to install my distro of choice, and something doesn't work out of the box, it's the distro's fault, and if I can't get it to work, it's either my fault or the distro's fault. For instance, at home my main workstation runs FreeBSD. I can't get the scrollmouse to work as such. (It works as a mouse, and depressing the scroll button gives me middle click as usual, but the actual scrolling feature does not work.) I suspect that it is possible to get it to work, but I don't understand the BSD way of dealing with mouse hardware well enough to set it up right. The fact that it doesn't get detected and work OOTB is because FreeBSD lags behind the Linux world in terms of automagical hardware detection. Currently I'm willing to live with this minor. If I weren't, I'd either hit the fora and find out how to make it work, or I'd use another OS. The thing is, the mouse is a perfectly normal standard scroll mouse. The manufacturer is not at fault here, and I know it. There's nothing wrong, or proprietary, about the mouse.

That's all I want. Really. (Well, one other thing: by preference I want hardware that uses technologies that have been around the block a couple of times, so that software people have had a chance to debug their support for it. PCI and IDE, for instance. Let the gamers field-test the new bleeding edge stuff, I just want something reliable.)

It doesn't matter whether the distro they pre-install is the one I plan to use. It's not like installing operating systems is very hard these days.

Re:Yeah, and that's wrong. This game is almost ove

[dedazo]

One, you are theorizing that "M$" adds hundreds of dollars to the cost of a PC. Would you care to back that claim up for us? Do you actually claim that the $200 computer does not exist because of "M$"?

Two, if this "anti-competitive" pressure exists, why is Dell even contemplating the shift to offer Linux preloaded?

Three, I assume you've worked as an OEM or VAR/integrator before, since you seem to be sure that Dell can "demand hardware" of one type of another at their level without regards to cost and availability. Is that correct?

Re:Yeah, and that's wrong. This game is almost ove

[bfields]

Anti-competitive pressure is what this ever boils down to. It will go away as hardware prices drop below $200 or so, because there's no room for software costs at that price point.

Yes, but if I were microsoft, I'd be more or less giving away the software on any machine under $200. It costs them nothing, and it means they'll probably get some percentage of those customers to come back to them for more full-featured versions of the preinstalled software, and maintaining dominance of low-end desktop computing will help them sell higher-end desktops, servers, etc.

And the other distros shoot themselves in the foot

[Anonymous Coward]

And all the other distros, like Debian, are currently rallying the forces on blogs and forums and lists to run there and put their favorite distro in, just to make sure Dell understands that we will never ever settle on anything. What's the matter with you people, if you want Debian or Gentoo on the machine, both of which are BEST when they are NOT preinstalled, support Ubuntu or something instead so that the driver support is guaranteed instead.

Some people just can't help tripping themselves up.

Not an Ubuntu disc alongside, but Knoppix maybe

[iabervon]

I'd be happy if they shipped it with an unmodified Knoppix disc that would demonstrate that all of the hardware works. If there's a problem with the hardware, you reboot with the Knoppix disc to demonstrate it. If it's a problem that only happens with the distro you've got on there, get distro support with the Knoppix configuration results as reference.

For convenience, Dell could offer machines with hard drives preimaged with arbitrary distros, and include whatever media the distro wants included. But they should pass off all support issues for this aspect to the respective distros, and only address problems with the Knoppix live CD (or rather, with the machine, as demonstrated by the disc) as their own responsibility. Personally, I'd be really amused to see Dells with Gentoo preinstalled (with few packages, but all of the ones you could hardly avoid using), and completely up-to-date as of the day the machine was assembled. And, of course, each machine would come with only the appropriate kernel drivers built.

Re:Not an Ubuntu disc alongside, but Knoppix maybe

[blubadger]

That's exactly what my top-brand entry-level laptop came with. Knoppix. I guess it was a ruse to lower the price by 80 bucks. Suited me fine anyway. I even discovered Debian as a result. Who needs Dell?

Re:Yeah, and that's wrong. This game is almost ove

[zotz]

"All anyone cares about is to have hardware with free drivers, from there any distro can be installed."

Exactly! That is the key...

Take that hardware you suggest. Provide a bootable CD meant to test that the hardware is working properly.

From there they have many choices which will be acceptable for reasonable people.

1. Sell the machine with no OS installed. There is no (gratis?) software support. Users install OS of choice. If something goes wrong, vendor tells you to pop in live diagnostics CD. Let it boot and test. If the hardware passes, sort your own problems. (Or pay for support?)

2. Pick possibly one "enterprise" distro and possibly one "desktop" distro and support them. (For approved versions?) For anything else, pop in that live diagnostics CD. Let it boot and test. If the hardware passes, sort your own problems. (Or pay for support?)

3. ???

4. Profit.

The whole thing hangs on the Free drivers for all the hardware in the box.

all the best,

drew

http://www.youtube.com/user/zotzbro

MODS: parent is not flamebait

[Anonymous Coward]

parent post is a valuable opnion not flamebait

If you ask me..

[Arceliar]

All we can really ask vendors to do is sell us PCs without an OS, and offer hardware configurations using devices known to work (or a least run off a well documented standard). Beyond that anything more we get out of them (pre-installing a wide variety of distros, for example) is probably more than they should logically offer from a business standpoint (as it starts the whole confusion of who's offering support for software and who's offering it for hardware).

Re:Yeah, and that's wrong. This game is almost ove

[turbidostato]

"All anyone cares about is to have hardware with free drivers, from there any distro can be installed."

That hits the mark, yes. And it is *VERY* easy for Dell to find the way so it's good for everybody: certify for Debian "Stable", that's all.

Debian is a known distribution that only uses free software and it's not bleeding edge. In sort: if it works on Debian Stable, it will work with any other. Still, Dell people is corporate, but Debian helps here too. What are the chances for a Debian-certified hardware not to work on RHEL or Suse? I'll bet they are almost nihil, so once certified on Debian re-certify for Red Hat and Suse is nuts. Even more: is the case that you want some hardware certifiable (think PERC)? No problem: Debian is an open community you will find far easier developing open source drivers and have them included on Debian as far as they are good quality than with anyone else that can have their own corporate portfolio.

So let's sort this again. Mr Dell: by certifying Debian you...
1) Will be certifying one of the most popular distributions
2) Will satisfy users of not so well known distributions (if it works with Debian you can bet it'll work with Arch, Slackware, Gentoo... you name it, and that's all that need and can expect users of such distributions)
3) Will satisfy FOSS zealots: if it works on "vanilla" Debian Stable this means it works over true tested open source software with no "small letter" involved
4) You still have an easy path for "corporate" distributions like Red Hat or Suse: since it works with Debian, you have an easy way to certify for Red Hat or Suse.

I don't think it requieres a genious mind to see this.

Still a bit too early

[Assassin_for_Atari]

Linux on the desktop has come a great distance in my years of being a user. Though I think the reason why OEM's don't pre-install is still due to some short comings. I believe that for Linux to be successful one should be able to get there pc, and pretty much view any web content, media content and all those "normal" day to day things people want to do.

We have productivity covered via OOo, Koffice and Gnome office apps
We have great media applications such as amarok
IM is getting there with being on par to their windows clients. By this I mean such things like webcam support etc (stuff I don't use by mom and dad will)

the big kicker is support for web and media content out of the box. For example, Ubuntu. Great distro but the fact I need to read a wiki to install cryptic package names to play and mp3 or view/listen to wm*. Also, Flash on linux still has issues with Overlay. See worldofwarcraft.com or asus.com to see what I'm talking about. Also, all in one readers for compact storage still doesn't have complete drivers.

So when it comes down to it, I'm sure OEMs see this too and are still waiting, Though I would side with HP on this that the tipping point is soon on us. Yet, its by no means a excuse to not sell OS'less pcs that have been tested against a distro to insure everything works and sell to the niche as of right now. Also, give us more than one model. Give us 2 or 3, either a low and mid range, or a low, mid and high..

Re:Hardware support

[Anonymous Coward]

You're naive if you think that selling a computer with Linux guarantees that it works well with Linux for your purposes.

A few years ago I bought a computer with Debian pre-installed. It was set up to my specifications by very competent people who knew Linux well. The computer was fine..until I upgraded Debian and the monitor stopped working. (Those of you who use Red Hat may not realize that this kind of upgrade would normally be expected to succeed without major issues.) I hadn't realized that full support for my really nice monitor required custom patches. To be fair, I'd been told this and was given a CD with the computer that had said patches on it (including source code), but I just sort of assumed at the time that they would get into Linux distributions in time, and when I upgraded everything would be fine. Unfortunately for me, they didn't. And the patches would not work with an updated kernel, and I didn't particularly want to figure out how to make it so. Sorting this out was a real headache.

The moral being that the fact that someone got Linux working on your hardware doesn't mean that you'll find it smooth sailing.

Now add to this the fact that OEMs won't blink at putting custom proprietary drivers on the hardware. Then you may find that there is simply no open source software that will make that equipment run, even though you got that equipment with Linux installed! (Which is significantly worse than the situation I was in...)

So what we want is not hardware shipped with Linux. What we should want is that the hardware installs a given distro out of the box without issues.

Cheers,
Ben

Re:Yeah, and that's wrong. This game is almost ove

[TENTH SHOW JAM]

If anyone could put pressure on the hardware market, it would be Dell. Imagine for a moment that Dell decreed that they would no longer purchase hardware from anyone who did not document their hardware in such a way that an open driver could be written. (hell, let's get the BSD crowd on side too). Dell then say to random video card manufacturers, "can you do it?". They reply "Yes. because it means we make $BIGNUM sales to you".

If it's a choice between releasing your trade secrets and going broke, most companies will have their specs on the front page of the "wall street journal".

The Open Source crowd get what they want. (libre drivers) Dell get what they want, (more PC sales to that noisy rabble who affect corporate sales), the hardware manufacturers get what they want, (big contracts with Dell) so everyone is happy. With the exception of some chair chucker from redmond.

Re:Yeah, and that's wrong. This game is almost ove

[EsbenMoseHansen]

One, you are theorizing that "M$" adds hundreds of dollars to the cost of a PC. Would you care to back that claim up for us? Do you actually claim that the $200 computer does not exist because of "M$"?

Excuse me for throwing water on that nice bonfire of a discussion ;) But in this country, many biggish (that is, big in the national picture) vendors sell desktop boxes with and without windows preinstalled. The price difference is about 80 euro, or 65 euro or so before taxes. This is across multiple vendors and configuration, so I think this is a fair take on the price hit that windows occurs, at least in this country.

Re:Yeah, and that's wrong. This game is almost ove

[dedazo]

The price that a company like Dell gets on an OEM version of Windows XP Home is about $38. For smaller OEMs it's about $43-45. XP Pro must be around ten dollars over that (which is why I HATE IT when they charge almost $100 to upgrade, but that's hardly Microsoft's fault). Vista pushed up the OEM license prices by about three to five dollars for the XP equivalents, and possibly more for things like the Ultimate version (but probably didn't break the $55 barrier).

In short, nothing that would justify twitter's claim that a PC that goes for $400 should go for $200 because of "M$" or whatever.

OT, I don't know what Microsoft charges for OEM licenses over there (Denmark?), but I hope it's a hell of a lot more, because the people who run the EU are a bunch of lawless protectionist sucktards that think it's double plus OK to nail Microsoft with petty demands using stupid claims of "unfair competition" by Real, who could not compete with WMP (bad as WMP is) if their life depended on it with their horrible cuasi-spyware "products" that no one in their right mind would use unless they're forced-bundled with new boxes.

Nothing personal =)

a distribution should step up to the plate

[Anonymous Coward]

I don't think it should be up to Dell to figure out how to install a Linux distro.

I'd rather see cooperation between Dell and a linux distro where Dell provides (loans) hardware to a Linux Distro which takes it upon itself to provide Dell an installable ghost image that "just works" for that hardware.

The computers are then flagged and sold with that OS as an option by Dell.

There would be nothing preventing Dell from having the same arrangement with multiple Distros.

This situation would fairly distribute the efforts between Dell and Linux Distros.

After all, I bet initially it was MS that approached Dell to pre-install their OS, why should it be any different for Linux?

Re:Yeah, and that's wrong. This game is almost ove

[Doug Neal]

The first vendor to deliver a $200 computer with nothing but free software on it is going to win big time and there's nothing M$ will be able to do about it. Didn't Walmart do exactly that a couple of years back, with Lindows preinstalled?

I seem to remember it wasn't such a huge success... although I could be wrong as I live in the UK and haven't seen first-hand how popular they are, but I certainly haven't read anything about them in ages.

So what we really need...

[babbling]

So what we really need to do is go to the crapware makers and ask them to make crapware for Linux?

Not true for many businesses!

[Roadkills-R-Us]

We run EDA tools. To get support from tool vendors, we have to run certain versions of certain enterprise class Linuxes. So we really need to know that the box will run with (for example) RHEL4. This is just as true of the workstations as the rackmount servers. If Dell (for example) sells systems with RHEL4, I have reason to believe the system will actually *work* with RHEL4. If they don't, I have a reasonable expectation that it *won't* work, based on past experience. PC mfrs are always putting new hardware out, and that isn't always going to work with the OS that's been out a while as a stable version.

There are plenty of exmaples of this besides those involving EDA tools.

There are several classes of users, not just one. At home, I'm fine with buying a box and trying thing til it works, to a point. At work, when we need a new batch of servers or desktops right now, I can't afford the time to mess around with it. It needs to work out of the box.

Leverage the Fussiness

[Izaak]

While most of us fussy Linux geeks would be happy with Linux certified hardware with no OS, a smart vendor would cater to our fussiness. Here is an idea...

Choose the latest versions of the top few distros. Make them available as a pulldown on the order page. Also include options for customizing the partition sizes and installed software (within reasonable limits). Heck you could even include fields for customizing the network configuration so all you need to do when it arrives is plug it in and turn it on. All of this is fully automated so the labor cost after developing the initial web app and install engine is almost zero. This could be easily built from existing software components. Even the certification and testing of install permutations could be mostly automated.

Are you listening Dell? Tell you what, give me $50,000 and a month, and I'll build you a turnkey system that does this. It would be EASY.

Re:Yeah, and that's wrong. This game is almost ove

[GrievousMistake]

And their 'You must absolutely not under any circumstances reveal anything about your hardware to open source developers, or the terrorists^Wpirates will have won.' DRM agreements with the big MS?

Re:Yeah, and that's wrong. This game is almost ove

[Anonymous Coward]

All anyone cares about is to have hardware with free drivers, from there any distro can be installed. The continued acceptance of M$'s inferior GUI and software for "hardware compatibility" is proof that the vast majority of computer users just want the system to work and will put up with all sorts of security and performance issues to get that level of "convenience". If Dell would select or demand hardware with free drivers, every major gnu/linux distribution would work - that's not hard at all. Picky people are going to reinstall the OS anyway and no one will blame Dell for that.

Haha. Only a hardcore lunix zealot could make the claim that losing in the marketplace of ideas is a virtue. Linux has so little driver support because most people (and companies) don't see a single benefit to using Linux, especially on the desktop... to say nothing of on the laptop!

Well played, sir, well played. May I suggest a career with Fox News? They are one of the few places besides Slashdot which can truly appreciate a man of your talents... and they pay far better than Slashdot (meaning, they actually pay).

Anti-competitive pressure is what this ever boils down to. It will go away as hardware prices drop below $200 or so, because there's no room for software costs at that price point. That Dell is making noises like this now is good evidence that there's not much room for software costs at the $400 price point. The corporate price point is already there and that's why so many companies are dumping M$. The first vendor to deliver a $200 computer with nothing but free software on it is going to win big time and there's nothing M$ will be able to do about it.

I think the better question is why Linux performs so poorly in the marketplace, considering Microsoft is competing against FREE. I mean, really: how crappy does your free product have to be to lose?

Time to face facts: all things being equal, Linux can't compete with Windows on any front. Linux's security is provided by obscurity (don't believe me? Ask Security Tracker...), Linux's networking abilities are crude and pitiful compared to Active Directory, and Linux isn't even remotely user friendly. Shit, it isnt even tech friendly.

Here is a clue, maybe you guys can use this to help catch up to Windows 95's tail lights: stop making more goddamned text editors, and get people working on having Linux auto-detect and auto-config hardware. Also, how about finally getting your collective acts together and making a package installer which works cross platform? Because when Lunix's flagship product, Apache, can't even work on most distros without intense manual file moving and config file changes, something is very, very wrong (and has been for, like, forever).

Re:Yeah, and that's wrong. This game is almost ove

[ljc86]

All anyone cares about is to have hardware with free drivers, from there any distro can be installed.

All *we* care about (as current Linux users) is that. It will help boost Dell's sales of hardware to current Linux users, if they did take up that kind of policy.

Perhaps, though, the wider picture is that a pre-installed Linux would speed up adoption. Certainly, a pre-installed (and thus a configuration with hardware issues ironed out) Linux distro such as Ubuntu is perfectly capable for what, probably, a majority of people need. There are certainly very few users who actually *need* features which are difficult to use or install on Linux (gaming, complete compatibility with MS Office or a Windows specific program).

The audience Linux should be targetting is those who use their computers for the simple things - Web Browsing, E-mail and simple word processing/office suite work. By including Linux pre-installed on big manufacturers such as Dell, you will be hitting a large part of that audience. So what if someone buys it without understanding the difference between the OS's - it surely helps resolve ubuntu bug#1.

Re:Yeah, and that's wrong. This game is almost ove

[dedazo]

Oh, I guess this is what got me modded down:

OT, I don't know what Microsoft charges for OEM licenses over there (Denmark?), but I hope it's a hell of a lot more, because the people who run the EU are a bunch of lawless protectionist sucktards that think it's double plus OK to nail Microsoft with petty demands using stupid claims of "unfair competition" by Real, who could not compete with WMP (bad as WMP is) if their life depended on it with their horrible cuasi-spyware "products" that no one in their right mind would use unless they're forced-bundled with new boxes.

Damn, I must remember to do the slashbot thing. OK:

M$ Winblows (WIndoze!!) is teh suxx and Linux roolz!!1! Bwah, bwah, why can't Dell$ and every other company give me what I want?? Bwah, bwah.

My most sincere apologies to the drooling calf that wasted his mod points on me. Won't happen again.

Straight from the source!

[SanityInAnarchy]

Steve Jobs will hire you a high-class hooker and let you breast feed. For $129, it's a bargain, but it's still more than you wanted, especially if you wanted help getting to sleep.

Microsoft will give you a cheap hooker, only charge $99, but there's a good chance she's carrying something, so you better buy a condom for $19 from Norton. When that one wears out, the next one will cost $49, and you'll have to keep telling yourself it's cheaper... somehow...

Linux will have plenty of geek girls who'll fuck you for free, unless you are an idiot. Some call them ugly because they wear glasses and go back to sucking on the Apple teat. Others get confused when "Suck it, bitch" doesn't work, and go back to the Microsoft slut.

And the patient ones among us will be in love... We want to bring her home to our parents (Dell), but we can't, because we're taking this joke much, much too far.

Re:Straight from the source!

[zootm]

I think you forgot the part where Steve Jobs sells you a marginally more-attractive but for some reason infinitely tempting hooker every year for another $129.

Re: Shuttleworth who

[El_Oscuro]

I agree. The distro should be geared towards end users who barely know what Linux is. They are not going to reformat and install slackware or debian, or whatever. They are just going to plug theier computer in and expect everything to work.

This includes proprietory codecs like MP3 and DVDs. The users are not going to care if the driver or codec is open source or not, just that they can play MP3s and their frickin 3-D video card works right.

The most "Windows consumer friendly" distros out now are Ubuntu and Linspire http://www.linspire.com/linspire_letter.php/ (the new version which is Ubuntu based). And make sure all of the codecs and stuff work. No crappy geek user interfaces from sourceforge.

Also, providing a small (dead tree) manual on how to use the computer (open office, web browsing, email, MP3s and DVDs, installing software with CNR, etc, like SUSE) would be of great benefit to newbies, even if they are Windows power users.

I just want to know it works

[smchris]

[W]ould you be happy to receive a Dell box with no OS and with an Ubuntu disk in the box, which you yourself installed, with no support from Dell?

What if it came with an assurance that the set of components you had configured *should* work

Yes and Great. The important thing for me is that the hardware has been tested with "some" flavor, there are decent drivers available for everything and a dedicated community board is up for sharing info all in one place. That's the no-nonsense legwork that has value. If it came preinstalled with a version I can live with, that would be a bonus.

And _no_ Microsoft tax. Showing some backbone would be appreciated. A "linux tax" to pay for the above would be a different matter. Just so long as it doesn't go to Microsoft. :)

Re:Yeah, and that's wrong. This game is almost ove

[Anonymous Coward]

I don't see the part where I make scads more money than if I did nothing. It doesn't take a "genious" to see that either.

Yours truly,

M. Dell

You're overreacting.

[SanityInAnarchy]

Dell might have to manage one repository. Maybe. But they could easily just offer 2-3 packages to go with a vanilla Ubuntu setup. Consider that they seem to have very little trouble supporting Windows, and it's not as if they roll a Windows distro (if such a thing were possible).

Seriously, the rest of it? Config files, if even that. Have you tried a modern distro on a modern Dell lately? Most stuff works pretty well out of the box, including 3D acceleration -- hell, it isn't even far from there to Compiz. I suppose if you're picky, you want the "Internet" button, etc to work, but these things already exist for Linux, Dell would just have to have them installed and configured properly by default.

Also, Apple did a hell of a lot more than just put a proprietary GUI on top of BSD. Also, KDE is actually a good bit better than GNOME these days -- Linus makes some good points.

Re:Yeah, and that's wrong. This game is almost ove

[Blakey Rat]

the vast majority of computer users just want the system to work and will put up with all sorts of security and performance issues to get that level of "convenience".

You consider a computer that works a convenience? Wow, Linux users have LOW standards.

How so?

[SanityInAnarchy]

I much prefer "Two thumbscrews in the back" to "Four screws that make me get a screwdriver just to peek inside my case."

Right, to a degree...

[TemporalBeing]

Linux users may need to stop being so fussy when putting demands on OEMs for pre-installed Linux PCs

True to some degree or other. There are a number of linux users (though, I think this number is likely shrinking now) that are very vivacious about what distro they will use and so forth. These lively people may or may not buy a system from an OEM, but they are also making it harder for the rest of us who want to.

As others have noted (and I think this is the growing community consensus, or at least all the articles/comments I have read on this issue seems to be pointing that way, and I agree myself) that the real need is that the OEMs provide a way that is cheaper to buy a non-Windows system, even if there is no OS at all, and to ensure that the OS interfaces to the hardware are open and do not require NDAs (or minimally require NDAs that are not restrictive enough to prevent an open source OS device driver) so that the various open source OS's (BSDs, Linux distros, etc.) can support the hardware.

While yes, I would, of course, absolutely love it if an OEM took up my favorite distro (a tie between Gentoo and Slackware for me; Debian/Ubuntu and friends thereafter; but no RPMs for me - can't stand them), I see no reason why I should keep from purchasing from an OEM that built systems that were open enough that I could either (a) run it with a Linux distro provided by them, or more importantly (b) be able to get to work with my favorite distro if I so chose.

And, btw, I am (or rather will shortly be and am therefore starting to look now) in the market for laptops and desktops that are OEM provided that fully support Linux. (My wife wants Windows, and she may get it - but only to support the software she needs for her job.) It would still be nice to be able to buy a set of systems configured near identically that meets my needs and which I can run Linux on. If the OEM does not provide the distro of my choice, so what - I can always switch it over, but at least make it so that the hardware is supported at least to some degree by the Linux community in general, or at least can be supported, so that I can use my own distro either right away or in a short time thereafter (e.g. waiting for a beta or release driver to hit the kernel).

I think more people would be open to being able to at least get supported hardware from an OEM. Which distro is a secondary issue.

No, that's not the same thing.

[twitter]

Didn't Walmart do exactly that a couple of years back, with Lindows preinstalled?

You might be referring to a few low end deals like:

• $500 laptop from 2004.
• $400 Desktop from 2002.

The prices were lower, but never much less than Windoze system prices at the same time. The savings were not passed along to the customer to help overcome the perceived risk. Moreover, the systems were never really promoted and I never saw one in a store. Crummy hardware, same price, no advertising, that's not exactly a recipe for success. At the same time, I don't know if they systems actually lost money. As far as Wallmart goes, relation ship with M$ is muddy, and you should do as they do not as they sell.

A company like Dell is in an entirely different position. They have the size to get low hardware costs and can make a dramatic price difference and still make good money. Obviously, the demand is there and the perceived risk is much smaller.

Re:No, that's not the same thing.

[mdfst13]

You might be referring to a few low end deals like: ...
The prices were lower, but never much less than Windoze system prices at the same time. No, I think that your parent was referring to the $249 deals from Wintergreen, et. al. As I recall, Lindows (this was before the name change) got down as cheap as $200 ($199) on at least one configuration. People were buying them to install their copies of Microsoft Windows on them. They were in fact about $200 or $300 cheaper. As others have noted, less than $100 of that was software costs. Like you said, crummy hardware.

The same site bottoms out with a $499 Vista PC. However, the specs are much better (e.g. twice as much RAM to meet Vista's minimum).

It's also worth noting that the $500 laptop was also much smaller than most other laptops (about three pounds). If you compared it to other laptops of the same weight, it was a third the price and had similar specs (all the ultralights had last generation CPUs). For example, a modern equivalent is Fujitsu Lifebook P7230 which costs about $1700.

Re:No, that's not the same thing.

[Anonymous Coward]

"Windoze"? "M$"? Are you for real?

Why even bother the OEM?

[Kyokugenryu]

You all know full well you'd just format and reinstall it the way YOU wanted it installed, anyway.

There's a reason these drivers are trade secrets.

[SgtSnorkel]

. . . and that's to hide the fact that there's not much that's special about the hardware. The pool of chips from which I/O devices are made is pretty small. Modern WiFi cards are each based on one of a small handful of "solution" chips, for example. Of course, manufacturers don't want to admit this -- their product is different and special, after all! The order of a few bits/bytes in a hardware control block don't make for much innovation.

Finite Cost Good

[Siker]

2. Such a programme would have a finite cost-per-system

As opposed to those pesky infinite costs. I hate it when one of those sneak into your cost-per-system. One day you're doing fine but the next day all the world's money is being sucked into one of your line items.

Re:Finite Cost Good

[replicant108]

Perhaps that was a poor choice of words.

What I meant was: limited, predictable, measurable, one-off.

Which means that the business risk is also limited.

Why Dell and not System 37?

[Siker]

Maybe I missed something but I don't see why it's so important for some people here that Dell in particular sells their system. If Dell doesn't sell the system you want, why not just go to a seller that does? It seems to me that you would get all the benefits that have been discussed in the comments above: a system that's pre-installed with Linux and hardware that's been checked and double checked for Linux compatibility. Who knows, if you vote with your wallet maybe there will be a day where the pre-installed Linux market is large enough to support a pro Linux decision on Dell's side.

As it stands I can't imagine Dell selling Linux machines for any other reason than as a publicity stunt. Even that is far fetched. The support costs would be enormous.

Just a live CD

[Anonymous Coward]

Just pick up hardware working with Linux and a live CD like Knoppix

Then the custoner could install his distro of choice, there is no need to be preinstalled

Re:Yeah, and that's wrong. This game is almost ove

[turbidostato]

"I don't see the part where I make scads more money than if I did nothing. It doesn't take a "genious" to see that either."

Maybe that's why you see falling your sells by about a 20% in most markets and lost the #1 position in favour of HP.

Linux is a very promising market for your servers and opening to Debian can and will open you quite more sells. And, remember the threat about admins installing whatever they have in their desktops or the other way around? Those people that can have their servers fully compatible with Linux (by making them compatible with Debian) are first rate candidates to buy desktops (not only their own but others within the company too).

Re:Yeah, and that's wrong. This game is almost ove

[Anonymous Coward]

Let me narrow it down for you :

OT, I don't know what Microsoft charges for OEM licenses over there (Denmark?), but I hope it's a hell of a lot more, because the people who run the EU are a bunch of lawless protectionist sucktards that think it's double plus OK to nail Microsoft with petty demands using stupid claims of "unfair competition" by Real, who could not compete with WMP (bad as WMP is) if their life depended on it with their horrible cuasi-spyware [sic] "products" that no one in their right mind would use unless they're forced-bundled with new boxes.

Re:Yeah, and that's wrong. This game is almost ove

[EsbenMoseHansen]

The price that a company like Dell gets on an OEM version of Windows XP Home is about $38. For smaller OEMs it's about $43-45. XP Pro must be around ten dollars over that (which is why I HATE IT when they charge almost $100 to upgrade, but that's hardly Microsoft's fault). Vista pushed up the OEM license prices by about three to five dollars for the XP equivalents, and possibly more for things like the Ultimate version (but probably didn't break the $55 barrier). Then add whatever margin Dell uses, and you will end up with something not completely unlike what I said, especially if you consider the prices in the respective countries.

In short, nothing that would justify twitter's claim that a PC that goes for $400 should go for $200 because of "M$" or whatever.

I agree. Maybe $349 might go for $299 or whatever. Significant, but not not 50%.

OT, I don't know what Microsoft charges for OEM licenses over there (Denmark?), but I hope it's a hell of a lot more, because the people who run the EU are a bunch of lawless protectionist sucktards that think it's double plus OK to nail Microsoft with petty demands using stupid claims of "unfair competition" by Real, who could not compete with WMP (bad as WMP is) if their life depended on it with their horrible cuasi-spyware "products" that no one in their right mind would use unless they're forced-bundled with new boxes.

Nothing personal =)

Glad you got that off your chest, then. I do believe that such laws are pretty much the same in the US.. in fact, I vaguely recall a settlement in the US. But out of interest... how can you be lawless and protectionist? Holding up ships at gunpoint and demand taxes upon arriving at a EU port?

Re:Yeah, and that's wrong. This game is almost ove

[squidsuk]

you are theorizing that "M$" adds hundreds of dollars to the cost of a PC. Would you care to back that claim up for us? Do you actually claim that the $200 computer does not exist because of "M$"?

I actually read GP's post slightly differently, that at a hardware price point of $400 there isn't much room for software costs, e.g. if those were $50-$100. And that as hardware becomes ever cheaper, at a hardware price point of $200, there's even less room, it starts to be a bigger and bigger proportion of the total price.

When I was playing around a while back with an on-line configurator, not a big-brand like Dell, but that at least gave me the choice of Linux or Windows + Office then add in other proprietary software, I found you didn't need a lot of software for up to 50% of the price to be software costs, very often for programs where there is a decent free/libre equivalent for most users requirements. Probably those prices were higher than Dell might p[ay, but even so...

Not fussy... IF...

[garwain]

I wouldn't be so fussy or complain about OEM machines if they offered a no-OS choice! Since very few OEM machines offer a no-OS choice (if any) while offering decent hardware (ie not emachine) I usually end up paying more to build the system since I can't get the volume pricing these guys get! I think I'll probably be building a lot more now since my clients are going to be less likely to buy a VISTA system, and only the medium/large buisness section is still offering XP...

About the Vaio laptop...

[Hitto]

That's true, I actually had to pry open the damn thing because I was short on some non-4-side screwdriver whose name I can't remember now because I'm high, but let's just say I understand why they say "to cannibalise a dead laptop", it's pretty gory.

Re:Yeah, and that's wrong. This game is almost ove

[Anonymous Coward]

Debian (and almost all other distributions) includes non free firmware in the kernel.
gNewSense (www.gnewsense.org) is a GNU/Linux distribution based in Ubuntu, that does NOT includes non free firmware in the kernel, and only has free drivers and free software. Thus, if a hardware is compatible with gNewSense, it is compatible with all GNU/Linux distributions.

sticks neck out and says 'you're all wrong'

[Ximogen]

OK so some of the Dell enterprise kit isn't bad from a hardware point of view (apart from too much of it being expensive & proprietary), but we seem to be talking 'cheap consumer kit' here and I'll come back to that phrase later.

Like it or not being a Linux user makes you a specialist (or possibly just 'special') user and on the whole a more experienced user. So, the thing that is confusing me is why would you want to buy anything from Dell?

I'll grant that up until the early 90's they were OK (but back then all PCs were expensive and proprietary) since then I can't think of any reason why anyone who knows what they want would look to Dell. The quality enterprise kit is too expensive (and proprietary), the consumer kit is cheap and nasty (sometimes without the 'cheap' bit). You order a specific specification and get something else delivered or you are quoted one price and your credit card is charged a different price. Components are sourced for cost not quality, or even value for money. Support sucks and on top of that you only have to read the previous comments here to see that Dell are not great in any respect.

So given all that, if you buy cheap consumer kit, you get cheap consumer kit. Live with it, you bought it because it was cheap not because it was a quality product from a quality company.

I consider myself to be a specialist user (and not entirely fitting within the expected norms of the society in which I live), as I use a PC for music production. As a result I have very particular requirements from my PC so I save up a bit more money, go to a good system builder who uses quality components and provides the service I expect.

The result is I get what I want, I know how it will perform and I can have any combination of hardware, OS and software I believe to be necessary to meet my requirements as a specialist user.

On the other hand my partner is an average, consumer level user of technology so she buys cheap consumer notebooks that may need a bit of 'fixing up' when they arrive but hey, they are cheap.

Well I think I've made my point, buy the kit for the job and it you go for cheap consumer kit then live with the crap that makes it cheap consumer kit.

Re:Yeah, and that's wrong. This game is almost ove

[turbidostato]

"Debian (and almost all other distributions) includes non free firmware in the kernel."

In any case it's free enough to redistribute, or else it wouldn't be in Debian, and since we are talking about a hardware controller there's no real (or usual) need to change it once it's working properly (and it *has* to be working properly: remember we are talking here about certified hardware). It insures it will remain working on future versions of the wrapping software as well. It's good enough for me.

"gNewSense [...] does NOT includes non free firmware in the kernel, and only has free drivers and free software"

That obviously would be even better... if it would happen that anyone knew or was using gNewSense which is not the case, or if at the very least it would have a known, wide and stable community wrapping it (which being an Ubuntu-dependant -which happens to be a Debian dependant, distribution doesn't have).

I think this is quite the "syndrome" Shuttleworth was talking about: I don't only want for the hardware to run good enough with Linux (which I think saying "Debian" would make for a well-ballanced, good-enough choice) but I want it to run on *my* petty distribution which happens to almost nobody else use or know about.