Slashdot Mirror
Why You Can't Buy a Naked PC
ZDOne writes "A piece up on ZDNet looks at the issue of naked PCs. ZDNet UK phoned around all the major PC vendors and not one of them would sell a machine without Windows on it. IT professionals are being forced to adopt Microsoft's operating systems — even if they tell their PC supplier they want a system free of Microsoft software. On the other hand, even if it's almost impossible to buy a PC without an operating system installed, companies like Dell and HP are now committed to supporting Linux as well. 'Murray believes there is a market for Linux in the UK but is also aware of the issues facing any large supplier who wants to make Linux boxes available. "It means diverting production lines and that is a lot of money and so we have to prove the business case," he said. However, he made it clear that he is enthusiastic about the idea and wants to make it work. "We just have to show it is worthwhile," he said.'"
I don't get it. You get the Win for "free" (or less) due to the nagware installed. Why not just get the pc with linux-capable components, let the advertizers pay for your unused copy of windows, and install your favorite flavor of linux (or whatever you plan on using)?
I have yet to get a new pc I didn't re-image or install from scratch anyway. If I used linux I'm certain I wouldn't like the vendor's setup any more than I like their win installs. Too many custom setting to get these kinds of things to work they way we use them. If the windows is effectively free, and you have to do a reinstall anyway, why not just ignore it?
Oh, right - it's far more appropriate to whine about it.
Is it just my observation, or are there way too many stupid people in the world?
I think it's a bit more complicated. Sure we know that, historically, Microsoft has engaged in anti-competitive practices like "the Microsoft Tax". But I would think that Dell, HP, and the others are probably equally scared of people like my friend "Joe". He's cheap as (fill in your preferred perjorative here), and if he could save a few bucks buying a PC without an OS he'd do it. Problem is, he is not tech savvy in the least - so he'd get some cut-rate version of Windows one way or the other, try - and fail - to install it, then spend hours on the phone with Dell arguing over "why their computer is broken". I've tried helping him with tech problems over the phone before, and I'll tell you - it's like pulling teeth getting just basic information from him.
When the vendors claim they don't want to sell naked PCs because of the potential support nightmare, I believe them. It's not the Slashdot crowd that's the problem; but there are 100 "Joe"s for every 1 Slashdotter.
#DeleteChrome
You are assuming that the amounts paid by the entities described
are passed on to the consumer in some way. It is entirely possible
that the amounts find their way, in part or in whole, to the
companies bottom line instead.
emt 377 emt 4
I'd wager that there's not enough consumer demand (or business consumers) for naked PC's. but there are other factors as well. one, there is but one windows, and dell, et al., can taylor it to their machines and make it work at least out of the box. no, they don't have the control over it as they would linux, but they have enough. when you screw with the machine, it's you screwing with it. and help is much easier, and cheaper, when there's a single OS. imagine having to figure out the distro, the kernel, etc. it'd be a disaster.
that linux is "free" in all senses for you and me, doesn't make it free for dell, etc. to add an OS would be very expensive and to provide none (for every comptuer), would terribly diminish their product. the OS for dell is a complementary good without which, they couldn't sell their product. not to defend MS or dell, but the truth is, MS is well within their rights to demand that dell sell a copy with every machine to get a volume discount, ability to modify it, etc. but the bottom line is that there just isn't enough interest to justify naked PC's. however, notice Dell's server line. you can get them, which ought to tell you something.
My problem? I was perfectly gruntled, until some numbnuts came by and dissed me.
In 1994 I tried to buy a bare desktop PC from Dell or Gateway. Since it was to replace my old dead IBM PC (dead after 13 months), I didn't need a new OS. But both Dell and Gateway insisted I buy a new license of Windows anyway.
These days when I buy a laptop, it comes with Windows. When the laptop dies, I can't transfer the license to another PC. They simply don't even provide OS or recovery CDs/DVDs.
So much for the DOJ's Anti-trust agreement with Microsoft. Nothing has changed.
The point is that no one would complain about Microsoft refusing to sell a computer without Windows on it. If Apple was strong-arming Dell,HP and whichever other manufacturers do this to install OS X on their machines I think people would have the same complaints.
But then, people might really start asking questions they don't want to answer.
Because is easier for someone to type "format c:/"
and subtract $70 from the price than for their
customer to assemble a computer from parts.
The fact that they don't is due to a predatory monopoly
distorting the free market.
Why do YOU think that linux users should assemble their
own machine?
This is about independent companies seemingly unable to offer an alternative when alternatives exist.
Ford, GM, et.al offer tires from one than one manufacturer, stereos from different manufacturers etc...
If you think imaginary property and real property are the same, when does your house become public domain?
Why is this relevant? Microsoft doesn't sell computers. Apple do. It's no surprise that Apple-branded computers run Apple's OS. Microsoft-branded computers I'd fully expect to run a Microsoft OS. But ... where can I get such a thing from?
Dell, OTOH, let me buy a laptop with either Intel Integrated Graphics, or an nVidia graphics card (even tho it's otherwise the same model!). Why shouldn't I think it reasonable to be able to buy a laptop with the operating system I prefer, too?
Look out!
Generally though, if someone really wants a naked pc, they are probably capable of building it from parts.
Capable, yes. Able to justify it to their employer in a commercial environment? Probably not. It would go something like this:
"You want to do what?"
"Instead of buying these PCs from Dell, which come with a copy of Windows we don't need, I want to buy parts and assemble them into computers myself."
"How much money do we save?"
"About fifty dollars per machine."
"How long will this take?"
"Including testing, about half an hour per machine."
"OK. What about warranties?"
"All the parts will be warrantied for one year."
"The parts. Not the computers."
"Yes."
"So when one breaks, instead of returning the entire machine for service, you have to diagnose which part is faulty before we can return it."
"Yes."
"How long will that take?"
"About half an hour per incident."
"How much am I paying you?"
"Forty dollars per hour."
"If we ever decided to install Windows, how much would it cost to get copies to replace the ones we'll not be buying"
"About a hundred dollars each."
"Go call Dell."