Slashdot Mirror
Dell to Sell Machines with Ubuntu Pre-Loaded
kotj.mf writes "Cnet is reporting that Dell will shortly announce a partnership with Canonical to offer Ubuntu pre-loaded on certain consumer-oriented desktops and notebooks. The announcement comes after a groundswell of support for pre-installed Linux on Dell's IdeaStorm site. 'The company is starting its business by trying to appeal to users of desktop computers. From there, Canonical Chief Executive Mark Shuttleworth has said, the company plans to head to the server market, where the real Linux bread and butter can be found. [Dell spokesman Kent] Cook wouldn't comment on whether Dell plans to offer Ubuntu on its servers as well.'."
I think we owe this to Microsoft. This would never have happened were it not for Vista.
People on the Internet (places like Slashdot in particular) have been begging Dell for this for years. Now, it's time to see how many of those people were doing it just on principle or to be part of the crowd, and how many did it because they actually were planning on purchasing such a box.
Dell may offer this, but I guarantee they won't be advertising it as heavily as they do their Windows boxes, so the only real way for it to work, at least to start off, is for all these people that were begging for Dells with Ubuntu loaded on them to go out and buy a Dell with Ubuntu loaded on it. Joe Blow won't be buying these yet, not until there are enough early adopters out there to generate a buzz.
Now lets see if half of those people that voted for Linux on the ideastorm site actually buy a machine. Because if this flops it will seriously hurt Linux in the mainstream market.
Kilroy was here.
It's kind of silly to say that Dell isn't already making tons of money on the Linux server market. After all, Dell sells tons of server hardware with no OS pre-loaded. Quite a lot of those servers end up with Linux on them. Most companies will have their own images of Linux that they use for their servers, so preloading it is a waste of time. Any pre-loaded image will just get blown away anyway.
i remember seeing dell machines that offered linux instead of windows in the past.. but the prices were the same or HIGHER for linux! Dell will need to address this, and offer these dellbuntu boxes at lower price. the OS is free! if they need to include a price to cover support costs, it should still not be equal to or greater than the cost of including Vista!
So we're expecting a flood of people complaining about how they are offering one specific distro, and none others. The big worry here was that few people would be happy with whatever 1 distro was picked, and picking many, and subsequently supporting them, would be a problem.
so my question: As I feel about it - I was under the impression that the idea behind getting linux pre-loaded was that you simply aren't paying for an OS you don't want. IIRC, it has been awhile, or it has never been possible, to get a blank HD with your system from dell. Personally, I think this would be the best option. Linux, configured totally-not-the-way-I-want -it would be one step better, as I'm not shelling out the $235345 for windows, which I'm just going to delete anyway.
Don't get me started on how when a relative or co-worker buys one of these things, you have to format the computer just to get rid of all of the annoyware that comes with it. (Mcafee! Musicmatch jukebox? Qualcomm service agreement? WTF is this agreement that comes pre-installed and pre-agreed to? )
Am I under the wrong impression here, or can we be happy just to not have windows pre-loaded, and not be paying for something that is going to get deleted?
Do we really have to argue about whether or not Ubuntu was the way to go? I can't imagine a single person in this crowd who would be happy with the way dell will set it up, and if the argument is that it will introduce linux to the masses, well, I just don't see that happening. The only people who don't already know what they're doing who wind up ordering a dell box with linux already on it are only going to order it because of the cost discount.
Then they'll do one of two things:
Ask you to show them how to use it (ugh)
pirate/buy windows.
So, my original question: We're happy because this primarily means not paying for windows when we're not using it, right? What other benefits are there?
Do they plan to sell this on less capable machines because the drivers just aren't available for the latest and greatest of options? Or, will they still sell you a machine with the hottest hardware, but no ability to use it?
Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it everywhere, diagnosing it incorrectly and applying the wrong fix.
...is a hardware platform that consumers are guaranteed will work with a particular distribution of Linux. It doesn't even matter which one it is as long as it comes, out of the box, ready for use. That's the only thing that, so far, Windows has always had up on any distro of Linux.
.... this is more about painting Microsoft into a corner by first flipping back to selling XP on some of their systems, and now this. I suspect that Dell is going to be in a very interesting position when they go to re-negotiate their OEM agreement with Microsoft where they can try and dictate the terms that they want.
This is my opinion. To make sure you don't steal it, it's covered by the DMCA.
Sorry, but it just doesn't have the same ring to it.
Sometimes you just have to take leadership and make a choice. It may not be the perfect choice, but it's a final decision that will get things rolling forward. I already know there will be a billion posts arguing why another distribution is better than another, but the point is moot. Ubuntu is a great distro. There are other distros out there that are great too. Distrowatch ranks it at #1 in popularity. Also, the choice of Ubuntu will make many in the community happy as Ubuntu isn't controversial with its licensing. A high quality, popular, FOSS distro. They could have made other choices, but I think Ubuntu will make the most amount of people happy, is an extremely safe decision, and they only have to support a single distro.
If an officer ever threatens to taze you, say you have a pacemaker.
Does it run Li...ooh, it does!
Now I can buy my first Dell w/ Ubuntu loaded already for me *tears up* it's a beautiful day :)
Ubuntu on servers is a bad, bad idea. It'd be like running your hardware on Debian Sid all of the time with neither thought nor care as to the consequences.
I tend to agree with most of your statement. I wouldn't run Feisty on a server, but I would/do run Dapper 6.06 LTS, it's been in the market over a year. I've been running it on a couple production servers for 6 months now, haven't had a single issue with it. At least Ubuntu server doesn't install X by default either, I'm looking at you SuSE and Red Hat.
root@allevil:~#
I've been using it on one of my servers (samba,cups,apache,java,postgresql) and it works quite well. So far, it's been significantly nicer to deal with than the CentOS 4.x install it replaced.
"The Federal Reserve is a fraudulent system."--Lew Rockwell
End The FED. -
http://geekblog.oneandoneis2.org/index.php/2007/03 /29/linux_on_dell
(To the tune of "Road to Hell")
Well I'm here to place an order
But there's a choice I don't know
It's weathered every crisis you can think of
And I came here to buy Vista
But the Windows joy I know
Is priced beyond belief way down in the shadows
And the need for anti-virus
Chokes the smile on every face
And common sense is screaming, "What the Hell!?"
This ain't no technological breakdown
Oh no, this is Linux on Dell
And I don't need to ask for credit
And there's nothing they can do
But watch the E.U.L.A.s, flying away from you
Oh look out world, take a good look
What goes down here
You must learn not to have fear of the G.P.L.
This ain't no vendor lock-in-forced upgrade
Oh no!
This is Linux
This is Linux
This is Linux on Dell
So.. it has come to this
CIO: "Let's see now, you're a startup incorporated two months ago, with no past experience building a Linux distro and no track record of reliability or usability. I've asked my tech people about you, but you're generally unknown to them. You want us to trust our enterprise servers to you?" *hysterical laughter* "No."
as opposed to:
CIO: "I see you've for the last few years have built a generally acclaimed Linux distribution focused on the desktop and usability. and fairly stably as desktop distributions go. Those of my techs that have tried it gives it high prise. Now you're telling me you'd like to expand on this to provide more server-oriented solutions? Of course I expect a good price and tight follow-up from your support since your new in this market, but you've got your foot in the door."
Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
"Do you honestly think that the Windows user who can't be bothered to download Linux is going to jump at the chance to buy a machine with it on?"
Do you honestly that Joe is going to opt for the $800 "vista ready" computer when it looks as though the $500 "ubuntu loaded" one is right next to it on the virtual shelf?
PS, Joe: you don't have to pony up another $200 for Office, either.
My turnips listen for the soft cry of your love
People are stupid. Why do you think people run out and buy a $40,000 SUV while gas prices are nearing $4 a gallon and the only use is to get groceries and haul around their 1.5 kids? Why do you think people are running out to buy a hybrid, when right now the best technology we can implement for the batteries only suggest a life of 3 years and the battery is the majority of the value of the car? Same people are buying computers. Why do you think some of the worst systems make the most money? The average person doesn't know DDR RAM from a Dodge RAM, so when they walk in to buy a system they look at 3 key things: Price, Style, and Prestige. If the laptop looks like a brown box with lights, but boasts the best stats in the world, they average consumer will walk right past it for the Dell or HP that looks cuter. The operating system is all part of the style of the machine. If the OS looks good but not intimidating, they will love it. When it comes to price, if the laptop costs $900 with XP and a system costs $800 with Linux, they will most likely go with the cheaper solution (provided they are not looking for specific applications that are windows specific, and the sales person does not down talk the cheaper system for commission). The prestige of a product comes form the water cooler gossip. If the office has a bunch of wanna be techs, then they will be talking up linux like there's no tomorrow. If the office is full of ignorant users, they will probably be down talking linux because they can't figure it out and all they see are limitations. This is the area that will most greatly affect the sales of the systems. If it's "cool" to have more people are likely to buy it. A great example of this is the ipod trend. Ipods are nothing special, in fact they lack 80% of the features of the better MP3/Video players on the market, but they have all 3 areas covered. They are cute and simple, they are cheap, and they are the "cool" thing to have right now.
Was Ubuntu chosen because of one distros community being more vocal then others or was it because it has the best compatibility with hardware. Sure Ubunty might be the most popular distro atm but seems like with Linux this changes quite often and I always see the "flavor of the month" distros appear and loose their ground quite often.
What will Dell do if another distro takes the number one spot?
by TheSpoom (715771) Uncaring Linux user here. I have nothing to add to this but please continue. *munches popcorn*
UbuntuNewbie: "I'm having a problem with my new computer".
DellSupportDrone: "Hi, I'm Bob from Wheatfield, Kansas - how can I help you?"
UbuntuNewbie: "Well, it works OK but I don't like the color scheme, how to I get the bright blues and reds my old computer had?"
DellSupportDrone: "Is the computer plugged in?."
UbuntuNewbie: "Yep, I did that.Like I said, it works OK but ... "
DellSupportDrone: "OK, reboot the computer three or four times."
UbuntuNewbie: "But...."
DellSupportDrone: "If that doesn't work, reinstall the operating system."
UbuntuNewbie: But...."
DellSupportDrone: "Thanks for calling Dell Support, have a nice day!"
Click
See, no problem. They don't even need to change the script.
Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
I can happily use Linux for most desktop stuff, but I still "need" Windows to play my games. I want to get the Linux certified hardware, but I also want OEM pricing on my Vista license. I don't want to have to go buy Vi$ta Ultimate retail.
So here is the dilemma: - I want the linux hardware and they will probably only offer it with Linux OS. But I want the Vista OS too at OEM pricing. If I buy the Vista box, that is a lost sale for Linux. If I buy the Linux box, I have to go spend extra money for Vista.
Hopefully Dell will offer pre-loaded dual boot or a Linux-ready box with Vista that will count as a "Linux" sale
[Cue monkey boy dance]. The biggest benefit that could come out of this for *all* Linux users would be better hardware support. If manufactures think that "Hey, no Linux driver means we're not supporting part of Dell's consumer line" they might get serious about writing (open?) drivers or at least making it easier for the community to support their stuff.
:-) It would be so great if you could just assume that any random printer would totally work with Linux...
And if Linux can end up being 5% of Dell's consumer sales (though even that might be optimistic) it's going to have a huge effect - because Dell is more likely to bundle stuff that will work with their entire line, not just 95% of it. Supporting one type of hardware is cheaper than two. (Though, of course, so it supporting only one kind of OS, which is how we got here
works for some products, but not everything. Your coke/pepsi/generic cola example is about a cheap and quickly consumed product. If they don't really like the generic,it will only last a short while and is cheap enough that they can toss it out if it is truly horrible.
Where windows/linux is concerned, let me relate a recent experience. My nephew just moved out of his parents house and out from behind the router and firewall I had configured. He got dsl and hooked it up to straight from the modem and into his computer. Guess what? Within three days he couldn't run either IE or firefox, they would just crash when launched. Before, he hadn't really appreciated the delicate nature of windows or the importance of a good firewall.
I installed the newly released Ubuntu 7.04 and he is tickled. He can do everything that he needs with totally free (in every respect) software. I showed him some windows games running under wine on my laptop and he was interested, but since he is now working and going to school, games are not as important. We haven't even bothered fixing his winxp install yet. His roommate was watching me setup Beryl and was asking a lot of questions about this linux thing, completely surprised at the maturity and features of the new Ubuntu. Brand awareness of Windows and Microsoft is very high with both of those guys, but seeing the differences in action has greatly tempered any effects of that awareness.
Kindness is the language which the deaf can hear and the blind can see. - Mark Twain
Don't confuse the slashdot population versus the general population. The general population never even got enough of a whiff of vista to stop buying PCs with it on it.
You are right, but that's because people here have not seen anything to justify the cost of Vista. At the very least, "everyone" knows to avoid Vista till M$ cleans it up, drivers are written for it and there are enough applications that work to make it worth while. At worst for M$, the free software message of freedom has convinced many that digital restrictions are costly and unacceptable.
I have nothing against Linux but the fanboism is really starting to stink up the place.
That's nothing next to Microsoft spam posts and astroturf.
Really though, if you don't have GNU/Linux as your primary home desktop right now, you have something against Linux. The only thing M$ has over GNU/Linux is accelerated video drivers, but Nvidia and ATI have those for you and the overall effort is no more or less than that required to set up and keep running a Windoze box. Dell's move into the scene might even eliminate that difference, because they will take the time to get all that non free shit to work. Outside that, gnu/linux networking, applications and window management rule for cost, ease of use and upkeep effort. Technical excellence is in favor of free software and has been for a long time.
Somehow I doubt the more vocal fanbois in this cause are going to take up the banner of actually shelling out the bucks. Mouthpieces normally stop when their toe touches the waters, so to speak.
How many coppies of Vista have you bought? Funny how M$'s revenue uptick did nothing for Dell, now isn't it?
The general population goes where the "experts" tell them. I've got no need for a new computer because my six year old hardware does what I need it to do. People with virused out computers now have a less expensive option that's going to get a lot of recommendations. Think about it. Is the houshold IT guy going to replace his mom's broken XP machine with more of the same or is he going to spare himself all that pain and trobout by getting her a nice little Ubuntu machine that does everything needed out of the box? Hell, I might even be tempted to get something a smaller, quieter in the next year or so and Dell just got on my radar.
The corporate market may move even faster. M$ and Dell expended a lot of effort getting exclusive contracts with government agencies and big companies. Dell offering those people computers that work with anything but M$ has given M$ nightmares since 2002. Good on them! Ha ha.
2007 is the year of GNU/Linux.
Friends don't help friends install M$ junk.
The most important reason is the lack of explosion. Linux is robust in a way that neither Windows nor OSX can even approach. If an app blows up on Windows, it often takes out the GUI which takes out the whole system. On Linux, if the app crashes, you can almost always kill the app. If not, sometimes the window system blows up, and then you find yourself back at the login prompt when it restarts. It almost never takes down the whole system.
Add to that same reason the lack of viruses, worms, and other infections, and you've got yourself the most stable and reliable platform out there.
Linux with wine can actually run a huge body of the most important Windows software, but Windows doesn't run Linux software without actually running Linux under Windows (colinux, vmware, etc) and then using an X server on Windows and displaying the apps back. But that tends to be slow, especially with OpenGL applications - and that tends to be crashy as well.
Add to that the many pieces of top-quality Free/free software on Linux, and yes, I can come up with a significant number of reasons to run it. But the only one that's important for the home user is that they can websurf and email with all the usual trimmings without having to worry about getting owned.
Another important reason for ALL users, though, is the lack of lock-in. So what if your flavor and version of Linux becomes unsupported? The next one will work in much the same way, run the same software, and open the same file formats. Plus, it won't cost you hundreds of dollars. Or even a dollar.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"