Lenovo Delivers SuSE Linux-Based ThinkPads

angryfirelord notes a DesktopLinux article on Lenovo's promise to deliver ThinkPads with pre-installed Novell SuSE Linux Enterprise Desktop 10 in the week of January 14. Quoting: "Lenovo will release pre-installed SLED 10 on its Intel Centrino processor-powered ThinkPad T61 and R61 14-inch-wide notebooks. In February, Lenovo's pre-integrated Novell Linux offering will expand to include some Penryn-based ThinkPads. The starting price for this system will be $949, $20 less than the same laptop with Vista Home Premium."

Comments

MS tax

[tsa]

The starting price for this system will be $949, $20 less than the same laptop with Vista Home Premium.

But since the OS is Suse, you still pay a Microsoft tax, am I right? I wonder when we will finally be able to buy laptops without any OS at all on them.

Re:MS tax

[SerpentMage]

Everybody complains about the MS Tax because of the prices they see at the retail level. Folks see how much the OS costs in the store. But at the OEM level the OS costs are not that bad. Maybe this 20 USD is a bit low, but I can't see it more than 50 USD difference.

That's why I personally don't see Linux happening on the desktop. If two comparable laptops have a price differential of max 50 USD I think most people would say, "Oh hey why not Windows after all most stuff is compatible with Windows." Linux does not actually stand a chance.

After all, OSX, which is even more expensive than Windows and Linux is making inroads by many. The moral of the story is that on the desktop I don't think price of operating system is the major decision maker. People want things to work out of the box without any hassles

On the server side there is a huge price differential and that's also why I think Linux did make inroads on the server side.

Re:MS tax

[sewalg]

Why do people using Linux need to know how to install it? Clearly, many people buy a laptop with Windows but have absolutely no idea how to install it or, for that matter, how it works. In fact, its this type of person who is IBM's biggest market. Surely, IBM's goal is to reduce any barrier to the uptake of these machines in that market. I'd say that's why they've chosen to support a particular brand of Linux rather than offer a cleanskin computer.

Also, on the subject of cost, have you any idea how much it will cost IBM to train and establish a support mechanism for these machines? I'd say a $20 saving is a pleasant surprise more than anything. Even price parity between Linux and Windows machines would be difficult to achieve early on, given the heavy discounting of MS products for OEMs, and the huge outlay IBM must have made to establish enough of a support network to bring these laptops to market!

Re:MS tax

[Syonax]

The OEM price of windows is much more than 50 dollars.

I managed to buy a thinkpad T60 in the Netherlands a few weeks ago with a preemptive windows (XP) refund. The dealer removed the OS and gave me a discount for the OEM price, which was 129.71 euros, about 190 dollars.

I would have been happy for Lenovo to give that money to a random linux distribution, but now I can decide myself which one gets it.

Re:MS tax

[tsa]

My use of 'MS tax' may be a bit wrong. By 'MS tax' I meant you pay MS a price for not being prosecuted for patent violations in the Linux OS. Novell made this deal with MS, remember? Sorry for being unclear.

Re:MS tax

[1u3hr]

have you any idea how much it will cost IBM to train and establish a support mechanism for these machines?

Do you know that it will cost more than training support for Windows?

One thing I do know is that the DRM in Windows makes support a big pain. You can't easily roll out a custom boot disc, for instance, to solve problems. In fact, I sometimes use Linux boot discs to fix Windows myself.

Also, Thinkpads are made by "Lenovo", not "IBM" these days. Though IBM probably still provides many services.

Re:MS tax

[Antique Geekmeister]

Not Windows, Vista. The support costs of Vista are so high, and it remains so fragile in customer environments, that SuSE may well be a fiscal benefit for Lenovo to provide instead, irrelevant of the greater retail cost of Vista.

This is certainly the case right now for Windows XP and Vista, as numerous laptop and desktop retailers have learned to their dismay.

Re:MS & Novell, sitin in a tree.

[Anonymous Coward]

Lenovo had an informal poll of their users about which Linux distribution they would like to see Lenovo implement.

Votes were about 23,000 for Ubuntu and about 800 for SuSe.

So, in an effort to listen to their customers, and make a success of Linux on Lenovo laptops, Lenovo have decided to offer ... WTF???

MS-Blessed Linux

[turgid]

Strange, that, how when Microsoft officially blesses a Linux distribution by investing in it and making all sorts of ridiculous patent/IP claims, a major PC manufacturer brings out a line of laptops with MS Linux. You can bet that Microsoft is making exactly the same amount of money on each Linux "sale" as each Windows sale, or maybe more.

Re:MS-Blessed Linux

[turgid]

I care about Microsoft trying to subvert Linux. I couldn't care less about the money per se, but I worry about the lies and FUD they're putting before the PHBs of this world. And the implied legal threats.

Dumping

[mangu]

Folks see how much the OS costs in the store. But at the OEM level the OS costs are not that bad

Then the real question is why do the OEMs get all that discount? Is that legal?

OK, I could pay the cost of distribution and all that, but in the end that would be something like 20% of the total. Boxed software doesn't even come with printed manuals these days, and selling through internet stores reduces the overall retail expenses.

Re:Dumping

[vux984]

'OEM' is cheaper because:

1) OEM is responsible for distribution and support. You buy a retail box, and you can call Microsoft for help. You buy a Dell... you call dell. (And if you bought sn OEM at newegg... call newegg for support.) Not that OEM support is worth anything, but its still a phone call MS doesn't have to try to answer.

2) With OEM editions MS tries hard to bind the OS to the physical unit to effectively strip you of your right to resell or transfer the software. They 'require' that you put the sticker on the case, and the language in the EULA is more restrictive, etc. In any case its often more a PITA to exercise your rights with OEM Windows. When you pay retail, they don't get in your way nearly as much over stuff like this. No stickers. No fuss.

3) Its been rumored, and im not sure if ever confirmed, that windows activation is less forgiving of OEM versions than retail. (in that OEM versions will require you to call microsoft for a manual activation in circumstances that the retail go through on automatic. (e.g. after a few transfers or hardware changes.) This being predicated on the logic that an OEM version doesn't get transferred, so it doesn't need as much leniency. If this is true, its not a big deal, but again, makes retail a little neater to deal with.

----

I typically buy my Windows at Retail, in the upgrade edition, as its about as cheap as the OEM, without any of the OEM hassles. (And I have enough copies to qualify for upgrades.) And the upgrade edition typically just required the previous media. Not a big deal considering it knocked half the price off.

For vista... what a Pain. The upgrade requires you actually install the previous edition then upgrade. (Makes sense from a certain point of view, given that iso's are trivial to obtain.) But its beyond stupid in practice. If my HD dies, I shouldn't have to install XP, before installing Vista.

What happens in 2020... I buy a new PC and decide to transfer Windows 9 on it...and put Ubuntu Zippy Zebra on the old one, and I've been upgrading windows all along so now I have to install windows 8 on it first for the v9 installer to run... but to do that I have to install windows 7, and to do that I have to install windows Vista, and to that I have to install XP? Good luck installing XP on a new PC in 2020... will there even be XP drivers for the ultra-hddvd-bluray-3.0 drive I'll be installing with on the BIOS-free EFI-2-superZ.22/q based motherboard using an intel octo 4 hyper III-2 cpu?

With Vista, at least there is a workaround, but its clearly an oversight on microsofts part. And I don't think it'll be their next time round.

They ought to go the OSX route, lower the price of full retail... (almost NOBODY buys that anyway on windows), and get rid of the 'upgrade editions'.

I hope they do better than Dell ...

[Godji]

... and actually put Linux on some of their really good business-class machines, as opposed to their cheaper "entry-level" "home" flaky laptops. Write this down, Lenovo and Dell: I don't want Linux because it's cheap; I want it because it's better and free. Now give me that great laptop that a Windows user can already buy, put Linux on that instead, and you have my 1500 euros.

That, or I'm getting an Eee.

Re:I hope they do better than Dell ...

[drolli]

> What exactly stops you from buying whatever laptop you want and installing Linux yourself?

Support. I know linux, i work with linux, i can install it myself, but however, since i am working as a pysicist it is not my job to do so. I want to buy a computer and problems should be solved by calling the support.