Slashdot Mirror
Dell Continues Shipping Fresh Linux Laptops
jones_supa writes: In its latest move, Dell will be bringing Ubuntu 14.04 LTS to its top-of-the-line Precision M3800 workstation laptop and the latest model of the Dell XPS 13. Both systems will be running Ubuntu 14.04.1. According to Barton George, Dell's Director of Developer Programs, programmers had been asking for a better, officially-supported Ubuntu developer laptop. This came about from a combination of the efforts of Dell software engineer Jared Dominguez and enthusiastic feedback. Specs of M3800: 15.6" LCD @ 3840x2160, Intel i7 quad core CPU, NVIDIA Quadro GPU, up to 16 GB RAM. The bad news is, as Dominguez explained on his blog, this version of the M3800 doesn't support its built-in Thunderbolt 2 port out of the box. However, thanks to the hardware-enablement stack in Ubuntu, starting with upcoming Ubuntu 14.04.2, you will be able to upgrade your kernel to add some Thunderbolt support.
It's nice to see that Dell have put Linux as an OS option right next to WIndows (and $101 cheaper than Windows too). A bit strange for them to ship a Linux release that initially has no Thunderbolt support, though I suspect not many people use Thunderbolt-only hardware outside of the Apple ecosystem.
Defaults to an HDD in the config options which is also weird, especially since it appears to have 2 drive bays, so surely you'd want an SSD in there in one of the bays?
The higher res screen is only a $70 bump, so it would appear to be a no-brainer to pick that option. If the final price wasn't so eye-wateringly high (and me being in the UK probably means it'll either not appear on the UK dell site or be a dollar to pound conversion), it would be an attractive high-end Linux laptop.
Why would you want Thunderbolt again? It is a badly broken (IE doesn't actually do what is promised like channel bonding and a few other things that are sort of fixed in VERY recent silicon), costs far too much, forces the use of painfully expensive active cables, and only passes PCIe or video. This last bit is problematic because if you want any functionality on the other end of the cable, you need to add full controllers there too, think expensive and wasteful of power. In essence you are hot-plugging controllers with the cable, and while it works in theory....
TB is a badly broken spec from day one, it was meant as a control point for Intel to force the use of it's silicon in phones.mobile by replacing USB with something only it could provide. Needless to say the market saw through this and didn't adopt it in droves, sans the few that drank from the Intel money hose. The second the hose was shut off, so was the design wins.
The main reason that USB3 had such a slow start was because Intel was desperate to kill it to promote TB. Since Intel had control over the USB3 cert process, things went might slow for technical minutia that would easily pass by previous spec certs. Coincidence? Nope.
TB is a bad idea on technical, cost, lock-in, and many many other reasons, not working correctly ever being a key one there. Delivered silicon is a joke, there is and always will be one supplier, and progress is glacial. USB3.1 on the other hand beats it like a drum in every regard other than single channel throughput.
Why do I want to pay for this in my next laptop again?
-Charlie