Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Dell Doubles Down On High-End Ubuntu Linux Laptops (zdnet.com)

Posted by msmash on from the affinity-for-Linux-machines dept.

Dell became the first major OEM to offer a laptop with Linux pre-installed in it in 2007. Ten years later, the company says it is more committed than ever to offering Linux-powered machines to users. From a report on ZDNet: The best known of these is the Dell XPS 13 developer edition, but it's not the only Linux laptop Dell offers. In a blog post, Barton George, senior principal engineer at Dell's Office of the CTO, announced "the next generation of our Ubuntu-based Precision mobile workstation line." All of these systems boast Ubuntu 16.04 long-term support (LTS), 7th generation Intel Core or Intel Xeon processors, and Thunderbolt 3, AKA 40 Gigabit per second (Gbps) USB-C, ports. As the Xeon processor option shows, these are top-of-the-line laptops for professionals. It took longer than expected for Dell to get this new set of five Ubuntu-powered Precision mobile workstations out the door. The Precision 5520 and 3520 are now available. The 3520, the entry-level workstation, starts with an Intel Core 2.5GHz i5-7300HQ Quad Core processor with Intel HD Graphics 630. From there, you can upgrade it all the way to an Intel Core Xeon 3 GHz E3-1505M v6 processor with Nvidia Quadro M62 graphics.

88 of 128 comments (clear)

  1. Why pre-installed? by interkin3tic · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Are there really many people interested in using ubuntu on high powered laptops who can't install it on their own?

    Have they made it impossible to install your own OS on the rest of their laptops? I haven't tried to install ubuntu on anything in a while, I remember hearing something about how intel was trying to make it harder to install anything other than windows 10.

    1. Re:Why pre-installed? by farble1670 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Have they made it impossible to install your own OS on the rest of their laptops? I haven't tried to install ubuntu on anything in a while

      No, it's that if people pay an arm and a leg for a laptop, they want it to be supported. And that doesn't mean "most of the stuff works", it means everything works. Every Ubuntu laptop I've used has had some quirk that didn't work right. Won't sleep. Won't hibernate. Display back light doesn't go off. DVD burner doesn't work. And so on.

    2. Re:Why pre-installed? by shigutso · · Score: 2

      Are there really many people interested in using ubuntu on high powered laptops who can't install it on their own?

      Yes. Otherwise Dell wouldn't be selling them.

    3. Re:Why pre-installed? by cvdwl · · Score: 5, Insightful

      No, but it's nice to know the hardware is generally compatible out-of-box. Trying to correct graphics and audio issues is what drove me away from consumer Linux about 10 years ago. And my experiences configuring desktops at work have never lured me back.

      --
      ... grumble, grumble, grumble, mutter, mutter, Millenium... Hand... Shrimp, I tol' 'em, I tol' 'em.
    4. Re:Why pre-installed? by MSG · · Score: 1

      Are there really many people interested in using ubuntu on high powered laptops who can't install it on their own?

      I don't know, but I, for one, am interested in buying a laptop without paying for software that I won't use, and in paying a vendor to either used Linux-supported components or developing Linux support for the components that they use. Dell puts significant effort into developing Linux support, and pushes the rest of hardware industry to maintain Linux support.

    5. Re:Why pre-installed? by Highdude702 · · Score: 2

      Atleast their not giving in to the dark leader Microsoft, Like all the other manufacturers are. I loved the fact that Dell started doing this. It prompted other manufacturers to also offer Windows alternatives. I'm sure any "Developer" that buys an XPS developer edition will have no problem installing linux on it. But why bother with having to Replace the OS when you can just have it shipped to you ready to rock and roll. Maybe with a custom kernel(I don't know for sure) for the newest hardware they plop into the thing.

    6. Re:Why pre-installed? by Highdude702 · · Score: 1

      I used to have the same issues back then. Even with desktops for things like wireless. But the advancements that linux has made as a whole is awesome now. Most all hardware works out of box on any mainstream linux os. You should really try it even if its just liveOS to start. I dual boot because gaming is not where i would like it to be for linux. But other than games i can do everything else better and faster most times with linux.

    7. Re:Why pre-installed? by phantomfive · · Score: 4, Informative

      It's $100 cheaper than the Windows version of the same laptop.

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    8. Re:Why pre-installed? by dpidcoe · · Score: 1

      That's not been my experience. Yes it's miles better than it used to be 10-15 years ago, but I've yet to install linux on a computer where everything just works out of the box. SteamOS came close, but small things kept breaking every few months until eventually it just sort of self destructed after an update and refused to boot anymore.

    9. Re: Why pre-installed? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      This may seem surprising but most of the people I know who use Linux are not techies. Half of them probably have not installed their own OS. They use it because Linux is stable and does not reboot in the middle of their presentations. They would probably be happy to see more Linux pre-installed options on the market.

    10. Re:Why pre-installed? by LVSlushdat · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I, on the other hand, do the exact opposite, run Linux just fine on a Dell Latitude, and for the extremely rare times I need Windows, I run a Windows 7 virtualbox VM, using the OEM product key from said Dell laptop..

      --
      THANK YOU, Edward Snowden!! Americans owe you a debt of gratitude (whether they know it or not..)
    11. Re:Why pre-installed? by LVSlushdat · · Score: 3, Informative

      When I installed Ubuntu 14.04 on my current Dell Latitude, I had zero problems, everything worked right "out of the box".. including the wifi AND that wifi was a Broadcom, which I recall a few years ago used to be a serious pain in the ass to get working on Linux... Not the case anymore...

      --
      THANK YOU, Edward Snowden!! Americans owe you a debt of gratitude (whether they know it or not..)
    12. Re:Why pre-installed? by SadOldTechie · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Me too, works perfectly on my Acer, all hardware features. Windows in a VM for those locked-in technology moments.

    13. Re:Why pre-installed? by Greyfox · · Score: 1

      It's marginally easier to install Ubuntu on a laptop that was running Ubuntu, than on one that was running windows. Plus I then know that all the hardware works (it does.) And I don't have to pay the Microsoft tax. The Dell Precision is a sexy little laptop, entirely unlike any of the Fischer-Price laptops that have been issued to me in the past. It might actually be enough to be a daily driver.

      --

      I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?

    14. Re:Why pre-installed? by steveg · · Score: 2

      Years ago, even if you could find a vendor like Dell who would sell you a Linux version, the Linux version ended up costing you more than the Windows version, if for for no other reason than the kickbacks the vendor got from all the crapware that came pre-installed on the Windows version. Either that or you had to choose completely different hardware for the Linux version, and the Linux hardware was always inferior.

      With this generation of of Dells, choosing Ubuntu as the OS actually cuts the price, on the same hardware.

      --
      Ignorance killed the cat. Curiosity was framed.
    15. Re: Why pre-installed? by dougdonovan · · Score: 1

      michael is by-passing the general public and concentrating on the people that run the corporate enterprise networks.

    16. Re:Why pre-installed? by tepples · · Score: 1

      it's a shame they're not pushing a SOHO model too.

      I think major laptop makers tried offering GNU/Linux laptops for the home market, but handling returns from people who didn't understand what they were buying made it unprofitable to continue offering them.

    17. Re:Why pre-installed? by TWX · · Score: 1

      That XPS 13 might actually be one of the easier ones to run Linux on, since the XPS 13 Developer Edition is available out-of-the-box with Linux.

      Way back in the day I'd bought an AMD64-based Gateway to run Linux on, it was basically impossible since there was some chipset issue that caused the clock to advance too fast and randomly. Not sure what the bug was but I never got around to making it work and stuck with XP.

      I would love a great Linux laptop, something with around a 15" screen, at least 1920x1080, preferably 1920x1200 or greater, but it's hard to justify the cost for a new one when they're going to come in at a thousand dollars.

      --
      Do not look into laser with remaining eye.
    18. Re:Why pre-installed? by mr_mischief · · Score: 1

      Even if I get absolutely everything working up front, the first thing to go wrong on a "made for Windows" laptop is going to be on me to figure out and fix rather than getting Dell to do it for me. If it's supported with Ubuntu, it's supported.

    19. Re:Why pre-installed? by mukinrestak · · Score: 1

      Ironically enough, considering what absolute trash they make, I had an old HP laptop that ran either Lubuntu or Xubuntu (this was a few years back, sorry I don't remember which) perfectly with no hardware incompatibility weirdness whatsoever. Even the switchable graphics worked well, and that's always finicky. The biggest problem it had was overheating, and *buntu actually helped alleviate it by not pigging out on resources like Windows did. It turns out the overheating was because HP can't design airflow/cooling for shit and it was a purely poor-hardware-design issue, not even firmware involved. Cutting some of the vents larger with a Dremel fixed it.

      The POS eventually suffered a short on the motherboard for no obvious reason, and I'll never buy HP again, but credit where it's due, Linux installed and ran perfectly on that one.

    20. Re:Why pre-installed? by Xicor · · Score: 1

      my daily driver is linux and i constantly run into issues where i have to start searching the ubuntu forums or even more obscure stuff off google in order to fix problems. i would totally pay a premium for a machine running linux that just... works... but i dont think any amount of r&d on the company that makes the hardware will fix that... this is mostly an issue with just how unreliable linux is on the desktop (people are obviously working on this, but not a huge amount of money is going into it)

    21. Re:Why pre-installed? by lucm · · Score: 1

      Same here. At home I mostly use Fedora and it's rock solid. Setup is always smooth and installing apps is a breeze. If it was available from a vendor like Dell I'd buy a Fedora machine anytime.

      I don't know why they insist on Ubuntu. I've tried it time and again but I always had problems with it, especially on laptops. I think Fedora is smoother because they ship with a bleeding edge kernel, and this helps with recent chipsets. Overall the Red Hat ecosystem feels more polished than the Ubuntu family.

      One thing I like about Linux is how easy disk encryption is. I've been robbed and also had laptops stolen while traveling, and although it sucks to pay for new hardware, it's comforting to know that the bastards don't get to mess with my data, listen to my music or read my emails.

      I'm a casual gamer and only play on console (yes, I do) so there's nothing for me that works better on Windows than on Fedora. Can't say I'm a fan of LibreOffice though.

      --
      lucm, indeed.
    22. Re:Why pre-installed? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      No, Microsoft made it unprofitable to sell laptops running Linux. When Linux laptops really started gaining traction with the netbook era (Microsoft had no real presence in that market segment) Microsoft directly threatened OEMs with licensing changes unless OEMs remained MS-exclusive.

      A side effect was the killing of the netbook segment until the Chromebook came along and did basically the same thing.

    23. Re:Why pre-installed? by unixisc · · Score: 1

      In fact, Dell could try something no one else has - offer a high end Chromebook - w/ plenty of CPU, RAM and SSD, but preloaded w/ ChromeOS. Not everybody who wants ChromeOS necessarily wants to put everything on Google Drive. One might want to use Android apps, but in conjunction w/ files that they store on the computer offline

    24. Re:Why pre-installed? by tehcyder · · Score: 4, Funny

      Couldn't agree more. Notebooks are always a proprietary mess, and just because someone could install linux on one doesn't mean the experience would be a positive one. I actually have an XPS-13 running Windows 10 and still think it would be a nightmare trying to switch to Ubuntu as the main OS. I do, however, run Debian inside a VM. I have started to view Windows as the "cloud OS of uncertainty", while Linux/BSD derivatives are deterministic little walled gardens to be run only virtually.

      Thereby achieving the perfect combination of the rock solid stability of Windows with the wide range of legacy software and games on Linux. Hang on...

      --
      To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
    25. Re:Why pre-installed? by houghi · · Score: 2

      That means that the prices they get for the shareware are dropping. Because that is the main reason companies do it.
      For them it would make no difference to put on a Windows Image, Linux Image or DR Dos or tripple boot image on the machine. It will be the identical same process in production.

      --
      Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
    26. Re: Why pre-installed? by cheesybagel · · Score: 1

      Google "The Register" "Netbook" Windows" "License".

    27. Re:Why pre-installed? by exomondo · · Score: 1

      No, Microsoft made it unprofitable to sell laptops running Linux.

      Selling netbooks running Linux was naturally going to be unprofitable. Linux may be free of licensing cost but it isn't free of cost in general, companies can't afford to support Linux if they're not going to charge at least some cost for the privilege of running it or else monetize it somewhere else like what Google has done with Chromebooks.

      This idea that the failure of Linux netbooks is down to a Microsoft conspiracy just doesn't hold water, we all know Microsoft's biggest OEM partners have shipped (and continue to ship) Linux-based systems for a long time (HP and Dell for example offer many laptops and desktops with Ubuntu and RedHat options) and also Linux-based systems in the form of Chromebooks (Samsung, Dell, HP, etc). Netbooks were crappy devices that were superseded by tablets and smartphones (and to an extent Chromebooks) that do a much better job.

      Fully supported Linux computers should be more expensive as this is an investment in improving the operating system, if you're just taking it as a no-cost option then of course the experience is going to be crap and unprofitable going forward, you need to give something back.

    28. Re:Why pre-installed? by Highdude702 · · Score: 1

      Sounds like you played a little bit too much in the system files without knowing what you were doing. I have Linux installs that are years ole that I've transferred hardware.

    29. Re:Why pre-installed? by thebullshitpatrol · · Score: 1

      One HUNDRED percent about in-house kernel development.

      Aside from not being compatible with a lot of commercial software, the main detriment to linux on a workstation is that you just aren't getting as good of driver support.

    30. Re:Why pre-installed? by dpidcoe · · Score: 1

      Sounds like you played a little bit too much in the system files without knowing what you were doing.

      In the case of SteamOS I had the sheer audacity to install chrome and then occasionally drop to desktop mode to watch streaming content. I know I know. The OS isn't really designed for that level of tampering by a user and I probably shouldn't be blaming it.

    31. Re:Why pre-installed? by Highdude702 · · Score: 1

      I played with SteamOS as soon as it came out. and for the 2 years after that. I stopped because I can do better with Ubuntu and a Steam.deb file. They are trying to lock people to the "console" like portion like other vendors. And its highly modified debian. Real easy to break. I normally suggest people start with ubuntu/mint to learn and play with linux for the simple fact of the community available for any problem. Once you can get most things working without web help then its safe to move to less supported flavors.

    32. Re:Why pre-installed? by dpidcoe · · Score: 1

      I'm not unfamiliar with linux. Over the last 15 years I've tried redhat (back in the days before fedora was out), gentoo, fedora, ubuntu, and debian. Of those, I ran ubuntu and debian fairly consistently on my laptop all throughout college. Whichever linux installation I was using tended to shit itself about every 6-12 months, so I basically ended up having to do a clean reinstall at the beginning of each semester. I never once had an installation of a new version go smoothly (there was always a weekend of googling to fix whatever nonsense happened during the installation), and I was never able to have an install in which everything worked. There was always some niggling little annoyance e.g. the wireless wouldn't come back after entering sleep mode, monitor brightness wasn't adjustable, touchpad scroll zones wouldn't work, etc.

      I know at this point you're either going to say it's because I didn't know what I was doing (maybe true), or shrug and say it's just anecdotal. But if it was really just a one-off thing where I've somehow consistently never been able to have a smooth linux experience, I suspect that desktop linux would have a much much bigger market share at this point in time.

  2. Five years? by DogDude · · Score: 1, Interesting

    Five years worth of OS support? Really? That's totally impractical or very expensive for any non-Linux professional.

    Heck, most of my work is done on 5+ year old hardware, running a 7+ year old OS.

    --
    I don't respond to AC's.
    1. Re:Five years? by omnichad · · Score: 2

      You can install a newer LTS OS later. And if there are drivers now, there is a good chance of drivers then.

    2. Re:Five years? by avandesande · · Score: 1

      Curiously enough Ubuntu support caps off at five years.

      --
      love is just extroverted narcissism
    3. Re:Five years? by AthanasiusKircher · · Score: 2

      Five years worth of OS support? Really? That's totally impractical or very expensive for any non-Linux professional.

      Well, you have a point. But I'd note that it was only a few years back that LTS was only 3 years for Ubuntu, and if you really wanted a functional system, you probably should be updating with every 6-month release (which would finally make some things work but inevitably break other things). This is one of the reasons I abandoned Ubuntu several years ago. It's gotten a lot better in the past 5 years or so, and the support for releases has been extended.

      Not that this should excuse anything, but this is longer than it used to be.

      Another important thing to note, however, is that Linux tends to be more stable across OS versions, so you can often upgrade after 3-5 years to the new OS version and carry most of your old stuff directly with little disruption in interface or problems with incompatibility between old and new software versions. (Of course, as with everything, YMMV.)

      But it's NOT like, say, Windows, where you often get stuck learning a completely new interface every few years. Even if the default environment changes from release to release, you can generally still choose among the standard ones.

    4. Re:Five years? by omnichad · · Score: 1

      Why are you asking me? Ask Dell. You would still have the option to install your own. XP was essentially an LTS release. As are all of Microsoft's OS releases.

      It's a problem with the Linux repo design that program versions are tied to repos by OS version.

    5. Re:Five years? by Rob+Y. · · Score: 1

      I don't know what "today's modern tasks" are that a 5+ year old desktop can't handle. I'm sure there's something you do that fits that description, but the rest of the world is pretty happily using their 5+ year old machines. Mine just turned 5, and it's running Linux Mint 18.1. Windows 7 is there, but I never use it, and certainly haven't felt a need for Windows 10. Maybe I'm missing out on something, but I doubt it.

      --
      Posted from my Android phone. Oh, I can change this? There, that's better...
    6. Re:Five years? by tepples · · Score: 1

      There's are very few reasons not to go LTS unless you like having to upgrade your distro every 6 months.

      Other than someone on Launchpad asking you "Does the issue that you reported also happen with the latest version?".

    7. Re:Five years? by TWX · · Score: 1

      XP was essentially an LTS release. As are all of Microsoft's OS releases.

      I'll half-agree with you. They're long-term.

      --
      Do not look into laser with remaining eye.
    8. Re:Five years? by bluefoxlucid · · Score: 1

      Are you running Linux Mint from 5 years ago, with Chrome from 5 years ago, without access to modern standards and software?

      --
      Support my political activism on Patreon.
    9. Re:Five years? by omnichad · · Score: 1

      They continued to get security updates during that long term without a major version change.

    10. Re:Five years? by omnichad · · Score: 1

      You keep posting and yet you seem to know nothing about LTS OS releases:
      https://community.linuxmint.co...

    11. Re:Five years? by omnichad · · Score: 1

      Yes, you want to use a development version of Linux for development. That's sort of self-explanatory. You might call it "user feedback" but with a user-hostile response like that, they expect you to be an active participant in the development process.

  3. 2017 by farble1670 · · Score: 2, Informative

    The year of the Linux Laptop (tm).

    1. Re:2017 by pr0fessor · · Score: 1

      Is it just me or does no one else remember lindows (linspire) desktops and laptops in Walmarts all over the US around 2004 or 2005.

  4. But they still fail on a big thing for developers. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    And that is having a good keyboard...

  5. Sad its so expensive by tatman · · Score: 4, Informative

    Dell XPS 13 developer edition, Ubuntu, i7 processor, 16BM almost $1900. Yikes.

    --
    I've always said English was my second language. Had Romeo and Juliet been written in C, I might have understood it.
    1. Re:Sad its so expensive by puddingebola · · Score: 1

      There are some lower priced models if you don't need an i7. Core i5 at $999. http://www.dell.com/us/busines...

    2. Re:Sad its so expensive by AnthonywC · · Score: 1

      For that price I expected 32G RAM and 1T SSD (which aren't even available options!).

    3. Re:Sad its so expensive by tatman · · Score: 1

      For that price I expected 32G RAM and 1T SSD (which aren't even available options!).

      Yes. I was shocked the memory was only 16GB at that price

      --
      I've always said English was my second language. Had Romeo and Juliet been written in C, I might have understood it.
    4. Re:Sad its so expensive by JaredOfEuropa · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I'd rather see some cheaper models. I'm still shopping around for a good basic laptop for my wife. It doesn't need to be ultra thin (it won't travel much) or super stylish, just something basic to run Ubuntu with a browser and LibreOffice. Not having to pay the Redmont tax is an even bigger deal on a cheap laptop. But the selection of low end laptops seems to be rather a lot poorer then when I last bought one around 5 years ago. And so does the selection of laptops with Linux or without Windows, come to think of it.

      --
      If construction was anything like programming, an incorrectly fitted lock would bring down the entire building...
    5. Re:Sad its so expensive by Gravis+Zero · · Score: 1

      Dell XPS 13 developer edition, Ubuntu, i7 processor, 16BM almost $1900. Yikes.

      These aren't your dad's BMs, these are 16 high quality gold plated BMs. If I were ever going to get BMs from anyone, it would be from Dell. Dell's BMs are the best BMs on the market and let me tell you, there are a lot of BMs on the market. Even Microsoft put their BMs in a box and they can't even pay people to take them! ;)

      --
      Anons need not reply. Questions end with a question mark.
    6. Re: Sad its so expensive by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      They have those options on the precision line. Also available with linux.

      The xps is more an ultraportable so there are some compromises to expansion options

    7. Re:Sad its so expensive by tatman · · Score: 1

      Dell XPS 13 developer edition, Ubuntu, i7 processor, 16BM almost $1900. Yikes.

      These aren't your dad's BMs, these are 16 high quality gold plated BMs. If I were ever going to get BMs from anyone, it would be from Dell. Dell's BMs are the best BMs on the market and let me tell you, there are a lot of BMs on the market. Even Microsoft put their BMs in a box and they can't even pay people to take them! ;)

      rofl. thanks for the catch

      --
      I've always said English was my second language. Had Romeo and Juliet been written in C, I might have understood it.
    8. Re:Sad its so expensive by exomondo · · Score: 2

      Not having to pay the Redmont tax is an even bigger deal on a cheap laptop.

      Well somebody has to do the development work to ensure compatibility, it's not just a matter of taking some hardware and whacking on the latest Ubuntu release. That's something anybody's been able to do for the better part of 2 decades.

      The idea that people should choose Linux because it is cheaper is stupid, if anything they should be more expensive and used to fund quality development of the operating system.

      But the selection of low end laptops seems to be rather a lot poorer then when I last bought one around 5 years ago. And so does the selection of laptops with Linux or without Windows, come to think of it.

      On the low end you have laptops like Chromebooks and plenty of cheap Windows offerings (you can't just take away the Windows license cost by putting Ubuntu on, you just end up with a laptop where simple stuff like hibernate doesn't work properly). And there are more options now than ever in terms of laptops with Linux, Dell now offer Linux on systems across their range, HP offer it on many systems too and there are vendors like System76 that have a larger range than ever before.

    9. Re:Sad its so expensive by Greyfox · · Score: 1

      Well now we're just arguing about price and performance aren't we? How fast is fast enough to justify a i7 versus an i5? That's an answer that'll be different for everyone. Maybe someone's OK with dropping a grand more for 32 GB of RAM, a 1TB SSD and a 15" 4K touch screen. Maybe not. With Moore's law eroding, it might be a while longer before the price comes down a lot on the top-end experience, but at some point that experience will still become available to everyone. It's just a matter of whether you want to wait for it or pay for it now.

      --

      I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?

    10. Re:Sad its so expensive by steveg · · Score: 1

      The 3520 has a trackpoint. The XPS does not (that didn't surprise me much, it's an ultrabook) and neither does the 5520. It looks like they're shooting for "slim" on the 5520 as well.

      --
      Ignorance killed the cat. Curiosity was framed.
    11. Re:Sad its so expensive by Trogre · · Score: 1

      I posted this yesterday in another article but here it is again:

      The Dell XPS regular version works fine under Linux as of about two years ago (the WiFi driver was the missing piece). In fact it works better than under Windows 10, which seems unable to properly use its own port replicators.

      --
      "Nine times out of ten, starting a fire is not the best way to solve the problem." - my wife
    12. Re:Sad its so expensive by MSG · · Score: 1

      Complaining that the fully upgraded, top-of-the-line model is expensive seems a liiiiiittle disingenuous, man. They start out a *lot* less expensive than that.

    13. Re:Sad its so expensive by tepples · · Score: 1

      But only Lenovo makes IBMs.

      (It bought the IBM PC business in 2005.)

    14. Re:Sad its so expensive by steveha · · Score: 2

      I'm still shopping around for a good basic laptop for my wife.

      I've had good success just buying whatever is on sale at a computer store near me, and then wiping it and installing Linux.

      The last time I did this, I bought a Lenovo IdeaPad S415 for something like $350, brand new. And to my horror, Linux installation failed on it; it includes both an AMD A6 and a discrete graphics adapter, and the two graphics systems fatally confused X11. There were workarounds but I never got around to trying one.

      Almost a year later, I simply grabbed the latest Linux installer, and the install Just Worked. Someone had patched whatever the problem in X11 and everything worked: the touchscreen, the WiFi, the sound, the Ethernet jack, sleep on closing the lid, everything.

      The moral of this story: most of the time, a Linux install will Just Work. But if you really need to be sure it will work, I suggest doing a Google search for the name of the laptop plus the name of a popular Linux distro. When I searched for "Lenovo IdeaPad S415 Ubuntu" I immediately found discussions, by other people who had the same problem I had, and the workarounds they figured out.

      At the moment, my father is using that laptop as his main computer. He's using it for hours every day. We are getting our money's worth.

      Not having to pay the Redmont tax is an even bigger deal on a cheap laptop.

      I'm not sure, this may be changing, but historically low-end computers are choked with pre-installed software you don't want, and the computer maker collects money for installing this bloatware. Enough money that they make more than they spent on Windows... at least in some cases, you actually would have to pay more to get a Linux computer.

      So unless you are really upset with Microsoft and don't want to give them a dime of your money, just buy whatever laptop is a good value, and wipe-and-install.

      --
      lf(1): it's like ls(1) but sorts filenames by extension, tersely
    15. Re:Sad its so expensive by roman_mir · · Score: 1

      Your SIG and Hamlet:

      (2C || !2C)==if...

      --
      You can't handle the truth.
    16. Re:Sad its so expensive by h4ck7h3p14n37 · · Score: 1

      Why not get a cheap Chromebook? I have a $150 Hisense model and it works fine for browsing, word processing, Spotify and Netflix. I have it hooked up to an external monitor and stereo amplifier with a Logitech K400 wireless keyboard/trackpad.

    17. Re:Sad its so expensive by erapert · · Score: 1

      I'd rather see some cheaper models. I'm still shopping around for a good basic laptop for my wife. It doesn't need to be ultra thin (it won't travel much) or super stylish, just something basic to run Ubuntu with a browser and LibreOffice.

      Here, try System76's Lemur

    18. Re:Sad its so expensive by ruir · · Score: 1

      How about the rumoured interference of wifi in the USB(C)? connector because they are side by side?

  6. ...only 13"? by Penguinisto · · Score: 2

    Gad - some of us actually *want* some actual real-estate on the screen. :/

    --
    Quo usque tandem abutere, Nimbus, patientia nostra?
    1. Re:...only 13"? by Highdude702 · · Score: 1

      I feel the same way. Thats why i try not to use laptops. I have has my laptop for about 6 months and I've used it twice. I am currently on my PC with a 40" 1080 screen and a 24" 720 next to it.

    2. Re:...only 13"? by sconeu · · Score: 1

      13" QHD display. A lot of programs apparently use fixed sized fonts, which are unreadable on this display (not the fault of Linux, but of the app developer).

      --
      General Relativity: Space-time tells matter where to go; Matter tells space-time what shape to be.
    3. Re:...only 13"? by MSG · · Score: 1

      There's one 13" model, three 15" models, and two 17" models. You've got options.

      http://www.dell.com/developers

    4. Re:...only 13"? by ruir · · Score: 1

      3360x2100 13'' display here...OS/X works pretty much well with it. Though most of the time I wont use more than the 2048x1280 resolution.

  7. *All the way?* by 0100010001010011 · · Score: 1

    E3-1505M v6

    I hope AMD gets Intel to stop twiddling their thumbs. The E3-1505M v6 benchmarks at 9798 / 2166 single threaded.

    I'm typing this on a 4 year old M6700 with a Intel Core i7-3940XM that benchmarks at 9324 / 2009 single threaded. It cost me all of ~$800 last year. Room for 4 hard drives, 32 GB of RAM, 17" screen. Thunderbolt and USB_C really don't seem like they're worth the $2k price tag.

    And it runs Linux and BSD just fine.

    1. Re:*All the way?* by 0100010001010011 · · Score: 1

      Replaced the DVD drive with a SATA drive holder.

    2. Re:*All the way?* by Blaskowicz · · Score: 1

      Intel says yours has a 55W TDP.
      So that's a great laptop you have there, but it is out of the ordinary.

      Perhaps someone could make a "luggable" that takes regular 65W desktop CPUs for max performance at min prices.

  8. Anyone else sick of the term by IWantMoreSpamPlease · · Score: 1

    "double down"? It was overused during the Obama admin, and it doesn't show signs of going away, but it's getting as bad as "begging the question"

    --
    So rise up, all ye lost ones, as one, we'll claw the clouds.
    1. Re:Anyone else sick of the term by Provocateur · · Score: 1

      WTF does it mean? When I was in ROTC I grew sick of my CO's use of "Double time" Oh, you want me to go slower then? when he meant for us to "speed it up"

      --
      WARNING: Smartphones have side effects--most of them undocumented.
  9. Neil Breen's "Double Down" (2005) by xororand · · Score: 1

    Maybe this will cheer you up and lighten the association.

    Neil Breen's Double Down (2005) is a film so bad that it's good, or.... at least interesting.
    http://www.imdb.com/title/tt15...

    Featured on Redlettermedia's "Best of the Worst":
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

    Full movie:
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

  10. Go lightweight by Provocateur · · Score: 2

    My DELL latitude E6440 had Windows 7 for a few hours, but bodhi Linux 4.1.0 has been its main resident ever since. Bought for $129 or available for $99 if you look hard enough; I used to be Thinkpad exclusively. E6440 is not bad but XPS13 is still in my crosshairs because I do prefer Tracpoints and discrete graphics.

    --
    WARNING: Smartphones have side effects--most of them undocumented.
  11. Re:After all the trouble by LVSlushdat · · Score: 1

    The Linux-powered Precisions are $100 less than the ones with Winblows... Of course, being Dell Precisions, they are pricy, but well worth the $$$$...

    --
    THANK YOU, Edward Snowden!! Americans owe you a debt of gratitude (whether they know it or not..)
  12. Re:1366x768? What is that, the Playmobil Edition? by steveg · · Score: 1

    Its 15.6" *default* display is 1366x768. The upgrade to 1920x1080 is about $100.

    --
    Ignorance killed the cat. Curiosity was framed.
  13. Re:Not available in my country by exomondo · · Score: 1

    Not sure how you come to that conclusion, I can't think of a place more obvious to look for such things than their website. And if you were to look at their website you would find there is plenty to choose from (yes in Australia). If the bar is set too high at the idea of hitting "customize" when buying a computer then there isn't much hope of Linux on the desktop in the consumer space.

    They offer it on desktops too.

  14. Dell, Part Du? by Jerry · · Score: 1

    At first blush it appeared that Dell was using the same old tricks of 10 years ago. Clicking on the 5530 link I didn't see any reference to Ubuntu but I did see this:
      Operating System (Dell recommends Windows 10 Pro.)
    Uh huh. That's how it was 10 years ago.
    But, I clicked on the "Customize & Buy" link and on the very next page I could select the Ubuntu OS. The price also dropped by $100 but the hardware stayed the same. THAT is different. Ten years ago Dell did the bait & switch, offering Linux on different configurations of their boxes to prevent comparisons. And, 10 years ago, the peripherals offered on the Linux boxes were very limited.

    Maybe Dell means it this time and it isn't a ploy to negotiate lower per unit prices from Microsoft.

    --

    Running with Linux for over 20 years!

  15. Coreboot must be mandatory by Neo-Rio-101 · · Score: 1

    Either Dell support coreboot or forget it. Really.

    --
    READY.
    PRINT ""+-0
  16. Re:1366x768? What is that, the Playmobil Edition? by chrish · · Score: 2

    I really wish PC laptop makers would stop with these ridiculous low-resolution screens. Especially up here in Canada, it's difficult to find laptops with reasonable resolutions... so many 15+" 1366x768 and 17" 1600x900 displays, both labelled "HD" or something to trick stupid people.

    Either stop making these horrible things, or let me easily search for models based on actual screen resolution rather than just size.

    --
    - chrish
  17. Dear Dell by michaelcole · · Score: 1

    I don't get why you make 13" Linux laptops. Linux isn't just "cheap". It's also what I work on. For me to be interested in a laptop from you it would have to have Linux and a 17+" screen.

  18. Re:1366x768? What is that, the Playmobil Edition? by ruir · · Score: 1

    I am holding to my 4 year old laptop until 4K notebooks are more common.

  19. Re:I don't get it by ruir · · Score: 1

    Because they would have more customers buying the in between and that cannot be.
    They are content in having a few domestic users buying their crap, the suckers buying the top-of-line and the majority of customers like you and me not giving a shit about it.
    Otherwise, the only logical explanation is that Tim Cook is bribing them.
    Seriously, joking aside, they do not want the domestic market to canibalize the enterprise offering, just as simple.