Let's summarize those 13 points: "Most people want Windows on their computers. Therefore, only buy these if you are really certain you don't want Windows."
Nice summary, but incorrect.
The statistics above directly contradict your assertion:
Dell also offers most of their desktop machines as "bare" (FreeDOS).
Additionally, it was to provide background on why people find the non-Windows offerings to be "buried".
Even "IBM Recommends Windows XP Professional". Gotta get the OEM discount.
Indeed. I never asserted that this was unique to Dell. If you want to have a profit in the PC biz, you do what Microsoft wants. This is often diametrically opposed to doing much with Linux (at least on the desktop).
This option is only available via the "Small and Medium Business" web page. Linux is not offered at all to consumers.
No laptops will come with anything but Windows.
This page is only available by clicking a separate, lower link, in a special section entitled "Dell Open Source Desktops". Clicking the top (seemingly complete) product lineups will not give you access to Linux computers--only Windows.
Exception: A special link in the "Dell Precision Workstations" section (entitled "View Linux Workstations") will take you to the Linux Precision workstations. Again, clicking on the top link (which seems to indicate that it has the entire linup of Precision workstations) willnot get you any Linux offerings .
Clicking on the series' pictures will not show you any Linux offerings, but has the appearance that it would contain all of the series' offerings.
Each series's Linux offering consists of precisely three machines.
The Precision workstation series consists of six machines--three Windows (670, 470, 380); three Linux (670n, 470n, 380n). Linux content: 50%
The OptiPlex workstation series consists of six machines--three Windows (GX620, GX520, 170L); three FreeDOS (GX620n, GX520n, 170Ln). Open Source content: 50%--Linux content: 0%
The Dimension desktop series consists of nine machines--six Windows (XPS 600, 9150, 5150C, 5150, 3100, 1100); three FreeDOS (5150n, 3100n, 1100n). Open Source content: 33.33%--Linux content: 0%
You'll note that only the Precision workstations come with Linux--two of the three "Open Source" desktops don't come with Linux.
Additionally, FreeDOS is not even installed (note the small print around the FreeDOS description.
Dell describes the Precision Linux offerings as "Dell PrecisionTM open-source n Series1 workstations deliver maximum workstation performance. Smart for businesses with proprietary software images or special Linux needs, these systems are available with factory installed Linux." (emphesis mine)
Dell helpfully adds the following cheerful text on their "Open Source Desktops" page: "he open-source n Series desktops feature select popular models from the DimensionTM desktop, OptiPlexTM desktop and Dell PrecisionTM workstation lines available with a copy of the FreeDOSTM open-source operating system included in the box, ready to install. It is not a Microsoft operating system and is not qualified for Windows licensing use under any existing Microsoft Volume Licensing Program (OPEN, Enterprise, etc.) Customers interested in a Microsoft® Windows® solution should purchase a Dell desktop pre-loaded with Windows XP Professional. Select n Series systems are also available with Linux. In order to boot this system, you must install an operating system. A FreeDOS media kit has been provided which will allow you to boot your system once installed. Please note that many common applications will not run and/or fully function using FreeDOS, and in order to run these applications, you will need to install the appropriate operating system and/or device specific drivers. Consult FreeDos.org or your chosen operating system vendor for compatibility details." (boldface theirs; italics and sarcasm mine). No such text appears on any of the Windows pages. Indeed, Dell recommends Windows XP Professional. No similar recommendation supporting Linux exists.
I think it's a double-standard. South Korea and the EU are trying to cripple Windows because they don't want Windows to be able to compete on a level playing field.
Anti-trust regulations exist because a monopoly situation is not anywhere near a level playing field.
So yes, they could force the playing field to slant, but it'd not be making the playing field un-level; it would (ideally) make the playingfield level, since it wasn't level to start with.
But don't cripple a product that millions of consumers like.
There are a myriad of ways to decouple various Windows components and yet allow for a full end-user experience. Removing Windows Media Player, for instance, need not cripple the end-user multimedia experience, provided Microsoft helps create a framework in Windows to allow other media players to be drop-in replacements (and make full use of their functionality, which means that there needs to be an open standard, not just "do whatever WMP does").
The only problem is that, given their monopoly status, such open standards are not in Microsoft's interests, and so they will (and are) fight(ing) it tooth and nail.
If you find that un-bundling WMP is crippling Windows, then place the blame where it belongs--with Microsoft.
You can get on the internet without Windows - In fact, South Korea REQUIRES government computers to run open source software (ie, Linux), with the business and academic communities resultingly all-but-forced to do the same if they want to get anything done.
Why are the business and academic communities resultingly all-but-forced to use Linux if they want to get anything done, provided the government mandates Linux use?
The real problems with the MS monopoly are their complete disregard for standards, and thus, interoperability, and consumers' complete lack of choice of an OS when buying new PCs.
No. There are three situations:
Small player
If you don't use established standards, other players' users cannot interoperate with your users effectively (e.g. cannot share documents), so the lack of adherence bites you in the ass. Open standards are your lifeblood--you live or die by your ability to interoperate, because you need to be able to attract users.
Medium player
Your lack of standards adherence causes difficulty because the other players' users have difficulty interoperating with your users. Therefore, you tend to adhere to standards pretty closely, but not as closely as a small player.
Monopoly
What you do is the standard, whether it's what others have agreed on or not. Your lack of adherence to other standards bites your competitors in the ass, since they cannot interoperate with your users, which are by far the majority. Interoperation and open standards are anathema to you, since it's really the only means by which you lose marketshare.
OK - so you really think MS is going to bust a home user for running an OEM copy of Windows on two machines?
It's really only a matter of time.
The worst I could imagine them doing is making it so you can't run windows update or something.
There are any number of things they could do, the least of which is cutting off your Windows Update. Have a fingerprint scanner? A camera? They can do anything, since they control the OS and have little to no oversight.
I'm not saying they're doing any of these things, nor that they will do any of these things, but the point is that they can do these things, and there's little people can do to prevent it. Doubly so given how entrenched their monopolies are.
I'm not advocating breaking the license.
Actually, you are, though you try to be suave about it.
Honestly though in terms of the case we were dicussing, home user dual booting to play games, I can't possibly imagine MS busting someone for that.
Your lack of imagination does not imply a lack of reality.
To Microsoft, those are piracy (and lost sales), and they're starting to try to crack down on that. I'm not saying they're gonna bust into your house tomorrow, but expect the temperature of the water to slowly keep rising. They're in business to make money, not for your pleasure.
But lets say you change out your computer once every five years. That's a whole $28/year for the OS cost. Whooo. What a huge "Microsoft Tax". Let's say you update your computer twice as often, that's a big
$56/year for Windows. Now if you want to subscribe to Cedega, it's $60/year.
Quite true, for (non-transferrable) OEM Windows licenses, and if you decide you want to stay subscribed all year (again, you can pay the USD15 minimum and just get the software updates for 3 months; the software doesn't expire).
However, Cedega and Linux can be transferred between PCs at will while the OEM Windows license cannot, and this was the entirety of my point. In fact, in my original posting, I even said, "That said, yes, it'd likely be cheaper (and better-functioning) in the long run to just buy Windows.". (and, actually, I should have said "short run", not "long run". The optimal long-term solution is to buy games for whatever platform you want to be running.)
Sorry I just don't see the OS cost as a big deal. Don't run Windows if you don't want do deal with a Windows installation but not running it because of cost is just silly. If you can afford to buy the games in the first place you can afford to buy the OS.
The cost was never my argument. Only that OEM Windows isn't the same as retail Windows, and there is a price discrepancy.
Personally, I find that dual-booting to Windows (and therefore having to quit everything I'm doing) to be too annoying to be worth it. Plus, I find Windows takes up far more hard drive space than it's worth (and before you cry out that I'm some rabid zealot, I'll qualify that with "to me, since I barely use it at all.")
As for reinstalling on a new machine, you aren't supposed to, but of course there are ways around that if you don't care about breaking the terms of the license.
Breaking the terms of the license is what gets people in trouble with the BSA and may result in heavy fines. While they've not sued any home users TMK (or at least not enough to get attention anyway), license issues get businesses in trouble pretty regularly. And Microsoft (and others) can audit you at any time!
Additionally, product activation should help stop this, to an extent.
Otherwise you are looking at buying a copy every time you get a new computer, which may be once a year or once every 10 years depending on how often you replace your computer.
Yes. This is one of the costs of using Windows. Trying to skip this cost may be expensive and illegal. Don't expect me to feel sorry for you if you get burned for it.
Doubly so, since many of these installs would be Linux or BSD or another non-Windows OS, had the person not pirated Windows.
That said, to me, marrying software costing 3x or more the cost of a Pro Linux version (no strings attached) to a particular PC (particularly when it's debatably married to the hardware and not the virtual PC) is rather onerous, certainly much more so than the lack of support.
OEM licenses for Microsoft operating system software are not transferable from one machine to another, even if the PC on which it was originally installed is no longer in use. The OEM license is tied to the original PC on which it was installed.
It's OK. Microsoft's gonna "innovate" (i.e. crush the competition via one of their monopolies) in this arena as well with Vista, so it'll simplify our lives even more. Instead of getting sick of two companies, we will just be sick of one!:)
BTW, this should be filed under Yet Another Reason Why Developing on a Monopoly Platform is a Bad Idea in the Long Run, or Why Developers for Windows Are Suckers.
Windows XP Home Upgrade is USD100. Full XP Home is 200. IIRC, Pro Upgrade is 200, and full is 300. Prices may vary within a few tens of dollars depending on sales, but those are retail costs.
Now, I fully realize that you can probably find XP OEM for much less, but it comes with bigger restrictions (particularly that it's locked to whatever machine you install it on (even more, I think it's technically locked to whatever hardware you bought with it)). IIRC, Cedega can be transferred between PCs at will.
That said, yes, it'd likely be cheaper (and better-functioning) in the long run to just buy Windows. But it's very annoying (to me, at least) to dual-boot, and I'd rather not give Microsoft any more money/support to enable them to trash Linux and other competitors. (It's not "religious"; it's being an active consumer--the cornerstone of the capitalist system.)
For me, the solution is to not buy Windows-Only games. Which is the fully cheapest solution of all--no Windows, few USD50 games, and I don't have to reboot and stop everything I'm doing (which is generally a lot). I do have Cedega, primarily for older games and discount-shelf games. If a USD10 game doesn't run, no sweat. The main games I loved to play back under Windows--Diablo 2, StarCraft, and a few others--play just fine (though it'd be so very nice if Transgaming would make the other games work too!). I guess I just don't have the gamer mentality. Games don't rule me--they're an occasional fun diversion.
Q: When is USD200,000 of software not worth USD200,000?
A: When it's being sold or given away.
Your example of a box plasma TV being a great deal if it's worth 5000 and sold for 500 is spot on. Problem is that software does not map well into the physical world, and your analogy is wrong because of this. You can (generally) sell items in the physical world once you've bought them. In the software world, this is much, much, much more complicated because sales aren't necessarily sales--they're more likely to be licenses.
For example, at (at least my) college, the Microsoft Campus Software Agreement will provide you (at the cost of USD30-70 per semester) an upgrade copy of Windows. Additonally all software provided in the program must be given back in every scenario, save graduating from the college.. I'm also pretty darned sure you may not resell the software. There's more to the deal that that, but that's just a quick example.
The bottom line is that software sale/licensing is much more complicated than the sale of physical objects.
If you're not going to (or cannot) eat it or sell it, the five pound block of cheese for USD5 is a waste of money compared to the one pound block of cheese for USD2.
If you actually read the whole article, you would've seen this sentence
Whoah. Hold on there, chief.
I actually did read the whole article, but obviously missed a detail. Missing a detail does not necessarily imply lack of reading, but rather a lack of retaining all details in the article.
What happens if they find a way to kill the parasites
The article specifically mentioned that, at least in rats, antipsychotics slow or stop the parasite. While not the same as killing the parasites, it at least stops the action.
While your argument is quite true for video, it falls flat on its face for data purposes. The difference is between 5-12GB and 25GB per side--a rather large difference IMHO. These suckers would be great for backup purposes, or for distributing a full Linux distro, and I'm really looking forward to their introduction for that reason.
On the video side, unless the encryption/DRM crap is broken on HD-DVD and Blu-Ray (or there is a full-featured player for Linux that I can use on my Myth boxen and desktops and either the price is decreased on the movies (expected for a significantly broken/less-featured product) or I can do everything but give copies to a friend (about the only thing I don't mind a DRM system requiring of me)), then I'll stick with plain DVDs, thanks.
And here I thought the advantage to open source was that other people would do most of the work for you.
No. with you.
In the end it is closed source that gets all the good help.
Good help with hardware? Certainly. Wellll, no.
See, you have to be popular enough to get the good help with hardware; it has nothing to do with closed or open source. If a new OS came out tomorrow, they'd face the same problems Linux is facing--the fact that lots of bits of hardware are quirky (or even broken), so to support all hardware properly, you must either be a popular enough OS for everyone to support you or else you must get a hold of every piece of hardware out there, and support it. Microsoft takes one tack (very nice place, if you can get there); OSS must (yet) take the other. Apple is in-between, since they're well-known enough to get some hardware vendors' attention, yet draw from FOSS projects too.
It's interesting to note that many of the quirks in hardware would likely not be present in a non-monopoly situation. Right now, if the hardware has some quirk they have to work around (e.g. broken DSDTs or DDC information), they need only fix for a few operating systems (the WinNT series if they wish to only support Windows; recent OSX if they want to support Mac, which is rare for non-standardized stuff); this can sometimes be done pretty quickly and easily (e.g. supplying a.inf file with the right mode information). In a situation where there are several equal players, vendors must stick to established standards, or else either provide fixes for a large number of OSes and versions or reduce their market by a non-negligible amount. Additionally, the time from initial creation to standard would be shorter on average, for similar reasons.
In fact, it's the Open nature of Open Source that Linux has a shot at all of suppoorting the hardware out there, given current market conditions.
Not really. It works; the problem is usually working around little hardware gotchas. This is where having a team of tech engineers do that work for you comes in, which is why it generally works better with Windows than with Linux--with Windows, HP, Dell, and friends do all the work for you (and, notably, for Microsoft. Great scheme for Microsoft!). With Linux, since it's not supported on the hardware, you have to do it yourself.
It works anywhere between fine out of the box and totally crappy, depending on the particular quirks of your hardware (for example, ATI cards apparently need VBE information saved, whereas other vid cards apparently don't). A friend of mine's laptop worked 100% with S3; my Inspiron (very similar to his) with a newer card (otherwise same laptop) worked great--except the video was useless after resume. I then found VBEtool tricks, and now it works fine (except I have to do funky tricks due to ATI proprietary driver suckage; it works great with the 2d drivers).
In conclusion, if you want to run Linux, don't buy a notebook "Designed for Windows"--it will only be guaranteed to work with Windows. Now, due to current market conditions, finding a fully-supported Linux notebook can be an exercise in furstration. If you know of a reliable way to get a Linux notebook, please drop me a line!
Slashdot Mirror
The statistics above directly contradict your assertion:
Additionally, it was to provide background on why people find the non-Windows offerings to be "buried".
Indeed. I never asserted that this was unique to Dell. If you want to have a profit in the PC biz, you do what Microsoft wants. This is often diametrically opposed to doing much with Linux (at least on the desktop).In order to boot this system, you must install an operating system. A FreeDOS media kit has been provided which will allow you to boot your system once installed. Please note that many common applications will not run and/or fully function using FreeDOS, and in order to run these applications, you will need to install the appropriate operating system and/or device specific drivers. Consult FreeDos.org or your chosen operating system vendor for compatibility details." (boldface theirs; italics and sarcasm mine). No such text appears on any of the Windows pages. Indeed, Dell recommends Windows XP Professional. No similar recommendation supporting Linux exists.
So yes, they could force the playing field to slant, but it'd not be making the playing field un-level; it would (ideally) make the playingfield level, since it wasn't level to start with .
There are a myriad of ways to decouple various Windows components and yet allow for a full end-user experience. Removing Windows Media Player, for instance, need not cripple the end-user multimedia experience, provided Microsoft helps create a framework in Windows to allow other media players to be drop-in replacements (and make full use of their functionality, which means that there needs to be an open standard, not just "do whatever WMP does").The only problem is that, given their monopoly status, such open standards are not in Microsoft's interests, and so they will (and are) fight(ing) it tooth and nail.
If you find that un-bundling WMP is crippling Windows, then place the blame where it belongs--with Microsoft.
To Microsoft, those are piracy (and lost sales), and they're starting to try to crack down on that. I'm not saying they're gonna bust into your house tomorrow, but expect the temperature of the water to slowly keep rising. They're in business to make money, not for your pleasure.
Quite true, for (non-transferrable) OEM Windows licenses, and if you decide you want to stay subscribed all year (again, you can pay the USD15 minimum and just get the software updates for 3 months; the software doesn't expire).However, Cedega and Linux can be transferred between PCs at will while the OEM Windows license cannot, and this was the entirety of my point. In fact, in my original posting, I even said, "That said, yes, it'd likely be cheaper (and better-functioning) in the long run to just buy Windows." . (and, actually, I should have said "short run", not "long run". The optimal long-term solution is to buy games for whatever platform you want to be running.)
The cost was never my argument. Only that OEM Windows isn't the same as retail Windows, and there is a price discrepancy.Personally, I find that dual-booting to Windows (and therefore having to quit everything I'm doing) to be too annoying to be worth it. Plus, I find Windows takes up far more hard drive space than it's worth (and before you cry out that I'm some rabid zealot, I'll qualify that with "to me, since I barely use it at all.")
[End Cynicism]
Additionally, product activation should help stop this, to an extent.
Yes. This is one of the costs of using Windows. Trying to skip this cost may be expensive and illegal. Don't expect me to feel sorry for you if you get burned for it.Doubly so, since many of these installs would be Linux or BSD or another non-Windows OS, had the person not pirated Windows.
That said, to me, marrying software costing 3x or more the cost of a Pro Linux version (no strings attached) to a particular PC (particularly when it's debatably married to the hardware and not the virtual PC) is rather onerous, certainly much more so than the lack of support.
Incorrect. Quoth the Microsoft Get the Bare Facts about Acquiring PCs Without Preinstalled Operating Systems (8th hit I got on googel for "oem license site:microsoft.com"):
yet....
BTW, this should be filed under Yet Another Reason Why Developing on a Monopoly Platform is a Bad Idea in the Long Run, or Why Developers for Windows Are Suckers.
Now, I fully realize that you can probably find XP OEM for much less, but it comes with bigger restrictions (particularly that it's locked to whatever machine you install it on (even more, I think it's technically locked to whatever hardware you bought with it)). IIRC, Cedega can be transferred between PCs at will.
That said, yes, it'd likely be cheaper (and better-functioning) in the long run to just buy Windows. But it's very annoying (to me, at least) to dual-boot, and I'd rather not give Microsoft any more money/support to enable them to trash Linux and other competitors. (It's not "religious"; it's being an active consumer--the cornerstone of the capitalist system.)
For me, the solution is to not buy Windows-Only games. Which is the fully cheapest solution of all--no Windows, few USD50 games, and I don't have to reboot and stop everything I'm doing (which is generally a lot). I do have Cedega, primarily for older games and discount-shelf games. If a USD10 game doesn't run, no sweat. The main games I loved to play back under Windows--Diablo 2, StarCraft, and a few others--play just fine (though it'd be so very nice if Transgaming would make the other games work too!). I guess I just don't have the gamer mentality. Games don't rule me--they're an occasional fun diversion.
A: When it's being sold or given away.
Your example of a box plasma TV being a great deal if it's worth 5000 and sold for 500 is spot on. Problem is that software does not map well into the physical world, and your analogy is wrong because of this. You can (generally) sell items in the physical world once you've bought them. In the software world, this is much, much, much more complicated because sales aren't necessarily sales--they're more likely to be licenses.
For example, at (at least my) college, the Microsoft Campus Software Agreement will provide you (at the cost of USD30-70 per semester) an upgrade copy of Windows. Additonally all software provided in the program must be given back in every scenario, save graduating from the college.. I'm also pretty darned sure you may not resell the software. There's more to the deal that that, but that's just a quick example.
The bottom line is that software sale/licensing is much more complicated than the sale of physical objects.
If you're not going to (or cannot) eat it or sell it, the five pound block of cheese for USD5 is a waste of money compared to the one pound block of cheese for USD2.
I actually did read the whole article, but obviously missed a detail. Missing a detail does not necessarily imply lack of reading, but rather a lack of retaining all details in the article.
On the video side, unless the encryption/DRM crap is broken on HD-DVD and Blu-Ray (or there is a full-featured player for Linux that I can use on my Myth boxen and desktops and either the price is decreased on the movies (expected for a significantly broken/less-featured product) or I can do everything but give copies to a friend (about the only thing I don't mind a DRM system requiring of me)), then I'll stick with plain DVDs, thanks.
*Trelane removes his tongue from his cheek
Is Hula maybe what you seek? If not, is it hackable to what you want it to be?
See, you have to be popular enough to get the good help with hardware; it has nothing to do with closed or open source. If a new OS came out tomorrow, they'd face the same problems Linux is facing--the fact that lots of bits of hardware are quirky (or even broken), so to support all hardware properly, you must either be a popular enough OS for everyone to support you or else you must get a hold of every piece of hardware out there, and support it . Microsoft takes one tack (very nice place, if you can get there); OSS must (yet) take the other. Apple is in-between, since they're well-known enough to get some hardware vendors' attention, yet draw from FOSS projects too.
It's interesting to note that many of the quirks in hardware would likely not be present in a non-monopoly situation. Right now, if the hardware has some quirk they have to work around (e.g. broken DSDTs or DDC information), they need only fix for a few operating systems (the WinNT series if they wish to only support Windows; recent OSX if they want to support Mac, which is rare for non-standardized stuff); this can sometimes be done pretty quickly and easily (e.g. supplying a .inf file with the right mode information). In a situation where there are several equal players, vendors must stick to established standards, or else either provide fixes for a large number of OSes and versions or reduce their market by a non-negligible amount. Additionally, the time from initial creation to standard would be shorter on average, for similar reasons.
In fact, it's the Open nature of Open Source that Linux has a shot at all of suppoorting the hardware out there, given current market conditions.
It works anywhere between fine out of the box and totally crappy, depending on the particular quirks of your hardware (for example, ATI cards apparently need VBE information saved, whereas other vid cards apparently don't). A friend of mine's laptop worked 100% with S3; my Inspiron (very similar to his) with a newer card (otherwise same laptop) worked great--except the video was useless after resume. I then found VBEtool tricks, and now it works fine (except I have to do funky tricks due to ATI proprietary driver suckage; it works great with the 2d drivers).
In conclusion, if you want to run Linux, don't buy a notebook "Designed for Windows"--it will only be guaranteed to work with Windows. Now, due to current market conditions, finding a fully-supported Linux notebook can be an exercise in furstration. If you know of a reliable way to get a Linux notebook, please drop me a line!
for integrating with an existing DB, there's also ReKall.
one
three