Ubuntu On Dell After Four Months

mrcgran sends us to LXer for an interview with John Hull, a manager of the Linux Engineering team at Dell, where he reports on how the Ubuntu machines have been working out for them so far. "Embracing Ubuntu Linux on our desktops and laptops seems to have really raised Dell's visibility within the Linux community. We have been supporting, testing, developing for, and selling Linux for 8+ years here at Dell, but before the Ubuntu announcement, a lot of people didn't know that we did any of that... Previous to our Ubuntu product announcement... we would have a conversations with vendors about pushing Linux support for their hardware, but without a Linux product offering from Dell for that hardware, it was very difficult to convince them to release Linux drivers. That has certainly changed now... The original sales estimates for Ubuntu computers was around 1% of the total sales, or about 20,000 systems annually. The program so far is meeting expectations. Customers are certainly showing their interest and buying systems preloaded with Ubuntu, but it certainly won't overtake Microsoft Windows anytime soon."

Dude!

[longhairedgnome (610579)]

Your getting linux!

Within the retail sector...

[Tastecicles (1153671)]

...Dell have raised the awareness of Linux to the point where potentials are actually asking if Windows or Linux is installed. Eighteen months ago, that wouldn't have happened. Eighteen months ago people asked if a machine had XP, 2003, ME, 2K, or whatever version of Windows, but hardly ever Linux. I'm a Linux user myself, by preference (and politic, and budget), and advocate it wherever I can. I'm not saying it's for everybody, it might not be, but if you want a toaster, get a toaster. If you want a toaster that deep fries your sunday roast with all the trimmings, give Linux a go. :)

Re:

[Luterek (1174623)]

It's great that they are offering Ubuntu, but it is only available on one desktop system not the entire line-up and you need to go to a specific section of their website. I wish I could click customize and when the OS section comes up choose Ubuntu.

Re:Within the retail sector...

[Trelane (16124)]

They can't garauntee that Linux works with every hardware configuration, so they create some configurations that do work under Linux, and let you buy from those. Although I think it would be nice if their ordering system figured out that yes, you system was compatible with Linux, and let you choose it, or point out which items aren't compatible with Linux, and offer alternatives.

Sounds plausible, except that they already do this. Some peripherals require Vista or some version of Vista, and you get a little warning if you choose them without having selected whatever is required.

Re:Within the retail sector...

[zyxwvutsr (542520)]

if you want a toaster, get a toaster

I want a toaster with working WiFi drivers. Know where I can get one?

Re:

[iamdjsamba (1024979)]

I know i'll probably get slaughtered for this, but I agree with this statement completely.

I'm completely pro open source, and started off with Ubuntu as my first linux distro about a year ago, as everyone was raving on about it. Really impressed with the package manager, but I was completely lost when it came to installing stuff that wasn't in there.

I'm on Mandriva now, which is a massively improved user experience, where most of my stuff worked perfectly out the box (except my wireless, which took a bit o

Re:Within the retail sector...

[zergl (841491)]

However, I'm now in a position where I want to install subversion and tomcat, and it's really not easy. Windows wins in this situation, because of the ease of automated installers. Which is a great shame, and I know I'll get lambasted because I haven't done enough research or put the effort into to learning the basics of installing on linux properly, but for it to ever be accepted in the mainstream by your average Joe, things like that need to "just work".

Tomcat and SVN probably isn't part of what average Joe will use.

While it's true that "professional" or "power user" software isn't that easy to setup (messing around in the configs with an editor, etc.), I don't think it would bother the ordinary desktop user very much, because he'll probably never need it.

OTOH, installing everyday software like OOo, Gimp, Firefox, small little games etc. is extremely easy on linux in comparison to windows. Browse repository, install and forget. With the added bonus that the software you get is very probably free of malware of any kind (if you use $DISTRO default repository) and same goes for updates to that software.

Re:

[tepples (727027)]

With the added bonus that the software you get is very probably free of malware of any kind (if you use $DISTRO default repository)

So if I am the maintainer of a Free application, how do I make it notable enough to be included in $DISTRO default repository so that users of $DISTRO can easily install it? Or is there another preferable deployment method for maintainers of lesser-known packages on common GNU/Linux distributions?

Re:Within the retail sector...

[WhiteWolf666 (145211)]

Yes, simple;

RPM. Most users can download an RPM, double click on it, and it'll get installed properly.

I'm 99% sure that Ubuntu or Debian people can do similar things with DEBs. Of course, the downside with the package approach is you have to have one package per distro (take a look at Skype; skype isn't in any linux repositories, but it supplies 4-5 RPMs and a binary tarball).

If you prefer something that is more like a Windows installer, use autopackage [autopackage.org]. Autopackages are distro neutral. Here's the quote from their website:
# What is autopackage?
For users: it makes software installation on Linux easier. If a project provides an autopackage, you know it can work on your distribution. You know it'll integrate nicely with your desktop and you know it'll be up to date, because it's provided by the software developers themselves. You don't have to choose which distro you run based on how many packages are available.
For developers: it's software that lets you create binary packages for Linux that will install on any distribution, can automatically resolve dependencies and can be installed using multiple front ends, for instance from the command line or from a graphical interface. It lets you get your software to your users quicker, easier and more reliably. It immediately increases your user base by allowing people with no native package to run your software within seconds.

As you can see from the screenshots [autopackage.org], autopackage is pretty dead-easy for end users.

There are also next-generation packaging utilities that are overtaking Windows MSI-type things, including openSuSE's one-click-install, and KDE's klik://, but neither of these has taken hold with enough Linux distros yet (you have to be using SuSE 10.3, or install a package on older SuSEs, and klik:// requires a kio-slave).

Re:

[bfree (113420)]

KDE's klik:// ... (... klik:// requires a kio-slave)

Firstly klik isn't KDE's though it did start out dependant on some kde features. The initial k in the name reflects the knoppix roots, which reflects Klaus Knoppers name rather then the desktop environment he happened to also choose! I sometimes wonder what difference it would have made to klik's adoption if it's name hadn't started with either a k or a g!

Secondly you don't need a kio-slave to use klik, you can use it from the command line if you wan

Re:

[aymanh (892834)]

I'm 99% sure that Ubuntu or Debian people can do similar things with DEBs. Of course, the downside with the package approach is you have to have one package per distro (take a look at Skype; skype isn't in any linux repositories, but it supplies 4-5 RPMs and a binary tarball).

Skype offers an APT repository for Debian and Ubuntu users:
http://www.skype.com/download/skype/linux/repositories.html [skype.com]

And so do many other companies. For example, Google also provides an APT repository:
http://www.google.com/linuxreposi [google.com]

Re:

[VagaStorm (691999)]

Now, if every linux game was as easy to install as Americas army, it would all have been a walk in the park. Unfortunately, even installing games that has a linux port can be hard at times.... I had to find out patch, alter the code(I have no right alt on my keyboard) and recompile sdl to get nwn working as I wanted the last time I installed it :p But unlike windows that seems to become stranger evry version, linux becomes simpler every time one of the larger distros makes a major release, which seems to ha

Re:

[websitebroke (996163)]

I don't think that this is really the fault of Ubuntu. It's the fault of the software makers themselves. (if fault is to be assigned) Any software maker has the option of making a .deb or .rpm, it's just that many, for various reasons, choose not to. The reason these pieces of software install so easily on Windows is that somebody made the installer. Software doesn't just install itself on windows from source code. It all comes back to the necessity of making these installers. If you want your software to r

Re:Within the retail sector...

[mhall119 (1035984)]

With Ubuntu, if the package doesn't exist, it gets considerably more painful. Painful to the point that I don't think your average user would be willing to put up with it. I think the repository system is great, I just wish that there were decent installers for when it fails.

.DEB is Ubuntu's equivalent of Microsoft's .MSI installer. Ubuntu will load .DEB files (and apt:// URLs [ubuntu.com]) in GDebi, which informs you of any dependencies, resolves them if they are available in any of your repositories, and installed the package. Developers just need to create the .DEB package, they don't need to use a third-party installation wizard. The problem isn't that Ubuntu doesn't have an easy to use installer, its that not every developer bothers to make .DEB files.

Re:

[Cato (8296)]

.DEBs are a bit like .MSIs, but there are some major differences - as you mention, you can use Gdebi to install arbitrary .DEBs bu8t it's a lot better if the package is actually in a repository already. The big difference is that for packages in a repository, you can install a whole set of packages (tens or hundreds) with a single operation, whether CLI or GUI.

Try doing that with Windows Installers - just keeping a Windows box up to date with security fixes (beyond Windows and MS Office) is quite time cons

Re:Within the retail sector...

[Jussi K. Kojootti (646145)]

I'm not saying your complaints aren't valid, but the examples you use are fairly bad. I'm pretty sure both tomcat and subversion are available in the repos of all major distros. Example in ubuntu:

aptitude install subversion tomcat5.5

Do you have actual examples of "joe average" applications that are not available (things that could legally be available)?

Re:

[Lumpy (12016)]

I was able to do what you did with the Ubuntu click and drool interface as well.

I then went to install subversion on windows. Ubuntu install was 100 times easier than windows as I had to search for a version that was acceptable. I finally settled on TortiseSVN which was nice.

Overall install on my ubuntu and my Fedora Core 7 box took very little time. Ubuntu was the least time and least effort. windows ended up the most as you had to find the software and then install it. fedora was as simple as your e

Re:Within the retail sector...

[BKX (5066)]

You're making in incorrect assumption. It's EASIER to use a package manager. Most distros (and competent admins) seriously frown upon non-package-manager-installed software because of the problems this can introduce. Also, puTTY? Why? Just stick with the Linux/UNIX equivalents that puTTY was made to emulate. (That's right, puTTY was made for Windows users to get unix functionality, not vice versa.)

Please, tell me one thing that putty can do that ssh, telnet, and xterm can't.

Re:Within the retail sector...

[hummassa (157160)]

You're making in incorrect assumption. It's EASIER to use a package manager. Most distros (and competent admins) seriously frown upon non-package-manager-installed software because of the problems this can introduce. Also, puTTY? Why? Just stick with the Linux/UNIX equivalents that puTTY was made to emulate. (That's right, puTTY was made for Windows users to get unix functionality, not vice versa.)

Please, tell me one thing that putty can do that ssh, telnet, and xterm can't.

The point is moot, anyway, because putty, putty-tools (plink, pscp, psftp, puttygen) and pterm (putty terminal emulator) are in the Ubuntu repository, ie, if you like them better, you can still use them.

Re:

[Loki_1929 (550940)]

"(That's right, puTTY was made for Windows users to get unix functionality, not vice versa.)"

You realize, of course, that you're also describing Linux with this statement? Just because something's designed to get you functionality already available elsewhere doesn't mean it's automatically inferior.

Re:

[MMC Monster (602931)]

Yeah, you'll probably get blasted for that post. :-)

Really, though, package installation is incredibly easy in most distributions now, with repositories handling all dependencies. In Ubuntu, for instance, there is an "Add Programs" icon in the Applications Menu by default, that lists the most popular applications and separates them into categories so there is no information overload. If you know the exact name of the package to install (such as subversion or tomcat), open up synaptic and choose the packag

Re:

[cerberusss (660701)]

However, I'm now in a position where I want to install subversion and tomcat, and it's really not easy.

I don't know what you're talking about. I'm on RedHat here, and installing tomcat is like:

yum install tomcat5

And on Debian it's:

apt-get install tomcat5

I guess your distro just isn't suited for server tasks.

Re:

[DanielJosphXhan (779185)]

When Apple bolts OS X to specific hardware, it's justified in the name of user experience. Apple stabilises the user experience by limiting the OS to a certain subset of hardware: theirs.

Ubuntu, on the other hand, doesn't have that option. It does, however, have the option of pointing users in the direction of certain software by making it easy to install: repositories. Things that go into the repos are tested for compatibility, they install smoothly, and yet there are literally thousands of programs in the

Re:Within the retail sector...

[LingNoi (1066278)]

If you're on Ubuntu there are places such as http://www.getdeb.net/ [getdeb.net] where you can get popular programs that aren't in the repositories yet.

Re:Within the retail sector...

[LingNoi (1066278)]

Not really. It's more to do with the fact that once a version of Ubuntu is released you only get security updates in the repository. So for example there is no Pidgin in Ubuntu Feisty because that was released after Ubuntu Feisty was.

The reason they only provide security updates is because they don't want a situation where continuously updating stuff in the repositories breaks other programs. Instead Canonical will take a snapshot of all the new programs and work really hard testing that snapshot and sorting out all the bugs, release that out the door and start working on the next version.

So if you want Pidgin or another must have updated program on Feisty then you go to getdeb.net [getdeb.net]

Ubuntu Gutsy is being released on 18th this month (2 days) so that'll have a ton of updated programs, features, etc.

Re:

[SgtPepperKSU (905229)]

cost in download is quite significant for me on my current ISP plan unfortunately

Then just have Ubuntu Ship It [ubuntu.com] to free of charge!

Linux compatibility

[reset_button (903303)]

Our lab has been buying Dell servers for a few years now, because they certify the machines as being Linux compatible. Instead of checking the hardware specs against the list of available Linux drivers, I can buy knowing that things will just work. Kudos.

Before the Ubuntu announcement

[MoonFog (586818)]

You had to ask for Linux in a very different way. Now, they are offering a proper desktop alternative, which wasn't the case before, so when he says they've had Linux for 8+ years, it doesn't tell the whole story. There's a difference between offering Linux, under the table more or less, and offering it as an actual alternative to Windows when you're ordering your new laptop.

Nonetheless, kudos to Dell and here's to hoping more vendors pick up this trend.

It doesn't have to take over...

[by Anonymous Coward]

To be honest, I don't think it has to take over, nor do I think it will. Even Firefox didn't take over IE, but it did have some impact, and Microsoft changed its crappy CSS support to a _slightly_ better one. If Linux achieves ~20% or so it will be much harder for Microsoft to push its proprietary standards, and everyone benefits.

What about dual boot?

[PianoComp81 (589011)]

What I'd like to see Dell offer is the chance to get both Ubuntu and Windows installed by the factory as a dual-boot system. While I normally use Linux, I need Windows for a few games still. I know, I know, I'm never satisfied. While I'm glad Dell is selling desktops with Linux now, a dual-boot offer would be a great improvement.

Re:What about dual boot?

[djfake (977121)]

I bought a Vista box (since the license it probably cheaper and the warranty better server) from Dell: Was this easy or what? I just did a "shrink" to the massive C: in Vista, then booted off of Ubuntu CD and started the install, selecting "guided using freespace" when partitioning. After a reboot, grub had automatically configured Vista into the bootloader. I then edited /boot/grub/menu.lst to set it as the default.

The other way around (adding Vista to a Linux Box) is slightly more complicated:

http://my.opera.com/djfake/blog/dell-preloaded-with-ubuntu [opera.com]

Or you could buy an Intel Mac and use boot camp, that's ea$y enough too! c

Ubuntu Preloads

[Zombie Ryushu (803103)]

I have a Ubuntu Preload Under warranty from Dell. It runs Feisty Fawn, I love it. I have one little problem. if you load up even a different Linux, you void your warranty, because they have a few proprietary drivers in the machines for some of the hardware, like the Win-modem. So. Here is an interesting question. How do you upgrade from Fiesty Fawn to Gutsy Gibbon without voiding your warranty?

Not in the Netherlands

[Twisted Willie (1035374)]

Dell doesn't offer any sytems with Ubuntu preinstalled in the Netherlands. I was looking for a new laptop for my parents, and I managed to convince them to go Linux. So I went to the Dell website, but alas, no such luck. Still, knowing that their hardware will work with Ubuntu was enough for me to go Dell anyway.

Dell and Debian

[jchawk (127686)]

Dell for sometime has provided pretty decide web support for Debian. The web pages I've come across have always been enough to get me started when needing to setup a new server. :-)

laptops as a loss leader for selling servers

[nadaou (535365)]

Dell selling a few Linux-on-Laptops at the consumer end makes a lot of sense when you consider they want to grab a bigger chunk of the server market, where Linux holds a great portion of the market share. Get people used to the idea of Linux on Dell, then when they are in the market for a server they come back to what they know. The super reliable Linux experience makes Dell look good. Same angle as RedHat supporting FedoraCore.

What happened?

[moosesocks (264553)]

I'm kind of interested in hearing what's caused the turnaround for Dell over the past year or two.

Dell has more or less had a reputation of being deep in the pockets of Microsoft and Intel. It was no secret that Intel was giving Dell huge perks for not selling systems with AMD chips, and I'd be surprised if Microsoft wasn't offering similar perks for keeping Linux off of consumer desktops.

Now, we're seeing dell open up a lot more options to consumers.

So what happened? Did the payola from Intel and Microsoft stop? Was there a management shakeup? Are they trying to re-focus their image as a serious business vendor to step into the void left by IBM? Or are they just emphasizing "choice" to avoid losing any more ground to Apple (this theory strongly lends itself to their decision to distance themselves from MS because of the Vista backlash)

Or maybe they're finally waking up to the fact that "nerd cred" seriously does sell computers. I would credit OS X's acceptance within the community as being instrumental to the sort of success Apple's been seeing over the past few years -- OS 7,8, and 9 left them with a pretty bad reputation that they needed to shed themselves of. When the guy who's fixed your PC multiple times recommends getting a mac, it lends some serious credibility to the brand. Given that Dell's a pretty generic brand, I doubt that anyone has serious qualms about buying from them, but it's a whole lot better than having a negative brand-reputation, or being badmouthed by everyone in the industry. (See also: Article yesterday about AOL losing $100 billion)

Re:

[rainer_d (115765)]

> I'm kind of interested in hearing what's caused the turnaround for Dell over the past year or two.

That's easy. AAPL ate their lunch.
When the market grows say 10% and one of your competitors grows 30% and your own growth is flat (at best), you know you're just a couple of quarters away from a big disaster.
You don't have to be a genius to figure that out.
Growth is hardly in selling laptops to new customers (just like the total number of people drinking beer is not going to increase significantly).
So, you

A missed opportunity

[Toreo asesino (951231)]

I, for the first time actually got a friend setup on Ubuntu a couple of weeks ago. Normally, being of the Microsoft persuasion, I'd recommend Windows if nothing else for its generally universal familiarity if nothing else (all the other PC's in the house were WinBoxes), but the machine she was given was free and not very good. The Windows installed on it was Win ME that wouldn't get even to the desktop unless in safe mode, so it had to go, but it was not capable of running XP to any degree of sanity (128 mb ram, celeron processor, etc), and indeed there was the licensing issue too.

A perfect opportunity for Ubuntu I thought! Or not, as it turned out.

I downloaded and burnt the latest CD image and installed it. Everything was installed fine, except the network card was not detected, rendering the machine even less useful than the butchered ME installation that was on it before. She only wanted to browse the net and read GMail basically, so without a network connection, the laptop was now as good as a large paper-weight.

Now, this is by no means a flame against Ubuntu at all. Before it turned out Ubuntu was compatible, I was thinking to myself that if there's one area Ubuntu could really grow in is the "too old to run Windows x/y/z" which sets the hardware requirement bar higher & higher with each release.

Despite what Microsoft say, Vista is not suited to all PC's - but arguably, Ubuntu is suited to run on almost anything assuming you don't mind common commercial apps/games aren't going to run for newbies (for obvious reasons).

So, if I had one suggestion for Ubuntu/Linux is please, get it to run on shite hardware! Refurbished machines are overlooked if you ask me as many people really can't be bothered to buy new hardware, and Windows really isn't so suited for them in many cases.

Re:

[LingNoi (1066278)]

Did you submit a bug on launchpad [launchpad.net] about that laptop giving the details of what your network card problem was? If not it won't get fixed. Ubuntu is mostly run by volunteers that depends on people like you to submit bug reports.

Also did you check the irc chatroom or forums out for help? I had one guy in the IRC room that couldn't get his webcam working on Ubuntu. After I did a quick search on the forums I found a post on how to get his hardware working and gave him the link. He thanked me and said it was now

Re:

[140Mandak262Jamuna (970587)]

You need to compare apples to apples. (oops!) Take a machine that is preloaded with Linux and download a WinXP/Vista, if possible and try to install it yourself. Most people compare pre-installed windows user experience with download a full os, install and run user experience of Linux.

Re:

[domatic (1128127)]

There are distributions specifically for low end hardware. Puppy Linux is one that I've had success with. There are others. It is probably better in the long run for distros like Ubuntu to concentrate their efforts on current middle of the road hardware. Low end old hardware imposes a lot of tradeoffs that current general purpose distro's won't manage well. Distros made with such hardware specifically in mind tend to fare better. Puppy, for instance, could completely install itself in memory on the ma

Not in norway. :-(

[arcade (16638)]

I was hoping to get a Ubuntu laptop here in Norway.

So far - no such luck. I'm looking forward to that day, so that I can just order one. But until they ship it, it's difficult.

Hey DELL! We norwegians want Ubuntu on our laptops too!

Has anyone actually gone to them for the ubuntu pc

[hairyfeet (841228)]

I just went there,are they kidding? They are charging MORE for a lower spec machine than you would get going Vista! 1Gb of RAM, the bottom of the line Core2Duo, and a lousy 80Gb hard drive,for 774? And I tried adding an extra Gb of RAM, which only added $60 on the Vista machine, added $125!!!. It is like they are doing everything they can to make sure it fails. Either they are afraid of making Bill mad, or they don't want to mess up the extra cash they are making from the crapware installs. But either way, you can't tell me that the price of memory jumps more than 100% just because it has Ubuntu on it.

http://www.dell.com/content/topics/segtopic.aspx/linux_3x?c=us&cs=19&l=en&s=dhs [dell.com]

Sadly,just like before Dell started, any geek with a brain will have to pay the Microsoft tax and wipe the drive if you want a Dell at a decent price. Unless they love Dell SO much they are willing to overpay for lower spec hardware just for the privilege of Ubuntu. The prices they are charging for what you are getting is just crazy.

Re:Technically...

[thsths (31372)]

> So, how many chairs will Ballmer throw?

I think this calls for a three seater leather couch.

Re:

[marcosdumay (620877)]

But does Linux really run on the kitchen sink?

Re:

[by Anonymous Coward]

Actually I bough 3 Ubuntu Dells for my buseness...and, i formatted the hard drives and installed 3 xp licenses I had here. it was not ***so much cheaper*** than buying 3 xp dells directly, but I really didn't need 3 licenses more. So that's 3 chairs less, actually.

Your point is perfect, though. How much running around and acreaming about those scurvey Pirates (Yaaaaarrrrr!) has Microsoft been doing lately, while tightening Windows Genuine disAdvantage. How many fleets of new machine orders with complem

Re:Technically...

[BlueParrot (965239)]

So one purchase of a desktop with linux costs MS two sales? Interesting figure.

The first is the Vista OEM sale, the second is the XP sale when users want to upgrade...

Re:

[MoonFog (586818)]

Not everyone is capable of building their own computer, and when a large vendor like this gives Linux a shot, chances are that more people who would normally not adopt Linux will look towards it as a proper alternative instead of a geek system.

Your experiences with Dell and their hardware applies to Windows boxes as well usually, and Dell may influence other vendors to try Linux in the same way, thus the issues with support may get remedied in the long run as well.

Re:Yeah, but where can I buy it?

[atomic-penguin (100835)]

It's under Desktop->Open-Source PCs or Laptop->Open-Source PCs on the Higher Ed. portal I'm looking at.

Re:

[_xeno_ (155264)]

If you go to Ubuntu.com [ubuntu.com] there's a link on the right side of the page to buy preinstalled Ubuntu systems from Dell [ubuntu.com], which sends you to Dell's site.

I know several other people have given various links, but I prefer Ubuntu's own link because it links to Dell's sites for the UK, France, and Germany as well as the US, making it more generally useful. It also provides an overview of the support options you can get from Canonical through Dell.