Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments
Search

News for nerds, stuff that matters

Slashdot Log In

Log In

Create Account  |  Retrieve Password

Shuttleworth Tells Linux Users to Stop Being So Fussy For OEMs

Posted by CmdrTaco on Wed Mar 14, 2007 10:33 AM
from the probably-good-advice-in-general dept.
Software Linux
Anonymous writes "Mark Shuttleworth says Linux users may need to stop being so fussy when putting demands on OEMs for pre-installed Linux PCs. CRN finds a response to Shuttleworth that seems to be both amusing and telling at the same time."
+ -
story

Related Stories

[+] No Wine for Dell Ubuntu Users, Says Shuttleworth 328 comments
yuna49 writes "News from last week, but still worth noting: Mark Shuttleworth told eWeek in a May 3rd interview that Dell will not include open-source software such as Wine with the PCs it plans to bundle with Ubuntu Linux. Says Shuttleworth: 'I do not want to position Ubuntu and Linux as a cheap alternative to Windows ... While Linux is an alternative to Windows, it is not cheap Windows. Linux has its own strengths, and users should want it because of those strengths and not because it's a cheap copy of Windows ... Often we see proprietary software companies just completely fail to understand not only the motivations of the Linux community, but also the processes. It's very practical, there's a way to get things done, and it's different. The VMware guys have really engaged with us completely and worked to the agenda set by the Linux community, which is not an ideological agenda but a practical one.' Does that mean Wine won't even be listed in the package manager?"
[+] Ubuntu Founder Says Microsoft Not A Big Threat 128 comments
Golygydd Max writes "Who says that Microsoft and open source developers are enemies? It's not Ubuntu founder Mark Shuttleworth. He says that Microsoft is not the patent threat Linux and open source developers should be worried about, and that the software giant will itself be fighting against the software patents system within a few years. 'He said the most dangerous litigants are companies not themselves in the software business, small ventures or holding companies that get their principal revenue from patent licensing. He singled out former Microsoft CTO Nathan Myhrvold and his company Intellectual Ventures, which is stockpiling patents at a rate that alarms large companies such as IBM and HP, as an example of such a potentially dangerous company.'"
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.

Shuttleworth Tells Linux Users to Stop Being So Fussy For OEMs 50 Comments More /

 Full
 Abbreviated
 Hidden
More
Loading... please wait.

  • Fatal flaw (Score:3, Insightful)

    by xxxJonBoyxxx (565205) on Wednesday March 14 2007, @10:39AM (#18348009)

    Linux users may need to stop being so fussy when putting demands on OEMs for pre-installed Linux PCs


    The reason most of us got to be Linux users in the first place was fussiness: we didn't like what commercial OS vendors did with their stuff so we went to open source so we could improve upon it any time we wanted. The average user just doesn't care that much about the OS they're running; vanilla Windows or OS X is good enough for the masses.

    If you Venn-ed "Linux users" and "people who can control their fussiness", you'd have very little overlap.

    • Re:Fatal flaw (Score:5, Insightful)

      by i_should_be_working (720372) on Wednesday March 14 2007, @10:51AM (#18348189)
      To be fair to Shuttlesworth, he didn't actually tell us to stop being fussy. He said we are fussy, without making any judgements. And that this fact would make it harder for Dell to satisfy us. I don't know why the /. article claims he said that.

      • Yeah, and that's wrong. This game is almost over. (Score:5, Interesting)

        by twitter (104583) on Wednesday March 14 2007, @12:55PM (#18350423) Homepage Journal

        He said we are fussy, without making any judgements. And that this fact would make it harder for Dell to satisfy us.

        All anyone cares about is to have hardware with free drivers, from there any distro can be installed. The continued acceptance of M$'s inferior GUI and software for "hardware compatibility" is proof that the vast majority of computer users just want the system to work and will put up with all sorts of security and performance issues to get that level of "convenience". If Dell would select or demand hardware with free drivers, every major gnu/linux distribution would work - that's not hard at all. Picky people are going to reinstall the OS anyway and no one will blame Dell for that.

        The of Mark's criticism that sticks is this:

        If Microsoft reduces the per-PC marketing contribution it makes for a particular reseller, that puts them at a huge financial disadvantage relative to their competitors. This means that one of the biggest issues a computer manufacturer or reseller faces in considering Linux pre-installations is the impact it will have on the Microsoft relationship, and hence bottom line.

        Anti-competitive pressure is what this ever boils down to. It will go away as hardware prices drop below $200 or so, because there's no room for software costs at that price point. That Dell is making noises like this now is good evidence that there's not much room for software costs at the $400 price point. The corporate price point is already there and that's why so many companies are dumping M$. The first vendor to deliver a $200 computer with nothing but free software on it is going to win big time and there's nothing M$ will be able to do about it.

        • Re:Yeah, and that's wrong. This game is almost ove (Score:5, Insightful)

          by turbidostato (878842) on Wednesday March 14 2007, @04:23PM (#18354365)
          "All anyone cares about is to have hardware with free drivers, from there any distro can be installed."

          That hits the mark, yes. And it is *VERY* easy for Dell to find the way so it's good for everybody: certify for Debian "Stable", that's all.

          Debian is a known distribution that only uses free software and it's not bleeding edge. In sort: if it works on Debian Stable, it will work with any other. Still, Dell people is corporate, but Debian helps here too. What are the chances for a Debian-certified hardware not to work on RHEL or Suse? I'll bet they are almost nihil, so once certified on Debian re-certify for Red Hat and Suse is nuts. Even more: is the case that you want some hardware certifiable (think PERC)? No problem: Debian is an open community you will find far easier developing open source drivers and have them included on Debian as far as they are good quality than with anyone else that can have their own corporate portfolio.

          So let's sort this again. Mr Dell: by certifying Debian you...
          1) Will be certifying one of the most popular distributions
          2) Will satisfy users of not so well known distributions (if it works with Debian you can bet it'll work with Arch, Slackware, Gentoo... you name it, and that's all that need and can expect users of such distributions)
          3) Will satisfy FOSS zealots: if it works on "vanilla" Debian Stable this means it works over true tested open source software with no "small letter" involved
          4) You still have an easy path for "corporate" distributions like Red Hat or Suse: since it works with Debian, you have an easy way to certify for Red Hat or Suse.

          I don't think it requieres a genious mind to see this.
          • If anyone could put pressure on the hardware market, it would be Dell. Imagine for a moment that Dell decreed that they would no longer purchase hardware from anyone who did not document their hardware in such a way that an open driver could be written. (hell, let's get the BSD crowd on side too). Dell then say to random video card manufacturers, "can you do it?". They reply "Yes. because it means we make $BIGNUM sales to you".

            If it's a choice between releasing your trade secrets and going broke, most companies will have their specs on the front page of the "wall street journal".

            The Open Source crowd get what they want. (libre drivers) Dell get what they want, (more PC sales to that noisy rabble who affect corporate sales), the hardware manufacturers get what they want, (big contracts with Dell) so everyone is happy. With the exception of some chair chucker from redmond.

    • Re:Fatal flaw (Score:4, Insightful)

      by Richard_at_work (517087) <richardprice @ g m ail.com> on Wednesday March 14 2007, @10:58AM (#18348323)

      If you Venn-ed "Linux users" and "people who can control their fussiness", you'd have very little overlap.
      Personally I get the impression that those Linux users that are vocal about Dell et al supporting and providing Linux are not the same group that would ever use a Dell provided install - preciselly because of the issue you highlight.

      • Re:Fatal flaw (Score:5, Insightful)

        by BillGod (639198) on Wednesday March 14 2007, @11:19AM (#18348723)
        I don't care what flavor they sell it with. Hell give me option of no OS. I dont want to pay more for a pc to come with windows so I can take it home and format the drive.

        • Re:Fatal flaw (Score:5, Insightful)

          by gfxguy (98788) on Wednesday March 14 2007, @11:28AM (#18348889)
          I think the biggest complaint the OSS community has is not that we can't buy a preconfigured Linux box from a major vendor, but that we are forced to buy an OS we don't want.

          And the truth then comes out in Shuttleworth's article. MS tried tying, and was told to stop. So they tried cliff pricing and were told to stop. Now it's giving vendors advertising money on a per-box basis.

          There's no law against it, but aren't there laws about monopolies being anti-competitive? Isn't that what got MS into trouble all the times before? Isn't that what they're doing now?

          I'm a libertarian (small "L"), and even I can see that government intervention is sometimes justified.

      • Re:Fatal flaw (Score:5, Insightful)

        by Znork (31774) on Wednesday March 14 2007, @11:58AM (#18349389)
        Of course I wont be using a Dell provided install, it'll probably be outdated by the time it ships anyway, so what would be the point?

        Personally I'm interested in Dell shipping linux because of two things: first, if they ship _one_ working Linux version, any version, the nature of the GPL makes sure that any other Linux version will also work, or easy to get to work.

        Second: For ethical reasons I prefer not to give money to Microsoft, which means I'm through with buying products which entail payment to them.

        In the end, any fussiness regarding Linux distributions simply doesnt impact Dell any more than Windows users fussiness about games, applications or desktop backgrounds. I dont care what they ship on it; I want the assurance that the fundamental product will work as expected. Ensure the hardware is supported by available open drivers, ship something reasonably (not too new, not too old) mainstream, and leave the users themselves to deal with their own fussiness.

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by suv4x4 (956391)
      The reason most of us got to be Linux users in the first place was fussiness: we didn't like what commercial OS vendors did with their stuff so we went to open source so we could improve upon it any time we wanted.

      Then improve upon it and stop whining that hardware vendors support it. You can't have it both ways.

      The very reason enterprise Linux vendors today (like RedHat/Novell) can sell an OS which is essentially free, is because the open source model is way too fussy for wide adoption and support in the i
  • And then Mark Shuttleworth made the Linux community a glass of warm milk and sent them to bed...

  • Wait, what? (Score:3, Insightful)

    by voice_of_all_reason (926702) on Wednesday March 14 2007, @10:44AM (#18348077)
    He wants us to be satisfied with a piece of technology (likely the most complicated one you own) doesn't work out of the box? What is he, retarded?

    Would you put up with that on other devices? Like an ipod that requires compiling, or a toaster that needs C statements to process bread?

    • Re:Wait, what? (Score:5, Insightful)

      by stratjakt (596332) on Wednesday March 14 2007, @10:48AM (#18348151) Journal
      Ya it's like shipping DVD players without movies to watch, or a video game console without a game to play, or a 200 CD jukebox - WITH NO MUSIC ON IT!?!

      The computer works just fine out of the box. Pop in a bootable CD and watch it do it's thing, or have fun setting the date in the bios.

      • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

        by apt142 (574425)
        To me, you and the rest here on slashdot that makes perfect sense. To the average user, they'll be upset there were sold, in their minds, a $1000+ paperweight.

        And, while it would be tempting to say "tough shit, they can learn to stick in a disk", you can't expect that of the average user.

        The main thing slashdotters would be getting out of this is an exemption from the Micrsoft Tax. As far as OS's go, we're more than capable of formatting and installing what we like. So, the whole choice of pre-ins

        • Re:Wait, what? (Score:5, Informative)

          by eln (21727) on Wednesday March 14 2007, @11:08AM (#18348547) Homepage
          What planet are you living on? With the exception of the Wii, none of the next-gen consoles ship with a game, and I don't think any of the previous gen ones did either (by default).

          As for DVD players, maybe if you buy them at a fancy electronics store that overcharges for them, they might throw in a DVD. But that's probably the store doing it, not the manufacturer. I've never purchased a DVD player (or VCR or TV for that matter) that came with a movie included.

    • Re:Wait, what? (Score:5, Funny)

      by Vulva R. Thompson, P (1060828) on Wednesday March 14 2007, @11:03AM (#18348399)
      or a toaster that needs C statements to process bread?

      Wouldn't be so bad, just use a bakefile.

  • How does that response answer anything? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by jojoba_oil (1071932) on Wednesday March 14 2007, @10:44AM (#18348079)
    If nothing else, that "response" seems to be more of a paraphrase than anything else, with a few links that are on the original anyways. And obviously the comment quoted by CRN doesn't understand the problem from the shoes of the OEMs.

  • Huh? (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday March 14 2007, @10:45AM (#18348105)
    CRN finds a response to Shuttleworth that seems to be both amusing and telling at the same time.

    You mean the quote at the end? Yeah, it's "telling" -- it's telling of how thoroughly garden-variety forum idiots can't even conceive of the possibility that there's something about Dell's business that Dell understands and they don't, and not vice-versa. You'd think that if nothing else, the editors here, as employees of a failed Linux box provider, would understand that.

  • I think the problem.... (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Churla (936633) on Wednesday March 14 2007, @10:48AM (#18348153)
    I think the problem becomes evident looking at the Dell survey...

    6) Which Linux distribution should Dell prioritize on?
            Commercial: Novell/SuSE Linux Desktop
            Commercial: Red Hat Enterprise Desktop
            Community Supported: Fedora
            Community Supported: OpenSUSE
            Community Supported: Ubuntu
            Other
            If 'Other', please specify

    People complain about several different versions of Windows Vista but you just named 5 completely different builds of a Linux OS, and there are several more I know some niche market people would like to see on that list too (like Kubuntu). Since if you roll out a SuSE based Linux machine several of the others would just say "Meh, I'll order it however and flatten it once I get it" you have a much smaller target audience who would actually buy it.

    And until a company can determine that there's a big enough audience who would buy a specific distro of linux on a computer they won't make efforts to support them.

    • Re:I think the problem.... (Score:4, Insightful)

      by sconeu (64226) on Wednesday March 14 2007, @11:04AM (#18348437) Homepage Journal
      The key thing is that if it's shipped with any of these, especially a community supported distro, then wiping and reinstalling is cool, because you know the hardware has drivers available.

      If you just buy a generic Windows version of said box, the hardware may not be supported.

  • It's about the money (Score:3, Insightful)

    by DeHackEd (159723) on Wednesday March 14 2007, @10:51AM (#18348185) Homepage
    For me, it's about the money. If I buy a laptop with Fedora Core 6 pre-installed (for the sake of argument), that money spent on the software would go to people who actually develop code for the system I bought, even if I nuke the hard drive and install $OTHER_DISTRO later. If I buy the same laptop with Windows on it, the money going to somebody with whom I have no interest in whatsoever.

    So, put some kind of non-Windows OS on it. If the software costs money, make sure it goes to the people who make the OS. Don't let Microsoft have it. Personally I'm okay with Red Hat getting a small amount of money for the system that will be turned into Gentoo. Microsoft, not so much.

    This is one of the big reasons we want Linux pre-installed -- evasion of the microsoft tax.

  • I don't get it. (Score:4, Insightful)

    by xerxesVII (707232) on Wednesday March 14 2007, @10:51AM (#18348187)
    I followed the link expecting to read a response. All that I found was a copy and paste of a few snippets and some snark at the end about just slapping an install disc in and calling it good. I am as proud a Linux user as anyone around here, but I fail to see how that kind of "response" qualifies as productive or even linkworthy. I've seen more detailed discussion around here. I agree with Shuttleworth- if we want the big boys to start shipping with linux, we need to meet them half way and explain what we truly expect. This is a very large corporation we're dealing with, not a couple of friends building computers in the garage.

  • Shuttleworth has some good points. (Score:5, Insightful)

    by jlowe (907739) on Wednesday March 14 2007, @10:52AM (#18348207) Homepage
    Obviously, Mark Shuttleworth has become a major voice in mainstream Linux. He raises some good points.

    He mentions the problem vendors face with the idea of Microsoft cutting some co-marketing funds. I really do not see much risk to Dell from this. After all, they already sell some OS-less (freedos) desktops and laptops (albeit fairly hidden). That to me seems like something for Microsoft to complain about more than selling preinstalled Linux machines. It should be understood that the cost of a pre-installed Linux machine will be more than a Windows machine. The additional software Dell installs on Windows helps them make money.

    Shuttleworth also brings up the valid and true point that Linux users are very fussy and picky. Linux users also are very specific with what they want. The problem being that Linux users will want specific hardware and a specific distribution. With Dell already talking about certifying several lines of machines for Linux, I see this problem disappearing completely. If the Inspiron notebook line is certified to work with Linux, then it should be trivial to have Dell install Linux instead of Windows Vista. Dell should decide on a specific distro to support, and preinstall that on the Linux computers. Then, if someone is a more "expert" Linux user, he or she can install whatever distro and version he or she wants. The main issue is that the Linux buyer is not buying Vista.
  • What I want from Dell is a commitment to selling a machine with hardware that is supported by the community. No Winmodems, no ndiswrapper, but actual, tested, "we put this in a box together and it works like we think it does" hardware.

    Past that, I couldn't possibly care less what distribution of Linux they throw on it. If it's a distribution I like and am willing to use, then more power to me. If not, "lsmod" and I'm off and installing the distribution of my choice. Either way, I'm golden.

    I own a Dell Inspiron 4100, and I remember what a holy terror getting Linux to run on that machine was (with full hardware support). If I could buy a laptop from Dell with a piece of paper that says, "The network adapter uses the 'eepro100' driver," etc., then I would be a happy customer.

    • Re:It's all about the hardware (Score:4, Insightful)

      by replicant108 (690832) on Wednesday March 14 2007, @12:19PM (#18349775) Journal
      Sometimes I wish posts could get modded to '6'.

      If Dell introduced a hardware certification programme:

      1. They would not have to do any post-sales linux support.
      2. Such a programme would have a finite cost-per-system, and would give their product-line a clear competitive advantage.
      3. It would buy lots of good karma and word-of-mouth marketing from the community.
      4. It would reduce the impediments to widespread Linux adoption - and MS's leverage in business deals.

  • What I want (Score:5, Insightful)

    by TopSpin (753) * on Wednesday March 14 2007, @11:05AM (#18348475) Journal
    Not really interested in OEM installation of any specific distro. They'll do it wrong or pollute it as they do Windows. What good is that?

    What I want is machines designed with components that are supported by mature Linux drivers. For almost any given component there are implementations that have good Linux driver support and others that don't. Select only components with good driver support, explicitly advertise this policy with adequate technical information, charge a modest premium for it if you must and give me the same hardware warranty as your other products. Seems fairly simple to me.

    That's all I want. You can stop fussing about distros now. That and support lines for Linux; I won't be calling unless your hardware fails.

  • It's the hardware, stupid! (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Ignatius (6850) on Wednesday March 14 2007, @11:17AM (#18348689)
    Linux customers could care less about the pre-installed distrib, but the do care about 100% Linux compatability of the hardware, which is pretty much the same over all distribs (modulo non-free drivers). After all, even for large roll-outs, "installing" a customized system on identical hardware simply means gunzipping a prepared disk image (which can also include the partition table).

    Therefore the best way to go about it would probably be to merely install a minimum system with a small footprint (1 GB max) but all hardware drivers installed and configuered in order to demonstrate Linux compatibility and to allow to check the hardware. The distrib should not matter in this case. Then, the customer can install his favorite Linux distrib and opt to keep the minimum installation as a rescue system.

    In the case of Dell, this means: Replace the existing FreeDos installation (which you get when you order a Dell w/o OS - at least here in Europe) with a small Linux system, and everyone is happy.

    • Re: Shuttleworth who (Score:5, Funny)

      by jdgeorge (18767) on Wednesday March 14 2007, @10:53AM (#18348223)
      Is this someone I relay should be concerned with telling me to settle down. Um considering Dell is actually moving towards putting Linux on desk tops, why should we settle down as it seams to be working and people are lisining. If we all sit back and just do nothing and Settle Down, then company's like Dell will not do this and we don't get linux on desk tops. Hell because of this, I may be looking at Dell for a low to medium end Linux system to replace my aging Linux system for testing and programing use. But if thye don't add linux on the system, I an't going dell, end of story.

      Hmmm... I think I understand the plan here:
      1. Butcher the English language nearly beyond recognition.
      2. ???
      3. Receive Dell desktop computer with Linux preinstalled.

    • Re: Shuttleworth who (Score:4, Insightful)

      by networkBoy (774728) on Wednesday March 14 2007, @10:56AM (#18348267) Homepage Journal
      Yes and no.
      We should not settle down about having a pre-installed Linux option, but we should settle down on what distro.
      Specifically I want the following:
      A mainstream distro with all devices that ship with the PC supported.
      Whatever is easiest for Dell/HP/Acer/whatever within the above constraint is fine.
      *Gnome Vs. KDE? I Don't Care (If I want "the other one" I'll change it)
      *Emacs Vs. VI? IDK
      *Ubuntu/FC6/Suss10.2/Slackware? IDK (though I think the slack may be a bit too geekish)
      Give me any mainstream distro, with a desktop and window manager. Give me drivers for all the devices in the box. Make it "nice" to joe sixpack. I'll geek it out myself.

      Now what wouldn't hurt is if the community came up with a "tweaked" distro (or even an entirely different build) if Dell would host a repository of .iso files with the good ol "we disclaim any liability from these distros, they are un-supported blah blah blah..." warning.
      -nB

      • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

        by SatanicPuppy (611928) *
        Frankly, if they put out good driver support, I think the best move is to gear the pre-installed linux options toward non-savvy users. I'm not going to use a damn out-of-the-box install of fricking WINDOWS, more less an out-of-the-box install of Linux, and I'm less anal than a lot of people around here.

        Let 'em gear the linux installs toward grandmas and newbies, because the rest of us are almost certainly going to be unsatisfied regardless of what they do. Expecting a hardware company to support a hundred d

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by Rycross (836649)
      Well, assuming we're talking about Vista, the entry level is $200, which for a lot of PCs isn't 50%. But the fact of the matter is that Dell doesn't pay $200 for a copy of Vista. I'd be surprised if they payed over $50 for it. I think XP was something like $15, right? I know I payed $5 for it from my university.

      But one also has to figure in the cost of supporting the transition to Linux. Software systems updated, maybe hardware swapper out, staff trained and informed at every level. I doubt its as exp

    • Re:Razor thin gets wider with Linux (Score:4, Insightful)

      by kjart (941720) on Wednesday March 14 2007, @11:06AM (#18348493)

      That changes a bit when 50% of the PC cost is eliminated when a free OS is installed with free office software.

      Wait, so you're willing to pay more than $CostOfWindowsPC - $CostOfWindows? That does not appear to be the vibe on other threads here that I've read.

    • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

      by big_gibbon (530793)

      From TFA:

      Microsoft co-marketing funds are a substantial portion of the profit margins for many large PC retailers. Tweaking the nose of the giant might be fun but it's risky. If Microsoft reduces the per-PC marketing contribution it makes for a particular reseller, that puts them at a huge financial disadvantage relative to their competitors.

      It's not the costs of the OS that are the issue, it's the fact that Microsoft may take their ball and go home. Once that happens, you could be stuck with narrower ma

    • Re:Razor thin gets wider with Linux (Score:5, Insightful)

      by n6kuy (172098) on Wednesday March 14 2007, @11:13AM (#18348627) Homepage
      Not quite.

      Actually, the "Windows Tax" gets offset by vendors paying the manufacturers to install all kinds of demo crap on the Windows computers they sell. Remove the Windows Tax, and you also remove the Windows Tax Credit... A PC with a free OS will prolly cost more than the one with Windows on it.

      • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

        by xtracto (837672)
        The problem with offering Linux ready machines is that buyers will cry loud if the cost of the system is the same as the one *with* windows included because they will reason on the lines of "WTF Linux is free blah blah".

        I would be very happy to buy a complete desktop PC to Dell, HP or anyone else with whichever Linux distro they choose given that I can personalize the machine (in one or other way what you can do now) before buying it including things like webcam, scanner, printer and other devices that are

    • Re:I do not (Score:3, Insightful)

      by Anonymous Coward
      The idea is that if a vendor ships boxes with Linus preinstalled that means that there are drivers for hardware in these boxes, that ACPI works OK with Linux and is not filled with MS-only quirks, etc, etc. Even if drivres initially are for specific distro they will find their way into the mainline pretty quickly.

    • Re:I agree (Score:5, Interesting)

      by asphaltjesus (978804) on Wednesday March 14 2007, @11:05AM (#18348467)
      1. Business guys like Shuttleworth view success in terms of volume adoption and profitability.

      2. The vast majority of users don't understand that the hardware is separate from the OS. They can't comprehend that another OS will actually run on their hardware. PHB's included.

      Which leads us to the conclusion that resellers like Dell are a gateway to _very_ many end users.

    • Re:Hardware support (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Bastian (66383) on Wednesday March 14 2007, @11:08AM (#18348561)
      The big deal is hardware support. If the laptop comes with Windows preinstalled, there's no way of knowing if Linux drivers exist for, say, the wireless card.

      If they sell it with Linux, you can at least be sure that Linux drivers exist and that you'll be able to get everything working when you wipe the hard drive and install your favorite distro.

      Personally, I think laptops with Linux preinstalled is barking up the wrong tree. I'd much prefer if Dell, HP, etc. were to just provide a list of which of their models and hardware configurations include only hardware that is known to work well with Linux. They can provide just as much of a guarantee to me that I'll be able to get Slackware or whatever working without having to take the effort to set up all the infrastructure for preinstalling Linux.

      • Re:Hardware support (Score:5, Interesting)

        by MikeZ52 (314911) on Wednesday March 14 2007, @12:07PM (#18349541)
        One point........Dell, HP, etc. use pretty standard hardware across much of their platform line. They are huge customers of the component manufacturers, many of whom will not open their code to allow developers to write open source drivers. If the PC makers want to sell new machines to me, they should either:
        1.) Only purchase components for which open source drivers are available, or
        2.) Use their purchasing clout to persuade manufacturers to allow developers to write OSS drivers.

        In this scenario, I could purchase a machine either with or without the chosen distro and have some certainty that everything can be made to work when I decide to switch to my favorite flavor of the month.

    • Better than nothing. (Score:4, Insightful)

      by matt me (850665) on Wednesday March 14 2007, @11:53AM (#18349311)
      Selling blank PC's is stupid, because they'd be useless to anyone without a second computer and broadband handy (that's most people not on Slashdot), and a operating system is necessary to test the hardware functions correctly immediately after purchase. You wouldn't want to test three different OS just to find out the graphics card is bust and none of them were to blame. Imagine customer service telling you to keep trying different ones. There has to be a standard system on which to test hardware.

      Ship ANY free OS, it *REALLY* doesn't matter which, because almost every user is going to end up replacing it, but they must ship *something* that allows people to download their OS of choice (hell, this could even be windows). Computer boots up for the first time with a good list of links to various operating systems and a functioning network card. Experienced users can go download whatever kinky OS is their fetish. New users can make an informed choice. A few recent images of free OS could be thrown on for users without broadband. Maybe even links to offers to buy Windows and Mac OS at OEM prices. Wouldn't that be fair?

      What matters is that the user is free to choose, rather than free to choose after they've already been made to pay £100 for OEM Vista.

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by dvice_null (981029)
      The point of pre-installed Linux is that if there is a pre-installed Linux, then most likely the hardware is well supported in Linux also. This is why I would buy a computer with pre-installed Linux, rather than one without.

      Also having pre-installed Linux would most likely increase the Linux user-base.

    • Re:Pre-installed? o.O (Score:4, Insightful)

      by bunratty (545641) on Wednesday March 14 2007, @11:26AM (#18348841)

      The people begging for pre-installed Linux are probably the same people who would, upon receiving a PC from a vendor with a pre-installed OS, immediately wipe that OS and install it from scratch anyway lest they be left with an OS that has tons of cruft.
      That was my thought exactly after reading the article. Dell should not try to satisfy the fussy people, but instead satisfy people who don't know about Linux. They should put together a system that our parents or grandparents can use out of the box. They should pre-install a whole set of software, including Linux, hardware drivers, office applications, a browser (along with common plugins), an email program, and whatever other kinds of software that most people use. Anyone who doesn't like what they pre-install can format the hard disk and start fresh, or just pick and choose among different software options.

    • anti-Spyware/Adware/Trials (Score:4, Insightful)

      by everphilski (877346) on Wednesday March 14 2007, @11:02AM (#18348385) Journal
      Ever seen a (dell/HP/Compaq/etc) straight out of the box? There are like 50 programs installed ... each vendor pays the computer manufacturer to put these things on their PC's. So the cost of windows gets paid for, mostly or even in excess, by these vendors.

      Problem with Linux being, the computer manufacturer doesn't get any of these kickbacks or a % of the purchase price from a trial installation... less profit, gotta charge more for the box.

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by Yvan256 (722131)
      They could, of course, use the answers to say something along the lines of "After seeing the survey results, the demands of the Linux community are too diverse. For reasons of technical support, we cannot offer Linux as an OS option on our computers."

      Or something.

    • Re:I still don't get it (Score:5, Informative)

      by Volante3192 (953645) on Wednesday March 14 2007, @11:22AM (#18348769)
      They rivet the cases shut on Dells!

      Baloney. Having worked with Dell systems that are up to 5 years old, I have to admit that while the parts themselves are crap, you can field strip a Dell desktop in under a minute. They are VERY modular and have only gotten better in that respect. Desktop models hardly use screws anymore, just tabs and buttons.

      Taking a hard drive out of a Dell Inspiron? Two screws under the PCMCIA slot. Four screws to remove the HD from its cover guard. That's it.

      Taking a hard drive out of a Sony Vaio? ...Let's just say it includes popping off the keyboard and nearly every screw in the thing. And that's for starters...

      If there's one thing Dell's done right, it's made cases that are stupid easy to field service. (Obviously for good reason, considering how often they need to be serviced.)

    • Re:I still don't get it (Score:4, Funny)

      by russotto (537200) on Wednesday March 14 2007, @12:14PM (#18349681) Journal

      They rivet the cases shut on Dells!
      The LEFT side opens.

All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners. Comments are owned by the Poster. The Rest © 1997-2009 Geeknet, Inc.