Mandrake to Come Preloaded on Wal-Mart PCs 617
surfimp writes "Here's a story from NewsForge: 'MandrakeSoft CEO Jacques Le Marois confirms the news this morning, and company spokeswoman Margaret Waters says, while a contract with Microtel has not been finalized, the company is working on getting Mandrake certified to run like clockwork on the Microtel systems. Waters is hopeful that the dotted line will be signed and PCs up for sale by the end of next week.'" Update: 06/20 17:21 GMT by T : Ooops! The Mandrake spokeswoman's name is Margaret Waples, not Waters. Apologies, and thanks to Todd Lyons of Mandrakesoft for the correction.
It's been like 3 stories on those Walmart PCs? (Score:2, Interesting)
There's been plenty of retailers shipping PCs with Linux (or OS-less). None of the size of Walmart, I agree. But I don't know much people looking to Walmart for PCs. Neither I know people going to Walmart for a dishwasher of a freezer. A PC might have become a commodity, but there are commodities better handled by more knowledgeable businesses. And they usually have a larger selection to boot.
</RANT>
Support (Score:2, Interesting)
Is this how Linux will really start making money?
Wal-Mart selling IN STORES! (Score:2, Interesting)
I wonder what would happen.... (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:wow (Score:3, Interesting)
I only have a few questions you should ponder (Score:3, Interesting)
When they want to get online, and put in the AOL CD they got in the mail, and nothing happens, what are their impression of Linux?
Software is what makes windows big. Its how they stomped Mac. Is your average Wal-Mart shopper going to be able to know to pick up linux software, and will they be able to install it by themselves?
I'm not going anti-linux, pro-ms, I'm just getting you people to think before patting yourselves on the back.
Walmat is unknowingly doing the THE RIGHT THING (Score:2, Interesting)
Will they sell preloaded Mandrake with The Sims? (Score:2, Interesting)
Sweet!
'Shovelware' of GPL software? (Score:2, Interesting)
Seriously - Why not?
And I think Joe Consumer will be willing to put up with the diffrence between OpenOffice and MSOffice for the $x00 dollars price diffrence. Hell, they're shopping at Wal*Mart, for crying out loud - You KNOW they're looking for a bargain!
Re:wow (Score:2, Interesting)
Damn straight. But then again, you know Linux, don't you? Ever thought of adding Lindows(tm) Consulting/Support to your shingle?
As you point out, you won't be competing against Wal*Mart, and I'll bet Microsoft has already warned every large consulting/service organization not to even think about offering Linux(tm) or Lindows(tm) support, or they can kiss their Microsoft Certified Partner designation good-bye.
Yet if Wat*Mart sells it, you know there's gonna be a market for technicians to service it....
Wal*Mart may be a crocodile, but as any plover will tell you, there's food in them there teeth.
A possible /. interview? (Score:5, Interesting)
But the 10k question is: who is behind this? I mean, this isn't like some normal free or open software guru we've known for ten years. Somebody at Walmart must be putting their John Hanncock on this.
Personally I'd like to get to know a little more about them (to congratulate them at least). Even more so I'd like a little more insight in to what got them started on this and how it all went down.
Short take of this Post: I wanna
To me this seems to be one of the first mainstream (outside of the IT industry and for endusers) acceptances of things most geeks hold dear. Who wants to miss this part of history?
Re:Consumer Confusion? (Score:2, Interesting)
Remember, the systems are being offered as "fantastic low-cost alternatives to models that are preloaded with Windows". There's nothing ambiguous about that statement; these machines DO NOT COME with Windows, and thus WILL NOT RUN Windows applications.
In fact, what I think Walmart is really trying to do here is not necessarily directed at the home user market. I suspect that many of these systems are being sold to technologically-savvy small businesses, the same sorts of people who might go to Fry's to purchase some low-cost computer equipment to help meet a need in their office. At $300, these things are a steal. Whether or not they end up with pirated versions of XP on them is not something that I think Walmart is concerned about, but by selling them with Linux preloaded they can escape from the "aiding and abetting piracy" whines that Microsoft was laying on them when they were selling these machines with no preloaded OS.
However, the fact that Walmart is selling PCs with Linux preloaded is a huge opportunity for Linux to make inroads with all sectors of consumers, and I'm glad to see that Mandrake is proactively pursuing this by agreeing to provide their distro for these machines.
If you consider that these systems are going to be offered with Mandrake preloaded, and then take note that you can download Evolution and OpenOffice (assuming they aren't preloaded), then you're talking about a system that is pretty much there as far as Windows-land compatibility goes, from a home-user and small business perspective.
It's up to Mandrake, Lindows, and Walmart to see to it that their users' experience with this software is all that it can be. And I'd also like to forward the notion that anyone who's genuinely interested in seeing Linux gain desktop marketshare consider helping out some of these Walmartian newbies when they invariably start showing up to the message boards and newsgroups. After all, that's what the spirit of the OSS movement is all about, right?
Re:the way walmart is (Score:5, Interesting)
Mandrake could increase market share by offering other resellers a "branded" OS, while making money on the support of the machines and the O.S.
Take Mandrake 8.2 and brand it to say, WalMart.
During Boot-up, Walmart gets screen space. They get a link on the desktop to Walmart.com. And Mandrake gets 30 bucks or so to do tech support for the OS.
If the big retailers pick up on this, Linux will be poised for a several percentage point growth. Combine this with an AOL client for Linux, and this could easily propel Linux into the mainstream desktop.
Re:It's been like 3 stories on those Walmart PCs? (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:wow (Score:2, Interesting)
(Please, Rolling Stone? It may be mainstream but I wouldn't let my hormone-ridden sons have it.)
Re:wow (Score:3, Interesting)
Kind of hard to prove that if they dont actually carry them, now, isn't it? For that matter, that *nobody* ends up carrying them?
I don't really care about reasons or excuses; only that magazines willingly admit to changing their covers (content-alterting self-censorship is more common in the news biz, true) is due to one retailer, in what some people insisnt on holding up as an example of a functioning free market. Please! If people wont buy it, they wont buy it. Walmart seems to think that you are incapable of even *viewing* a potentially controversial cover and making a decision whether or not to buy it - they make that choice for you! Since you dont know what the pre-Walmart-Approved covers are, you're in no position to evaluate whether they are censoring material you deem censor-worthy. Alas, as usual, since they are successful and wealthy, people are all too happy to assume (envy?) that they must be the poster child of how to run a retail conglomerate and that all is good in the world.
Oh, and way to keep the lid on your sons' hormones! Heaven forbid they should learn that tool of the devil, masturbation, nevermind potentially read about musicians! *guffaw*
Re:A possible /. interview? (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Walmart and censorship (Score:3, Interesting)
Thats pretty easy. Make sure nobody can get super big. I think that the concept of economy of scale has costs that are both social and cultural. Yes, many people will laugh at me for worrying about social and cultural consequences of fostering pure economic goals. I dont care anymore, because it seems to me that the advertised ultimate goal of free-market capialism is to help people attain wealth in order to foster cultural and social health, safety, etc in addition to spurring technological development. (Although, with technology, whats the point of keeping people alive and physically safe if the social and cultural things one requires in order to enjoy life are sacrificed to attain it? I'm not anti-technology, but I think people lose sight of what the purpose of it is
It just seems silly to me to encourage attaining massive amounts of wealth and economic leverage if it has negative consequences on the advertised goal of the system in the first place. And just because you or I dont want to see those covers doesn't mean that it doesnt make a lick of difference to me that my neighbour, who would like them, cant. My potentially laughable form of altruism is simply a way of paying my interests and values forward
Comment removed (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:wow (Score:3, Interesting)
*********
I.e. - a significant portion of their customers.
As a parent, I don't want my child seeing racy stuff just walking in a store. I'd like to be able to _shop_ without having to explain why such material is indecent. Therefore, I go to Wal-Mart. It seems that a lot of people have the same idea (notice the number of children walking with their parents in walmart). These people constitute a _market_, and a large one at that. The beauty of capitalism is that the market decides. If you aren't a part of the mass market, don't go to mass-market places. It's that simple.
Is there nowhere else to find porn? I mean really, if blockbuster doesn't rent porn, find someone who does! It's not the end of the world. It's not like Ma and Pa Video requires a different kind of VCR to play their tapes.
It's not like buying at Target all-of-a-sudden makes your stuff incompatible with the rest of the world. It's not like Wal-Mart lies and cheats it's way to the top. They are what they say they are. The market likes them.
Re:wow (Score:2, Interesting)
No, *you* really don't get it. Walmart is preventing you from getting an alternate product somewhere else, because the alternate product DOES NOT EXIST. Walmart prevents the alternate product from ever appearing on any store shelves, so there's no reason to shop elsewhere, because you can't get anything different anywhere else.
The argument here is that Walmart shouldn't get to decide what the public gets to see, but they do. They're enforcing censorship through monopolistic tactics. (Walmart isn't exactly a monopoly, but they account for enough sales to bend manufacturers/publishers to their will.)
I'm not for censorship -- I'm not an idiot -- but if we had to have it, I'd *much* rather see it come from the government. I at *least* get to vote for my elected officials. I don't get any say whatsoever about who's running Walmart, and Walton's heirs aren't accountable to me in any way.
People just don't seem to realize how insidious all of this really is. Yes, it's entirely within the rules. So was what Arthur Anderson was doing with Enron. Just because it's "within the rules" doesn't make it right. Just because you don't see it happening doesn't make it okay.
I admire the amount of effort SirSlud has put into this thread. Too bad it's falling on a lot of deaf ears.
--Jeremy
Re:wow (Score:3, Interesting)
So WalMart should be forced to carry everything under the sun, no matter how dangerous or objectionable? You want unlimited individual freedom, but want to force large corporations' behavior. You can't have it both ways. Freedom of choice must be protected for all. Besides, we may have the right to freedom of speech, but we don't have a right to be heard.
<SARCASM>Really? Then how are babies made?</SARCASM> Like I said in my previous post: I could care less, I just won't buy the stuff. I'm not asking anyone to make any sacrifices, just let corporations have the same freedom of choice you expect yourself. And my life is rated PG (besides the bathroom & bedroom).