The Agony and Ecstasy Of Becoming a Linux OEM 164
jammag writes "An article at the site Datamation, entitled Becoming a Linux OEM: A Roadmap, talks about the challenges (and rewards) of selling hardware with Linux pre-installed — most likely a growth market in the years ahead. The interesting part is the description of how some smaller Linux OEMs have made it. The bottom line: surviving as a Linux OEM requires far more than making it as a Windows OEM. In particular, you have to make the systems idiot-proof for users who don't care a whit about what OS they're using."
It's still a niche (Score:3, Insightful)
Dell and the embedded world (Score:5, Insightful)
As for the embedded world, they've had it made since the early days of SBC's running Linux in rom, Linksys WRT54G, and now Tivo's.
Is this FUD? (Score:3, Insightful)
There are looming possibilities of "patent claims" and "copyright infringement" against linux and the components that various distributions include. As a Linux OEM, I would think that fact poses significant risk to your business. It only takes one weird case/judge/lobby such as the old JPG copyright scares, etc to potentially put you at legal risk.
Again I'm not saying such a thing would be justified, but the possibility of it...when it's your money on the line is scary.
Re:most people just want what works (Score:1, Insightful)
"just works"
Re:most people just want what works (Score:1, Insightful)
Many of the problems that keep Linux from gaining a bigger slice of desktop market are known and could be solved. But the people who have the skills to solve these problems aren't interested in them. The standard response to "user" issues is: Well, why don't YOU write the patch / app / whatever.
But you see, most "average" users are not programmers, and don't want to be programmers. As long as the people with the programming skills required to address Linux usability issues show no interest in usability for the "average" user, Linux will stay where it is and Microsoft will own the consumer market regardless of how crappy their OS is, because Microsoft *does* make an attempt to address usability for the "average" user.
Re:It's still a niche (Score:2, Insightful)
Since viruses are not as big of a concern on Linux (about the worst one could do is screw up a user account) companies will spend less money on technical support if they are a Linux OEM.
Lowering the cost of doing business goes directly to a company's bottom line and increases profits. Imagine that - making money on Free Software!
Re:most people just want what works (Score:5, Insightful)
Embedded works because there is no user (Score:4, Insightful)
Getting Linux onto the desktop requires a great deal more user interaction. I think though that Linux is getting there. Windows is not much easier to use than Linux, but it does need a lot more support from hardware vendors to get to the "just works" level.
Re:Is this FUD? (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:most people just want what works (Score:4, Insightful)
Go to Best Buy and count how many programs you can buy for Windows. Now count how many for the Mac and then how many for Linux.
Go and look for a printer that says that it will work with Linux, WiFi card, Webcam,
This is from the end users stand point mind you.
One of the big problems for Linux is the lack of a stable binary driver interface. Even if you are going to make your drivers FOSS you can not just stick a cd in the box or post the driver on your website. The faithful will say that there is no need for the hardware manufacture to make a driver since they can just give out the specs. Well yes but then you have to wait for your driver to be included in the the kernel and then for them to be included in the distros.....
The hardware people all control of when the support will get to the end user that way. So even if a company creates a driver for a piece of hardware and makes it FOSS they may have to wait months before it becomes available as part of the kernel.
This isn't an issue for the embedded space or servers but it really is a pain for the average end user.
Yes there is a lot of really good free software that you can run on a Linux desktop but sometimes you just want to play Age of Empires, WOW, or buy that $10 set of card games at Best Buy.
Re:most people just want what works (Score:1, Insightful)
I've seen this a lot, plenty of people for whom Windows "Just works", and for the reasons mentioned - mostly they don't go around downloading everything they see, and runing it, and trusting every email blindly. Add to that a good firewall router, and they are just as happy as clams.
Evil is right, there is room for both Windows and Linux out there, as well as several other OSes.
If Linux were more popular in the user community, how long do you think it would be before someone decided to email around a shell script that had some local privlege escalation code in it, and managed to work out a botnet from Linux boxes? Do you think the average user would be any more knowledgable that they've been hacked, than if they were using windows? Heck, even if the hack were on their account specifically, and only ran when they were logged on (many users only log off when they shut their computers off, at least for home machines).
Sure the hole would get fixed relatively quickly, but the hacked computers probably wouldn't. We'd have the same problem that we have in Windows.
Re:most people just want what works (Score:5, Insightful)
But those people with the skills that you're talking about don't give a flying fuck about Linux ruling the desktop market. They have what works for them, and do it for the love of doing it.
Besides, in my opinion that kind of polish is the job of the distro makers to pull it all together. If some distro wants to take on Microsoft on the desktop, then they'll fund developers doing that work (as Canonical is doing with Ubuntu), so I don't really see a problem or a need to villify developers who've already given you a whole boatload of free software as lazy.
Hmm....really... (Score:4, Insightful)
More so, they should avoid being Linux snobs and stop using phrases such as "idiot proof" if they are really interested in growing.
Was there a point to this article? (Score:3, Insightful)
What I saw were a few fairly vague suggestions and one piece of advice (know your market) repeated over and over. There wasn't any real research. There weren't any statistics. I'm sure my second reading was a waste of time and electrons, and the more I think about it, the first one was too.
As someone else mentioned, there are still end-user problems regarding linux in the mass market. A user wants something that works. Especially John Q. Public, who doesn't give a darn what its running underneath. What he wants is the stuff he clicks on (in the OS or in the Web Browser or Application) to work. That means when you go to YouTube, the movie plays and the sound works. When he wastes time on a web games site, the games play. When he needs some software for some idiotic reason, its easily available, easy to install, and after he installs it he clicks on the icon and it works.
I've run Linux as an only OS in the past. 10 years ago, when I started doing that, there were many challenges to running it day to day, from corporate compatibility to application bugs. The reality for me is that many of those issues simply haven't been resolved yet.
When I think of the masses and Linux, I think about my family. I have a range of people there who span from retirees to teenagers. I don't think a single one is capable, or, perhaps more importantly, has any desire to switch. I don't think I could even convince my 20 something step daughter, who grew up with computers, to switch, even though she needs a cheap computer and Linux would let her get a fairly decent machine for very little.
In some ways, Linux strikes me as being 95% of the way there. The problem is, that last 5% may well be the most difficult part. The remaining issues are ones that will prevent mass adoption. For instance, I see the issue of video. The end user couldn't care less about Codecs. What they care about is the fact that when someone sends them a video file (most likely created in Windows), can they click on it and it plays with sound? As long as there are Window's proprietary video adn audio formats, that may be enough to keep a good portion of the userbase on Windows.
Not only that, but I can't imagine what support issues must be like. Even with good customer support, if you try to sell to anyone other than a geek or semi-geek, the phone support has to be pretty deep. Like my video playing example above, what happens when someone emails some inane audio clip and it won't play? What if Uncle Leonard needs to install drivers for a USB device?
Even for me, the thought of it to the masses is overwhelming. That final 5% is just a bear of a mountain to climb, and there isn't any easy way to get over it.
I also think the author of the article misses something in his targeting of customers. Remember, you've locked out so many segments of the customer base, who is left? Gamers are out, especially casual ones. Gramma and Grandpa are out, they won't switch to save their lives. Anyone who has some favorite Windows application is probably out, even if Wine supports it. Do you really think the average user is going to want to know how to get Wine running (even with top notch support?), let alone figure out how to upgrade it each time a new version comes out?
I'm sorry, I just don't see how this article addressed anything that anyone who has even thought about setting up a business shouldn't have thought about 2 minutes after they get the idea.
Bill
Re:Was there a point to this article? (Score:5, Insightful)
it is however a case of gnu/linux vs. the entire world of proprietary software. a world with so much money that compatibility can only be bought on their terms. gnu/linux would have to become proprietary software to implement proprietary data formats or allow non-documented devices to work. instead of that, technically superior possibilities are being offered to us. ogg is technically superior to mp3, odf is technically superior to ooxml, lilypond is technically superior to finale files.
but how much does that help free software advocates to free others? if others insist on slavery, what can we do? one this is sure, we shouldn't implement these last 5% in gnu/linux: that would mean the end of everything gnu/linux stands for. it would mean the end of stallman's dream which has already produced the most remarkable software free of charge and open for the entire world running on the most remarkable hardware. throwing that away for out-of-the-box support for wmv files would be an act of utter idiocy.
Comment removed (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Unless you're talking about Vista.... (Score:3, Insightful)
I certainly agree with your sentiment that Linux has become WAY simpler over the last few years. I'm not sure whether I'd go so far as to say Linux became simple for the experienced computer user in late 2002. It all depends on what you do. The hard part is not really using it, that's easy. Even Grandma can use it, once she's taught which buttons to click.
The hard part is getting your hardware configured, chasing drivers, and figuring out how to do everything you used to do in Windows, but in Linux. The more varied the stuff you do, the harder it is. That's something Grandma will never do, but it's something that a certain class of power user has always done.
Linux is at the point where a good portion of these users will be able to make it through an install and never look back. It's only going to get easier now.