Pre-installing Linux
There’s been a tremendous level of interest in the fact that pre-installed Linux (in the form of Ubuntu | Fedora | OpenSuSE) is the #1 rated suggestion on Dell’s IdeaStorm. On the face of it, there is little question that Linux pre-installation is popular with customers. Why, then, is it so difficult to buy a PC in the US or Europe that has Linux (and ideally Linux alone) on the hard drive?
The devil, as always, lies in the details.
First, margins on PC’s are razor-thin.
This has two significant consequences. Most importantly, it means that 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. 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.
Also, thin margins mean that any customer interaction or support call can blow away the profit not just on that sale, but on many others as well. The worst-case scenario is a customer who buys a computer at the lowest price off your website, assuming it’s a Windows machine, and then calls, infuriated, because it “won’t work with the game they are trying to install”. One customer who accidentally gets Linux without knowing what that means is an expensive proposition for a company that makes relatively little on the low-end product range. For this reason, I don’t think it makes any sense for Walmart to sell low-cost Linux PC’s, and we’ve never pushed US / European retailers to try pre-installing Ubuntu unless we think they can segment out the market which genuinely WANTS Linux from those that are just looking for a great deal on “a [windows] computer”.
Second, we free software fans are a fussy crowd, and very hard to please. You know what you are like - you sit and configure that Dell system down to the finest detail, you want a specific model of HP laptop, you want the one that has the Intel graphics chipset not the other chipset because you prefer the free driver approach from Intel… you are in short an expert, demanding customer. This means, that in order to reach us with Linux, a reseller has to offer Linux EVERYWHERE, not just on a few select models.
Worse, we are not “Linux” users, we are users who want version 6.06.1 of Ubuntu, or 10.2 of SuSE, or Fedora 6. We want a specific distro, and in many cases also a specific VERSION of that distro. In order to please us, the vendor has to offer an enormous matrix of possibilities - machine and distro/version.
This is an expensive proposition.
So, what can we do to help address the need?
First, we can help the vendors get more detailed insight into the real nature of demand. For example, here’s a survey being run by Dell that will I’m sure help inform their decisions about how they help you get Linux on Dell:
It would be great, of course, if those sorts of surveys were less vendor-specific, so that we could express our opinions once and have that counted across the whole industry, but there you have it. (It would also be great if Dell would consider Ubuntu to be both community- and commercially-supported, but that’s a different story ;-)).
Second, we can start looking at ways to change the model so that there’s a better fit between customer expectations and the economics of the industry. For example, if you’re one of the people who voted for Linux pre-installation on Dell IdeaStorm, would you be happy to receive a Dell box with no OS and with an Ubuntu disk in the box, which you yourself installed, with no support from Dell? What if it came with an assurance that the set of components you had configured *should* work, but no guarantee? Can we tweak the parameters to get to the point where you would be satisfied, and Dell could make a reasonable profit with only reasonable risk? Solve that, and I think we could all get one step closer to fixing Bug #1.
Addendum:
Of course, some resellers specialise in Linux pre-installations. My favourite of them is System76, who do a great range of laptops and desktops with, amongst others, Ubuntu preinstalled. Kudos to them for spotting the market and making the most of it.
March 14th, 2007 at 9:51 am
The expensive matrix you suggest is already managed by Dells of service delivery mechanisms at the website level. The time it takes me to order anything from a new Dell server to a Inspiron Laptop is usually 20 minutes as I have to move from the base class of the order through various installation and configuration options. Much of the leg work for choice is carried by the customer and delivered by the implementation processes of service functionality. The heavy subsidisation which Dell and other manufacturer rely on though is becoming more of a crutch to their business models and I am sure they are aware of the risks which is why the need a new model. Ive already blogged about how I use Dell and Ubuntu to deliver services to my clients and how the inherent lack of effort required to deliver and manage these boxes make a added value proposition. As you say we need to change the market and the expectations it needs to start with understanding of how different Windows is to Ubuntu when it comes to long term support and maintenance. Theres plenty of opportunities for Dell to add value to the installations ( I detailed one on my Blog ) . Im with you on changing the vendors and their habits and beliefs offering Ubuntu would provide any vendor with an additional Unique Selling Point and the first few vendors to commit knowingly to doing so will read early rewards, though they will need to find ways to listen and adapt quickly. If any vendor has shown how to do this in my mind it has been Dell with their Web process for orders and delivery they have the chance to do the right thing. Thanks for your comments though, Ill bear them in mind when I get my next chance to ask my Dell representative where Dell are at.
March 14th, 2007 at 9:51 am
Illuminating post Mark, thanks. A short while back Jack Schofield (on the Technology Blog, guardian.co.uk) pointed out an additional reason why many computer vendors are reluctant to unbundle Windows. Apparently it’s because a significant portion of their margin is Win32 “crapware” (his phrase), that is, the plethora of, at best, marginal utility and quality software that comes preinstalled or on CDs supplied with most new IBM-compatibles. He was actually referring specifically to Dell, but no doubt this applies to many other vendors well.
March 14th, 2007 at 10:08 am
I do think that after a “boycott” for as long as Linux exists, we, the open source community, would soon be satisfied. So the example you named that “[a Dell product] came with an assurance that the set of components you had configured *should* work, but no guarantee?” would already make many (including myself) very happy.
March 14th, 2007 at 10:17 am
i’m getting so sick and tired of hearing excuses and rationalizations. just put the cd in the cupholder, install it and sell it. period. there’s no need to analyze or certify. what is so hard about this?
March 14th, 2007 at 10:48 am
[...] Mark Shuttleworth writes about the obstacles for widely available pre-installed Linux PCs. Also note Dell’s Linux survey. [...]
March 14th, 2007 at 10:58 am
(First of all, pardon me for my poor english)
You can buy a music player and music CD.
The player’s producer is not responsible of music’s quality.
The music vendor is not responsible of player’s fidelity.
You can choose any player and any music combination, and nobody think this is weird.
In computer’s evolution, OS is in the uncomfortable position between computers (the players) and software (the music).
One upon a time, in home computers, like Commodore 64 and Sinclair Spectrum the OS was firmware, bundled with computer.
Also in the Apple world you have PC and OS meshed together.
In the Windows era, the OS is utterly linked with software (Windows + Office + Visual Studio).
Also GNU/Linux disto concept aim to mesh OS and software.
Really in the history you never really got to be free to choose an OS. Cross platform programming is a very narrow part of computer science.
Also data are linked to software.
Finally you choose one of three streamline: win + office + your office data
or GNU/Linux + OOo + odf
or Mac + Mac software + Mac data
High cost of machinery and software also make hard to change your streamline, migration are expensive.
I think we should aim toward a world where computers (players) should cost 100-200-300 euros and you should choose what OS-software, at reasonable cost, you want to play on it.
Data should be utterly in open format so you can use it in any system.
March 14th, 2007 at 11:14 am
Community teams volunteering to support the PC vendors in their efforts to bring out Linux-friendly systems ought to do the trick. The ubuntu community is structured enough for something like this to be stewarded. Greg K-H’s appeal to the vendors’ bottom line seems to have worked equally well; seems to me a good part of the reason why we don’t have Linux pre-loaded systems goes to the complexity (and therefore marginal costs) of getting something like that off the ground; ideal for offloading to the community.
March 14th, 2007 at 11:46 am
[...] Whoohoo as tons of you have noticed and read about on many blog’s from Elkbuntu to Jono Bacon to Mark Shuttleworth to the F{l}amed Slashdot , Dell has now in response to the Dell Idea storm put up a Page asking about the specifics you would like to see on your Dell pre-installed with Linux. Now I’m not totally sure if this is a good thing or bad, overall I think in the long run it will be good, the only thing I fear is that it will give leeway to the likes of Nvidia and ATI if they use binary drivers ( and yes the Free Drivers will “work” but lets be honest with ourselves , Dell is about $$ , and it dosent make sense for them to sell a computer with an Nvidia Driver that only half works IF there is something that does work )Also the only other gripe I have is Redhat is listed commercially supported ( as it should be ) as well as SuSE ( again as it should ) and then there are openSuSE and Fedora, but Ubuntu is listed only as community supported ? it should be listed as Both also IMHO , Canonical does a great Job of providing commercial support for Ubuntu
Soooo who do we poke to get this rectified Mark? I would love to see you contact Dell and have them make the correction. [...]
March 14th, 2007 at 11:46 am
I think a reasonable approach would be for Dell (or another PC seller) to sell computers with blank drives that should work with a certain version of Linux. The computer should include a CD for that particular distribution. For extra money, Dell could throw in a coupon for 6 months professional support (that coupon would give a phone number and code good at Canonical or Novell, or Red Hat, or possibly combination of the above). Maybe Dell can get together with Novell and have Novell SuSE Linux 2007 certified hardware only in the machine.
I certainly think doing the installation of Linux itself is going to be a loss situation for Dell. People have different partitioning schemes and choices of filesystems, let alone the services that are going to be run on the box.
March 14th, 2007 at 11:53 am
I think the ‘which distro’ question is rather a red herring - what I, at least, want is hardware that’s supported by Free software drivers, then I can choose to install whatever I want, change my mind in the future, upgrade versions; in short, exercise my freedom to choose.
I don’t want /this/ distro, or /that/ distro - I want any distro.
March 14th, 2007 at 12:00 pm
Here’s an idea for hardware vendors that would minimize the risk of souring their sweet Microsoft deals…. The vendor sells a PC with a hot swap / removable hard drive bay or some trivial way to install a hard drive without opening the case or voiding the warranty. The vendor gives the buyer the option of buying a hard drive with Windows installed on it or the buyer can buy a no hard drive PC. Then some third party or subsidiary sells hard drives for the PC with $LINUX_DISTRO pre-installed, tested, and configured for that specific model.
March 14th, 2007 at 12:04 pm
I’d rather have PC vendors offer Windows-taxless, nothing-installed hardware but with a clear guarantee that a certain device/configuration works 100%, with open drivers, with Linux (kernel xx) (or with FreeBSD, etc.).
That’s all you need.
After all, say it comes with Suse or Ubuntu, then I will remove Suse/Ubuntu and replace it with my distro of choice anyway. BSD users will too.
What would be so hard about that, to any vendor? Sure, Dell has MS to worry about so I don’t see this really happen on a real life scale.
March 14th, 2007 at 12:22 pm
ANY mainstream distro would be fine, as long as it’s properly configured. Around here (Argentina) most computers sold by large retailers come with some obscure distros installed, which are promptly removed by in-store techies and replaced with a pirated copy of Windows after the sale (unofficially, of course). Ubuntu, MEPIS, SUSE and Fedora would be fine for most people. We nutcases can install whatever we want.
By the way, does anyone else think that we FOSS fanboys make that kind of user interaction irrelevant? Dell Ideastorm could be renamed as “The place where FOSS proponents bash Dell asking for Linux, BSD, OOo and Firefox”, as most of the ideas have to do with those.
March 14th, 2007 at 12:47 pm
[...] Ubuntu - É o preço pá… 14 03 2007 Mark Shuttleworth (e toda a comunidade aliás) escreveu sobre o recente inquérito da Dell, em que pergunta aos utilizadores que distribuição de linux é que gostariam de ver pré-instalada nas máquinas da companhia. [...]
March 14th, 2007 at 12:51 pm
Echoing Maimon Mons, out here in the Philippines (and I suppose some other Southeast Asian countries) we are seeing branded laptops and desktops which sell with either pre-installed Linux or no OS at all. The price differences are in the order of $200 or so, which is a significant amount in these parts. Sadly, what often goes into these machines are bootleg Windows.
That said, support isn’t nearly as big an issue as one might think. After all, bootleggers don’t really expect support from MS. The bigger issue at hand, therefore, is familiarity with a non-Windows OS, viz. Linux. This is where people expect a lot of handholding.
March 14th, 2007 at 12:59 pm
[...] Whoohoo as tons of you have noticed and read about on many blog’s from Elkbuntu to Jono Bacon to Mark Shuttleworth to the F{l}amed Slashdot , Dell has now in response to the Dell Idea storm put up a Page asking about the specifics you would like to see on your Dell pre-installed with Linux. Now I’m not totally sure if this is a good thing or bad, overall I think in the long run it will be good, the only thing I fear is that it will give leeway to the likes of Nvidia and ATI if they use binary drivers ( and yes the Free Drivers will “work” but lets be honest with ourselves , Dell is about $$ , and it dosent make sense for them to sell a computer with an Nvidia Driver that only half works IF there is something that does work )Also the only other gripe I have is Redhat is listed commercially supported ( as it should be ) as well as SuSE ( again as it should ) and then there are openSuSE and Fedora, but Ubuntu is listed only as community supported ? it should be listed as Both also IMHO , Canonical does a great Job of providing commercial support for Ubuntu Soooo who do we poke to get this rectified Mark? I would love to see you contact Dell and have them make the correction. [...]
March 14th, 2007 at 1:35 pm
What about user generated content? If a computer vendor was willing to sell any computer from its production line in a osless form, and provide a site where people from the different distributions would give the information on which of those ‘puters (or at least components) have been proved to work on an specific distro, I think the coexistance would be possible.
March 14th, 2007 at 1:39 pm
At the end of the day, I just wonder when the US will be willing to notice that Microsoft is a monopoly and that with their practices they are shaping the industry the way they want. Is it fair that they are able to offer different deals to different computer vendors forcing them to only sell their software?
March 14th, 2007 at 1:42 pm
No offense meant Mark , but you missed the Mark on that one
#1 “margins on PC’s are razor-thin”
False and wrong , we are not talking about can of soup or corn that cost 50 cents here. where if you find a way to cut down the cost by 49 cent the maximum made is still 50 cent. We are talking about computers that cost 359 just for the Box.
1. Case and power supply retail for 40$
2. Motherboard. ( onboard video and sound ) retail 40$
3. CPU retail 30$
4. Hard drive retail 25$
5. DVD 16x retail 10$
6. Vista home basic 35$
7. Combo mouse/keyboard
total 185$ retail , 359$ - 185$ = 174$
Now if it was any Mom and pop corner shop thats all there is to it , now we are talking about Dell.
1. They don’t pay there part retail price.
2. They dont invest in R&D ( for building hardware components )
3. They don’t pay for stocking and inventory.
4. They don’t pay for product placement in stores.
5. Service is done in a country where 40/month your considered a rich man
6. Warranty is taken by the hardware maker
Shipping is paid by the clients.
Is that all ? No …
All the Crapware that people don’t like and complain about are paid TO Dell for install :
http://www.yorkspace.com/pc-de-crapifier/
* QuickBooks Trial
* NetZero Installers
* Earthlink Setup Files
* Corel Photo Album 6
* Tiscali Internet
* Wanadoo Europe Installer
* Get High Speed Internet!
* Internet Service Offers Launcher
* Dell Search Assistant
* Norton Ghost 10.0
* Symantec Live Update
* MS Plus Photo Story 2LE
* MS Plus Digital Media Installer
* McAffee
* Norton Internet Security
* Google Desktop
* Google Toolbar
* AOL US
* AOL UK
* MusicMatch Jukebox
* MusicMatch Music Services
* Wild Tangent Games
* Norton AntiVirus 2005
* Norton Security Center
* Norton AntiSpam
* PC-cillin Internet Security 12
* Corel Snapfire Plus SE
* Yahoo! Music Jukebox
* Vongo
* Run Registry Entries
* Desktop Icons
* Startup Menu Items
* Corel WordPerfect
* Roxio RecordNow
* Sonic DLA
* Sonic Update Manager
* Sonic RecordNow Audio
* Sonic RecordNow Copy
* Roxio MyDVD LE
* Microsoft Office Standard Edition 2003
* Quicken 2006
In reality its Hook and bait for other products , put 3$ on each + referal commision of 20% , 41 product known about at 3$ each thats 123$ up front with a possibility of 41 X 5$ = 205$ in referrals , its just estimation its probably more. that’s 328$ in Dell pockets.
What else do they have ? Kickback on the OS , Microsoft is using the reward system like Vegas style casino for there OEM where as Microsoft give 60% kickback to there high player , 45% on middle player and 20% the bottom player. With Dell its even VIP platinum treatment , so they probably invest back 30$ out of the 35$.
The hardware vendor who make up the Dell parts , you think they win by being the best parts from the best components ? no they win by being the lowest price of the bunch and because of kickback on high volumes plus preferential treatment , like first to get the parts , best service on call 24/7 , 365/365.
ETC …
Go Visit Dell Round Rock Texas , take your teams there too.
Go visit Alienware , have to buy Malx I think but its worth the vist:
http://www.alienware.com/product_detail_pages/Aurora_mALX/aurora-m_features.aspx?SysCode=PC-LT-AURORA-M-ALX&SubCode=SKU-DEFAULT
Go visit VoodooPC
http://www.voodoopc.com
ETC …
“we free software fans are a fussy crowd”
Please , Stop the painting of the jihadist religious terrorist on Free Software users , We all agree that
if one Gets on those PC he will pass the info on to the others , now the one with a problem are the Commerical entity
who want “there” distribution only on it.
Personally I also don’t want Red hat or Novell , Red Hat got kicked out on Dell in 2000 and only care about corporations and
Novell did the same on the Lenovo. There product and community are not to Ubuntu level either.
Drop me a mail , with what I have in mind you will be able to afford your own Ubuntu space station in space and a cottage
on the Moon. I guarantee 100% you haven’t thought of it.
March 14th, 2007 at 1:48 pm
I responded to this on my blog Mark. (Be spamming if I cut this huge response on your page.
March 14th, 2007 at 1:54 pm
Personally I think what needs to happen for support is that Canonical and Dell partner up. Dell and Canonical get together and find a right laptops/pc’s/servers to install Ubuntu LTS to. Canonical offers software tech support for the Ubuntu installed machines. Dell provides the hardware support.
March 14th, 2007 at 2:26 pm
Mark:
Is the first time I reply to your articles, even if I read them every time. I want to thank you for introducing me to Linux, I just love it, and it works. I have it installed also in my daughters computers.
Anyway, the reason I’m replying is because I think there is a market for Linux/Ubuntu Pcs.
I think that it will be a good idea, to promote the Apple model, where they do the hardware and the software and sells as one package. I don’t know if financially makes sense because you are constraining yourself to a more limited audience. But is something that maybe is good to explore. That way you don’t have to worry about the Microsofts or the Dells.
Same regarding the Apple Store. I think Ubuntu should go to the shopping mall and open Ubuntu Carts where community members trained show regular people/comuter users the capabilities, the friendly environment and how easy is to get the daily tasks they looking for, that a OS like Ubuntu has to offer and that the learning curve is not that big.
All right this is what I have to said about it.
Thanks again and keep the good work.
March 14th, 2007 at 2:31 pm
Mark,
I appreciate your argument re MS co-marketing margins, although I think questions of the legality of this monopoly leverage must be raised, and even pursued in the courts. But for a vendor to offer a choice of OSs presents no great technical difficulty or cost cost increases once initial adjustments are made.
I worked on an assembly line for a summer, screwing in pre-loaded Windows hard drives and fitting other hardware. For Dell’s website to offer a Linux option (with a pop-up warning that Windows software does not run on Linux, and some simple coding to grey-out selection options for MSOffice, etc) would be simplicity itself. I think an Ubuntu pre-load and a blank drive option those who want alternative distros — with all drivers available from a Linux drivers page — would be a sensible and wholly workable strategy. The assembly process would then include 3 trays of hard drives (Vista, Ubuntu and Blank), which even a semi-trained newbie worker like I was in those days, could manage.
With a clearly written manual introducing Ubuntu and giving some basic trouble-shooting tips and prominently placed indications of where to go for support (Ubuntu forums definitely, but I think Dell’s email-based Linux discussion forum is good too), users would be off to a running start. Also I think Dell should include a prominent sticker for Ubuntu as they do for Windows as a visual reminder, and their return policy can be adjusted to cater for Windows replacement of Ubuntu units should the customer so desire.
As Geeks we tend to think the average Joe is stupid, but he’s not — as long as the web-site selection process is well thought-out, with clear information and warnings, so that his choice is not based solely on a $20 OS price reduction, but is made consciously in an informed manner, he will do fine. For most uses Ubuntu is the equal of XP/Vista, with a whole ecosystem of advantages as well. And once Dell offers Linux drivers for all its hardware the last major hurdle to widespread adoption will be behind us.
Just my two cents!
–Simfox
March 14th, 2007 at 3:43 pm
For me, I would be quite happy with a PC without an OS, and before I buy an exact (down to revisions) list of the hardware that is going into it.
Then I can check whether it is supported in linux or not (ok dell could try to help by listing whether each part is supported but I’d probably still go and double check, especially on the wireless)
Include CDs in the box or don’t, it wouldn’t matter to me as I have my own or know where to download them.
For other users including install DVDs from suse, fedora and ubuntu is probably the way to go along with a little leaflet where each of the 3 can give their own advertising blurb so a newbie can pick which they want, an intermediate user will already know.
March 14th, 2007 at 3:44 pm
Thats all fine and good. Users should have a choice if its offered. Incidentally, Suse and Red Hat are clearly good choices as a starting pt.
Ubuntu is not there yet.
March 14th, 2007 at 3:44 pm
Give me a bare box without the “Microsoft Tax” and put Linux and BSD device drivers on your web site and that will satisfy most of hobbyists.
March 14th, 2007 at 3:44 pm
I don’t mind PC vendors who offer PC’s with Windows-taxes even not if it’s pre-installed with windows version X. Because if it’s not the right price you’ll go to some one else.
What I do would like to see from these PC vendors is that they at least promise that this specific hardware is compatible with linux, and if it’s not that they will make it compatible by contributing to the linux kernel.
It would of course be nice for the people who are new to linux that they can have a system with kubuntu/ubuntu installed but that’s not the most important in my opinion.
March 14th, 2007 at 3:51 pm
I think Linux is doing just fine right now and is better supported by us going to our friends and passing CD’s around and answering to their questions. I would just like to be able to buy a laptop without paying the windows tax (desktops i build myself).
March 14th, 2007 at 3:52 pm
I second what Maimon Mons wrote. A laptop manufacturer would make me very happy if
1) all of the hardware was certified to run on Ubuntu/Novell/Fedora
2) the hard drive arrived blank
3) I received a CD/DVD of every OS that I paid for (Vista, Linux, whatever)
I’m going to make it into a dual-boot anyway — that’s part of the fun. All I ask (and expect) is that there are no serious hardware issues during installation or normal use.
March 14th, 2007 at 3:57 pm
Good article…but:
it’s SUSE and openSUSE
*not*
SuSE and OpenSuSE
March 14th, 2007 at 3:59 pm
[...] 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.” [...]
March 14th, 2007 at 4:02 pm
Heh. Most of us experts would be happy with any version of linux preinstalled on the machine with a complete set of (working) opensource drivers. If that were the case, I could live with installing my favorite environment (FreeBSD) when it arrived.
March 14th, 2007 at 4:02 pm
Everyone should be voting for Dell to ship gNewSense on their machines. I don’t understand why anyone would want them to do otherwise? Surely, the fact that Ubuntu ships binary drivers is because a lot of machines come with hardware that requires them… we should support Dell in creating and selling machines that do not require any non-free software, instead of having a “my non-free distro is better than yours” contest?
March 14th, 2007 at 4:08 pm
The difference between a computer and a CD Player is that the CD player is incredibly simple to operate; literally any person who buys one will have no problem inserting a CD into the player.
Installing an operating system, on the other hand, even one with an installer as user-cajoling as Microsoft has tried to make theirs, is a significantly more difficult task, and greatly intimidates most users. Therefore it’s necessary in the to offer pre-installed operating systems rather than allowing users to provide their own.
March 14th, 2007 at 4:09 pm
[...] Mark Shuttleworth, the financier behind Ubuntu (thanks Mark!) tackles the problem of Linux in a recent blog post. He points out that profit margins are very low on these products, and that co-marketing funds from Microsoft make up a significant proportion of the profits. Without these funds, the profit margins on machines are so small that a problem with any single order can negate the profits on many orders. All it takes is one guy complaining that he “can’t install his [Windows] programs” and returning the computer to cancel out the profits on ten other sales. Unfortunately, the number of people who would do this kind of thing is way too high, as the average computer buyer really doesn’t know anything about Linux, and many sales of Linux PCs might end up being accidental, i.e. the person doesn’t realize what they’re getting into. [...]
March 14th, 2007 at 4:09 pm
OS-free PC with Ubuntu Live CD is all I need, I happily install it myself (it takes about 10 clicks and 20 mins). Dell can have some reasonable subset (Linux-ready, or Ubuntu-ready) of all configurations, vetted up by Ubuntu gurus and OK by them/Canonical. Just to make sure Dell would not make some strange hardware change painfull to Linix. And free support from existing forums should be enough - we provide it anyway.
March 14th, 2007 at 4:12 pm
As always, Mr. Shuttleworth paints a realistic picture of the situation without resorting to bashing anyone. Kudos for a well reasoned and written piece.
So, how do we approach the preload situation?
I don’t have an answer for the problem of making up for lost Microsoft soft-money, unfortunately. Theoretically that should already be illegal, but Microsoft has, to date, been able to work around legal obstacles.
I think that we can solve the remaining problems, though. Obtaining a desktop or laptop for use with Linux, at least at this early stage, doesn’t have to be easy — it merely has to be POSSIBLE. I think Wal-Mart’s “PC’s with Linux” plan was a bad idea. As this blog entry mentioned, you end up with customers who just go for the cheapest models assuming that they’re going to get Windows. I would be happy to see the Dell order customization screens simply offer two additional options: “replace Windows with Linux” and “omit Windows.” The latter would be useful for people who don’t care for the Linux flavor Dell chooses to offer (though I hope it’d be Ubuntu, perhaps with the proprietary codecs from Linspire pre-integrated). I wouldn’t even mind if selecting one of those options popped up a box that warns the user that Linux does not easily run Windows software.
Later on, once we have market share and consumers begin to understand that a Linux box isn’t any more likely to run Windows software than, say, a Macintosh is — then we can revisit the ordering options again.
The important thing, though, is that by offering a Linux option, Dell will presumably test and certify it with their hardware. This will eliminate the need to do crazy things like hunt down video driver patches, or even really obscure things like disassembling and repairing the ACPI DSDT.
March 14th, 2007 at 4:13 pm
Here is what I think Dell should do:
1) Give people the option on Dell’s website to select “Operating System Not Installed”. Clearly explain in laymans terms what that means; you won’t be able to play World of Warcraft unless buy and install Microsoft Windows seperatly (sort of like “Batteries Not Included”). Yes, I know WoW runs under Wine on GNU/Linux but that isn’t something the average user will be able to get working.
2) Have option to select which GNU/Linux distrubution CD-ROM you want shipped with your system. Dell should not attempt to provide software support for any GNU/Linux distribution since it will be too expensive, and their “Home” users are for the most part not computer savvy, and expect to use Windows. Instead, Dell should direct GNU/Linux users to obtain software support from the respective GNU/Linux distribution website (RedHat, Ubuntu, SuSe, etc)
3) Dell should Ship with the PC their excellent Diagnostic Test Software boot CD-ROM. If you’ve used this, you’ll know that it is best PC hardware testing software out there. It tests every single hardware component of your PC. Dell could use this to provide hardware support for the systems they sell.
Here is what I think the US govn’t should do:
1) Make it ILLEGAL for PC manufacturers to install “craplets” — software that just slows down your computer and wastes your hard disk. Example: AOL Free Trial!. That way, GNU/Linux PC would actually have a competitive price advantage over Microsoft Windows based PCs. Currently, PC manufacturers make about $70 per PC by installing craplets on their PCs that only run on Microsoft Windows. This is one reason why PCs that ship with Microsoft Windows are more expensive than Linux PCs. Microsoft doesn’t want craplets on PCs either since many of them are not Vista compatible, and actually cause problems for Vista, and thus make Vista “look bad” to the consumer.
March 14th, 2007 at 4:18 pm
First, Dell (as well as many others) offer systems with “No Operating System”, but generally only on the business-class machines since those normally go to folks with volume license agreements. Comsumers are generally free to buy one though.
Like it or not, Linux is not nearly as easy as Windows is to support. With Windows, every copy — regardless of locale, version, or language — has the same place for cmd.exe. Think of all the different places stuff hides on linux .. it could be /bin, /usr/bin, /usr/local/bin, /opt/bin, etc.
Now imagine trying to explain to “Bob” in India (which, oddly, seems to be everyone that works for Dell’s name) .. that you’re missing library ‘x’ and can’t compile ‘y’.
March 14th, 2007 at 4:28 pm
If I could buy a Dell laptop with 1GB of memory and a ready to use CD and DVD burner running Ubuntu preinstalled, I would do it today.
I’ve got an HP Laptop with XP and I don’t feel like monkeying with it and risking things to put Linux on it. I’ve done that before with different levels of success but that was before I had children and a lot more demands on my time.
Preinstalled major brand laptop = purchased laptop.
March 14th, 2007 at 4:35 pm
I’m not fussy at all, Mark. All I want is to be able to buy a Dell laptop, whip out the ubuntu install cd (doesn’t matter if it came in the box with the computer or not) and know that, when the cd is done, my shiny new laptop will work in linux at least as well as it would OOTB in windows. I don’t even care if it comes preconfigured with windows so long as I know it’s ALL (that means modem, sound, network, wifi, firewire, 3d accel) going to work with ubuntu WITHOUT me having to invest 100 hours crawling through support forums trying to figure out what config file needs to say what and what modules need to be added.
If Dell would put together a laptop and then work with you folk to make sure ALL the drivers work and are included in Ubuntu-whatever, then they’d sell me a new machine.
March 14th, 2007 at 4:36 pm
It is interesting that the founder of Ubuntu thinks that Dell need be concerned about supporting the OS. To my knowledge, this situation–hardware vendor supporting the OS–is only required with the Microsoft or Apple systems. Dell could easily contract with Ubuntu, Red Hat, Novell, or some third party to do the (software) support. Then the user who wonders why WoW won’t install without jumping through hoops need not trouble Dell–that responsibility falls upon the support partner’s shoulders.
Does Ubuntu not do support?!
March 14th, 2007 at 4:38 pm
I am all but certain that this survey and seeming open mindedness by Dell are a back-handed effort by Microsoft to nudge the Linux distributions to coalesce into one. After all, if there’s only one Linux, Microsoft will have a much easier time pummeling it into nonexistence. As it stands now, Microsoft endures the uncomfortable position of having to play “Whack a Mole”. And this is a Good Thing (TM).
March 14th, 2007 at 4:41 pm
Hello Mark,
The issue is does Linux work with a new Dell PC. Here are a few thoughts:
1) Sell Drives w/out an OS and still minus the discount of XP / Vista off that machine.
2) If Dell is so inclined; the can provided some dev machines to developers to make sure that the hardware is recognized.
Dell, does haven’t to support the OS; that is why Canonical and Red Hat do for their money.
Most companies let their business partners do the work. I am sure if there are some major companies that want:
RH or Ubuntu to be installed on OS’less machine. Dell would sell the desktops; RH and Canonical would provided support.
Just my .02 cents worth.
March 14th, 2007 at 4:45 pm
Don’t project yourself onto every other Linux user, Narcissus.
March 14th, 2007 at 4:47 pm
We’re really not as picky or conflicting in our opinions as you say. Yes, I want the chipset with the Free driver. With the exception of gamers, just about anyone in the FOSS crowd will at least prefer that one also.
Beyond that, I think there are about three groups of potential buyers. (I fit into #1 or #2, depending on the time of day.)
(1) Commercial. They want RHEL with paid support.
(2) Hobbyist. They’ll say “I’ll only use Fedora Core 9!” or Ubuntu or Gentoo or whatever, even if it hasn’t shipped yet. But the truth is, they’re not going to use the support anyway, so Dell can ship anything and they’ll just reinstall it. The reason they want a Linux-branded machine is to know the hardware meets their expectations (i.e., has Free drivers).
(3) Mainstream consumer. They want paid support (with a lot of hand-holding), and they probably don’t even know what a distribution is. As long as it boots with working X11 and drivers out of the box, they’ll do okay.
It seems like the logical thing to do is to ship Linux-ready hardware, with an option of paid RHEL support. That should satisfy everyone but the hardcore gamers, and if Dell does that, maybe vendors like nVidia will get with the program and so Dell can truly satisfy everyone in the future.
March 14th, 2007 at 4:50 pm
Point is this: just offer a box with no OS on it. I’ll do the rest.
Plz.
March 14th, 2007 at 4:53 pm
I agree there are some hurdles but don’t think they are insurmountable.
For most hardcore Linux users - I don’t think you would see a mass exodus from building DIY boxes to Dell. As you said - most people want to configure everything - myself included.
What I would like to see is a basic box, with compatible hardware that I could buy at a low cost and setup for my parents, neighbors, etc… They would see recognition in the Dell name, and I would be happy knowing they are using a safe and secure OS. These people don’t need cutting edge hardware and performance. They need web, email and an office program. These same needs would also fit a lot of small offices as well.
March 14th, 2007 at 5:03 pm
[...] Mark Shuttleworth has some comments on his blog about pre-installing Linux, and the issues that OEMs face with selling Linux. He’s spot on, of course, when it comes to the problems that OEMs have — margins are already thin, supporting Linux could be pricey, there are tons of distros to choose from (which is great for Linux users, but lousy for OEMs and ISVs who just don’t care about the differences/advantages of package formats or admin tools they just want something that they can target) and other issues. [...]
March 14th, 2007 at 5:04 pm
I might be opening a can of worms here but I think something needs to be said. I’m 39 years old. I’ve been involved with computers since I was 13. I like Linux. I like Ubuntu specifically. I understand the free software movement. But I think there is 1 thing that the free software movement does not understand about users. Users don’t care about whether the software they are using are GPL, GPL2, GPl3, Aladin, BSD, or a host of other types of licenses. They just want it to work. I have a decent PC that I run Ubuntu on. I have Nvidia video and an Atheros based WiFi card. I don’t much care that I have to use the Restricted module to make these work fully. Most end users feel the same. They don’t care. They don’t realize that they don’t OWN their software. They just want to turn on their pc and be able to surf, print, or play a game without a hassle. In order to get some of these hardware vendors to come on board, some concessions are going to have to be made by the Linux people when it comes to drivers. Perhaps a middle ground can be found.
March 14th, 2007 at 5:07 pm
Realistically, all Dell needs to do is provide hardware that is 100% certified for GNU/Linux.
They could, then, provide CDs of several of the leading distros to be explored and installed by users (i.e., OpenSuSE, Fedora, Mandriva and Ubuntu).
Or, just provide Novell SuSE Desktop (which is what I think they will do) pre-installed, and perhaps add in an Ubuntu CD.
I personally think a Dell Linux would be fine, too.. Base it on Debian, Fedora, or OpenSuSE.. You could build support mechanisms into the distro, such as short-cuts to IRC channels.
March 14th, 2007 at 5:14 pm
…we free software fans are a fussy crowd, and very hard to please….
Please, I want a computer which supports Linux. The main reason for free software users paying too much attention to those details is that many hardware is not compatible with Linux. I want to be a computer user, not a technical expert. I want to buy a computer and I want it to be running Linux without problems. Why pulling vendors to preinstall Linux has to be so bad? You know who is going to buy those machines: Advanced users and companies who want a computer to run Linux, not home users.
March 14th, 2007 at 5:16 pm
Linux on a PC by Dell is going to look an awful lot like the RedHat distribution did. They don’t really have much choice. They have to step up and make sure Dell proprietary BIOS extensions and such are supported. They have to make sure that ACPI works so you can hibernate a notebook. They have to make sure the video and network drivers work, including wireless.
Then they have to make sure this all works out of the box for the utter noob that can be expected to buy it. If it doesn’t they have failed. The market for Linux on a PC is not the “Ubuntu community” or “Linux fanboys”, it is the general public. This is going to require them to dedicate significant resources to a single distribution for support purposes and to get all the drivers working properly together.
One thing that people seem to be missing here is that Dell (or anyone) isn’t going to decide on hardware components based on their level of Linux support today. They are going to choose a distribution and add needed drivers to it - even writing some - based on the hardware that is available to them. If the decision is to use an ATI video chipset that doesn’t have Linux support in a notebook they aren’t going to change the hardware to suit Linux, they are going to change Linux to suit the hardware. They will (obviously) be selling 100 Windows machines to 1 Linux machine and aren’t going to change their hardware process based on 1%.
I bought a Dell server machine with RedHat 9 some time ago and it came with all sorts of Dell added stuff. Support for the RAID. Support for the BIOS. Support for hardware diagnostics. You are not going to get Dell to strip the machine down to “commodity generic” stuff if that is not what they are selling for Windows. And it isn’t.
Sure, Dell could sell a “bare” machine with no OS for those that want it. But, the support nightmare would certainly come to pass where they were trying to support Fred’s Linux Distro and failing. This does not make for good customer relations. Any Linux program that allowed that to happen would be pulled at complaint letter #5. Permanently. Do you blame Dell for not wanting to get into that?
March 14th, 2007 at 5:17 pm
I’d be happy to get a blank machine and a CD. IF IT WORKED. Unfortunately there are still some nagging details that don’t work properly with regard to drivers (sleep/hibernate, wireless, ATI cards are a nuisance). This is particularly true if you try to pick up a random laptop, but it would really be nice if the desktops all hibernated properly as well. For me it would be sufficient if the computer models simply had a flag indicating if they were fully compatible with some off the shelf linux distribution. It would be even better if they made sure more models were that way.
March 14th, 2007 at 5:21 pm
What I think would be the best solution (assuming nothing in the community or distro environment changes in the time it takes to deploy Linux based offerings) is to:
1) as you mentioned - bundle the CD for the distro of choice
2) Have a second CD of drivers certified with that version of the distro
3) as Dell offers in the survey - utilize community based support with extensive involvement on Dell’s part
Will it be a gangbuster? probably not. I feel it will gain Dell publicity and good will, neither of which can be discounted.
March 14th, 2007 at 5:25 pm
Mark:
Great post
[quote]…an Ubuntu disk in the box, which you yourself installed…[/quote]
In my opinion this will make the trick.
Maybe you and the great community of Ubuntu can consider to have a group to work directly with the big players (dell, asus, toshiba, etc) to develop a .iso for a few modells from then that will make all the hardware funcional from the start. That particular reader, the camera, etc that give so many work to get working to a noob.
I now that one day we will have it. I only can hope that will be really soon
I also must say that is very bad that for example dell don’t have in consideration some country’s. In my country (Portugal) only Company’s can buy dell products. it is not possible to a home user to buy from dell.
I hope that can change one day.
Th
March 14th, 2007 at 5:29 pm
If we accept the following to be true:
- that Dell is in business to make profit
- that a good proportion of Dell’s profit comes from its relationship with MicroSoft (MS)
- that MS has got Dell over a barrel
then surely we cannot expect Dell to “sour its deal with MS”.
So it follows that pushing Dell for OS-less PCs is fruitless.
Even asking Dell to certify that its PCs will be 100% open-source compatible at the hardware driver level is fruitless.
Much more realistic, in my opinion, would be to go to manufacturers of mainboards and video cards, of barebone systems, and press for enough details so that we can get open-source drivers written.
Then have “Mom & Pop stores” doing the final assembly and OS installation.
As it is, we already have Mom & Pop stores assembling and installing Windows, and this niche seems to co-exist with the big operators like Dell. (At least in the UK and in mainalnd Europe. I admit I haven’t seen many in the US.)
So my opinion is, leave the bulk, lumpen market to the likes of Dell and MS, and attempt to increase the size of the existing niche market for Mom & Pop and Linux.
Beef.
March 14th, 2007 at 5:30 pm
Hi Mark. It’s true that Linux users, like Mac users, are a fussy bunch. We wouldn’t have gone out of the mainstream if it offered us what we wanted. But you’ve forgotten something important.
Let’s look at that list: (I’ve added one item so that Ubuntu has the same options as the others)
Commercial: Novell/SuSE Linux Desktop,
Commercial: Red Hat Enterprise Desktop,
Community Supported: Fedora,
Community Supported: OpenSUSE,
Community Supported: Ubuntu,
Commercial: Ubuntu LTS (Long Term Support).
Since RHEL, SUSE, Ubuntu LTS have are more conservative than Fedora or OpenSUSE or Ubuntu (no nLTS), then if your hardware supports RHEL or SUSE or Ubuntu LTS, it’ll automatically support Fedora or OpenSUSE or Ubuntu (non LTS). Okay, so we have three items on our list.
So far, so good. Since the Linux kernel version number determines what hardware is supported, then if your hardware supports the oldest kernel of RHEL, SUSE, and Ubuntu LTS, there’s a very good chance it supports them all.
So out of the list of 6 or so distributions, Dell have a single number to work with (call it kernel 2.6.x). Look at the hardware their selling. If it’s supported by 2.6.x, then fine. If not, then they need to replace (or drop) the hardware in favour of something that 2.6.x does support. They could then say “Works with Linux 2.6.x”. It’s not that difficult, is it?
Now let’s take it to the next level. Suppose Dell gave pre-release versions of their hardware to RedHat, Novell, and Canonical in exchange for *their* work in validating the hardware and their certification mark. The only thing Dell would need to do is receive their “hardware compatibility” reports, do the necessary hardware replacements (if any), and offer *certified* RHEL, SUSE, or Ubuntu LTS CDs along with the hardware (that contains no operating system). I’m sure that RedHat, Novell, and Canonical would jump at the offer, especially since if they don’t, their competitors will and they’d be locked out of a juicy market. It’s good for RedHat, Novell, and Canonical who get better hardware support, and it’s good for Dell which gets to tag “Works with Linux 2.6.x”, “RHEL Certified”, “SUSE Certified”, and “Ubuntu LTS Certified” to their product with minimal work.
Now let’s take it to the next level — preinstallation. They could tack on a $20 fee for anyone who wanted “Certified Linux” preinstalled. No tech user would accept this option, but many newbies would. They’ve just generated an additional source of revenue for something that could be easily automated through imaging. There are tonnes of these value added services that can be used to generate revenue.
Fussy people are more likely to appreciate services catered to them than the mainstream (who will go for any commodity item they find at the lowest cost).
Mainstreamers are responsible for the razor thin margins (in the Ubuntu world, they’re the ones who are happy with community support and thing else).
It’s the fussy that provide Dell, Canonical, and others with larger margins. Any OEM that walks away from this market is selling itself short.
March 14th, 2007 at 5:32 pm
I think there could be a “just a touch” different approach to including a variety of distributions in a single delivery.
Intead of including a number of CDs of the most common distributions (10 CDs? 15?), it could be possible to include the installers to run from the bottom of the Hard Drive (more than one installer can easily fit inside a HD) and then be wiped out (the installers) after the installation.
Perhaps asking the user to burn a CD with the selected distribution in case something is wrong.
Or simply leaving the option of wiping all the installers to a user who so wishes.
Just a thought (a couple, as a matter of fact).
March 14th, 2007 at 5:33 pm
Pre-installed Linux boxes for endusers aren’t all that important in my book. Before we can tackle the home user market in earnest, we still have to overcome one big hurdle: gaming. Everything else is in place, office applications, multimedia, browsing, IM, VoIP, digital cameras, digital camcorders - whatever. But Linux remains weak on gaming.
The corporate desktop, on the other hand, is a target that is clearly in reach. All necessary components are there. We just have to assemble them. We don’t need pre-installed linux boxes out of the shelf for this. Any local supplier/distributor/whatever can do it. Well, maybe not any, but it can be done.
We at SysEx do it.
March 14th, 2007 at 5:33 pm
The irony is astounding. Buy a cheaper machine with Windows or a more expensive machine with Linux. That is just crazy!
March 14th, 2007 at 5:36 pm
David: You mean Windows is particularly easy to install? I just installed XP for my brother, and it takes me FAR more time than installing Edgy+codecs+Nvidia drivers+whatever configuration I want. You need to manually install a current IM client, an office Suite, a decent web browser, antivirus software, misc. hardware drivers, an archiver that can handle .tar and .rar, and downloading security patches. Plus, I can’t use the computer while I install. Ubuntu has the best installer I’ve ever seen in any OS.
(but Vector Linux’s makes me laugh…)
March 14th, 2007 at 5:36 pm
The CD and the music player work independently because they are standardized to do so. Same with PCs, they are standardized on windows. If the major PC manufacturers standardize on (one, not more) Linux distribution, its all that we ask. What we don’t want is to pay $$$$ for a branded box (or graphics card) and not be able to operate it under ANY distro
March 14th, 2007 at 5:46 pm
Not all of us forgot about Canonical when filling out the survey. I selected other: Commercially supported Ubuntu via Canonical agreement. The capitalist in me would not have had it otherwise.
I think there are some wonderfully salient points in your posting particularly about not confusing where the current demand for Linux on the desktop comes from and the complexities of co-op marketing dollars. As a corporate manager, Linux on the desktop is much closer than in the past but still not there yet; I won’t be installing or buying support for such installations anytime soon for all save my most tech-savy power users, and even then no for anyone outside of IT. For a company like Dell to jeopardize an important source of cash such as co-op for such a slim portion of the market would not be an appealing proposition for any manager there I presume. We must remember, they aren’t in it for the cause: they are in it to make profit (as they should be) and anything not consistent with that position must necessarily be rejected if management is on its toes. Having said that, the upstart that doesn’t get co-op from MS or other big players anyway may find room in the niche if they play their cards right…. they simply don’t have as much to lose.
Cheers
SCB
March 14th, 2007 at 5:47 pm
On a completely unrelated note: I sent Mark an e-mail regarding a petition for the UK government to support ODF. I can understand if he doesn’t want to blog about it directly, but I thought I’d leave a note here in case any Brits reading this are unaware.
The petition is at: http://petitions.pm.gov.uk/OpenDocument/ I believe it important for the future of our country, and its governments ability to communicate with its citizens, that ODF be adopted.
March 14th, 2007 at 5:49 pm
What if Canonical partners with Dell to offer official Ubuntu support. When a person buys a Dell with pre-installed Ubuntu, maybe Dell could sell them support from Canonical at a discounted rate. Maybe all new Ubuntu Dell’s come with 3-6 months email support, it could have a guaranteed response within 48-72 hours. Then for a small fee customers could buy guaranteed 24hr response time email support. For a little more, standard business hours phone support. And then the last option, 24hr phone support.
March 14th, 2007 at 5:50 pm
I don’t get it.
We only want computers that “just works”.
Whatever the way (certifying or not, preloading Ubuntu or Fedora, etc.), the “preinstalled distro” thing is no more, for us, than some sort of “it just works” confirmation.
But the main support should go to upstream.
Specifically, for a laptop, a Linux user wants, straight in his standard kernel & xorg :
- Working hibernate & suspend
- Accelerated graphic chipset with free drivers
- Working Wifi (with redistribuables firmwares)
- Working internal modem (if any) and/or webcam (if any)
For this, Dell, doesn’t have to support every distro version out there : they mostly have to get patches integrated in the upstream vanilla linux kernel and the standard X.org git repos. Or presure their suppliers to work on this. Then, the community and the distro vendors will do their job (integration, end-user documentation, support, …) as usual.
So why why don’t hardware makers get this simple thing ?
We don’t want “certified RHEL 4 binary driver for the IBM x346 raid chip” that breaks on upgrade anymore. Things don’t work like that nowadays, in linuxland. If they work like this, they’ll only get heavy criticisms.
So why is still Dell polling for things like “what distro do you want”, “what kind of support ?”, …, didn’t they understood ?
We only want Dell products to work with “Linux” (not specifically “Ubuntu 6.4″ or “Fedora 7.0″), it’s that simple. Proper patches integrated in main kernel repository (where they’ll be reviewed and maintained in the long run by who-knows-how-to-do-it-properly), and everything will work on future distributions releases.
Remember the Nokia’s Maemo/N770/N800 success ? Nokia got it, at least, and had momentum and good PR in return. They know who we are, they know how to work with us.
March 14th, 2007 at 5:54 pm
[...] The blog entry by Shuttleworth is one worth reading. He talks about some significant issues: Don’t worry, he doesn’t tell you to be a different person he just tries to lower your expectations a little. [...]
March 14th, 2007 at 6:01 pm
Fussy is you!
You are billing me on OS you install, that I won´t.
So, you are talking about my money, don´t yours.
So fussy is you, and only you!
March 14th, 2007 at 6:02 pm
Mark obviously knows that those with the least risk in preinstalling linux on laptops are startup companies not doing anything else. e.g. System76.
Let’s face it, we want Linux on Laptops, and what I mean is that we want all the hardware on a Laptop to work with the Linux kernel. Doesn’t matter which distro Dell test this with, kernel driver compatibility is THE issue. Crack that for your customers, slap a penguin sticker on it and you can sit back and watch the cash roll in.
One model is all you need to start at. The only proviso is that you must listen to the community and keep testing new hardware against the Linux kernel.
March 14th, 2007 at 6:14 pm
“Worse, we are not “Linux” users, we are users who want version 6.06.1 of Ubuntu, or 10.2 of SuSE, or Fedora 6. We want a specific distro, and in many cases also a specific VERSION of that distro.”
Actually I have my own personal configuration for running Linux. I can create my configuration from almost any Linux distribution and have done so using Fedora, Mandriva, SuSE, and Kubuntu. So, I don’t think that which distribution is offered will be a problem for Dell. Faced with a choice of Windows or some Linux distribution on a Dell machine I will always buy Linux and reconfigure whatever Dell offers to suit my needs.
——————-
Steve Stites
March 14th, 2007 at 6:20 pm
Now what would be the point (for us fussy geeks) for Dell to get intimate with any specific vendor?
Since we’re still human, we have differences in taste. And demand choice, it seems. So, the optimal strategy for Dell would be to get into contact with Greg K-H (remember his driver program?), and arrange for decent drivers for all of their hardware, which will assure compatibility for Dell’s products from then on. Then all the vendors/distro’s/whatever can backport everything to their LTS versions, or recommend upgrading to current versions (for bleeding edge stuff like desktops etc).
Before too long, Dell can tick off “fully supported on linux (running a reasonable recent kernel)”. End of story.
Oh, and BTW, since it seems the MS tax actually saves ME money (an Optiplex with Windows is, or used to be, cheaper than an N-series with FreeDOS), they can ship any box WITH windows on it to me. Since I format away adware in any case, _even_ if I plan to run windows on it, it doesn’t actually cost me anything ….
March 14th, 2007 at 6:21 pm
I hate to tell you that this whole thing might just be Dell positioning itself for the next round of negociations with MS regarding the cost of faciliating PC technology preinstalled with MS operating system / application software. Lets face it, if Dell is able to decrease the over head cost of installed MS software technology by a small fraction it will increase its overall profits much more than selling PC’s with Linux installed and be preceived as having less risk.
Now, if we want to get serious about delivery of linux based workstations to customers we need to expand the install process to include an internet connection, perferably high speed, right from the get go. I say this because all the issues I have had relative to installing Linux over the past 4 years have been show stopper hardware configuration issues, e.g. unsupported display adapter / display, unsupported LAN/WAN device, USB Keyboard / Mouse not recognized during configuration process, software required for device support is not on distribution CD. I am a long term Linux user and I have gotten around these problems by preinstalling drivers, using an alternate installation method, or replacing the unsupported hardware with supported hardware and installing the OS and the required software (downloaded from the internet) after the fact then restoring the hardware back to the original configuration. This is way too much work for a typical PC user to handle. I think we should expand the BIOS on PC motherboards to provide for enabling the linux boot process to proceed with support for a network connection for a target ftp/http site which will provide for downloading the driver / application software required over and above the software on the CD/DVD for the install. This will provide for a user to have a seamless install process when they install Linux, enable them to use the latest open source software on their pc and prevent them from having to learn all of the alternate methods required for a successful install.
There you have it.
March 14th, 2007 at 6:25 pm
Mark, I think we all understand the point about the thin margin on desktop OEMs. That’s always been an issue and it’s a way that Microsoft creates a monopoly. One solution for that is for a Linux distributor to give kickbacks to Dell the way Microsoft does and to offer a channel for support without involving Dell. This isn’t easy, since Linux distributors aren’t exactly making loads of money of the distribution, but it’s not an impossible solution. But that’s not my main point.
The point about Dell’s (or even Wal-Mart’s) margin seems to be getting confused with how the actual users will react to Linux. Most novice users won’t even notice that they’re not using Windows. They will notice, like you said, when they attempt to install something off the shelf at Wal-Mart, such as a game. The solution is not to not offer (i.e. surprise the user with) pre-installed Linux, but to make finding software (and setting up the pre-installed software) blindingly easy and to offer good support channels for the things that just don’t work, like games. Most novice adult users don’t care about big label PC games.
March 14th, 2007 at 6:37 pm
Having the OS preinstalled is no good for many corporate as they will blow it away and load their own suite of OS and applications. I know this is what I do for 99% of my customers. In this case, just having drivers for all of the hardware supplied would be fine. Biggest hassle I have with any linux distro is with keyboards supplied with extra buttons the users want to use, laptops with extra buttons for system functions like volume control, tablet screen rotation, wifi on/off etc. I had a laptop that all of the BIOS features could only be accessed from a software application written for Win32. I had to keep an MS OS installed just to config the hardware!
My company supplied me with an MS wireless keyboard and mouse. The devices would not initialise until I had installed and run the device driver in Windows.
Once these sorts of issues are covered, it is actually pretty trivial to install linux on most hardware, and infact openSUSE off DVD takes much less time than either XP or Vista for installation. If the distro repositores are mirrored on a local server, a corporate deployment would be even faster.
For business, a linux PC could cost twice as much to buy than a Windows PC, and would still work out cheaper than the Windows functional equivalent.
The MS way: buy PC + OEM Windows, then delete. Buy software to package and distribute apps and OS (eg Altiris or SMS) licence Windows with maintenance, buy CAL to access mail and Active directory, buy CALs for Terminal Server for remote users.
Linux way: (just an example) Buy PC with no OS. Buy support for a suitable linux distro, package any apps not already bundled as RPMs with tools already in the distro. Deploy using Yast/redcarpet,yum etc already in the distro. (you might have to but user licences for acess to a corporate LDAP directory like eDirectory, but you could use openLDAP for free.) Use mail clients already in the distro to access your mail server, use “ssh-X user@server” or ifolder to support remote and laptop users.
March 14th, 2007 at 6:42 pm
Sell the hardware Mr. Shuttleworth, follow your instincts. Do like Apple, it just works!
Cool cases, mini-itx, the green dragon, UBUNTU.
The time is now…
March 14th, 2007 at 6:46 pm
It seems like all hardware choices made by Linux users boils down to two things:
1. Is it a complete product (ie, isn’t missing a key component then branded as a WinModem, WinPrinter, WinScanner, etc)
2. Can be taken full advantage of with the free drivers. (ie, if I plug it in, I should be able to make the thing Just Work in about 20 seconds since the distro already shipped with the drivers).
Usable and complete hardware shouldn’t be such a bloody fight to obtain. It’s in OEMs best interest to make it easy to obtain usable and complete hardware, even if it costs them a couple bucks more per unit (if nothing else, it’ll offset the cost of support for incomplete hardware in their outsourced customer neglect centers).
To suggest that it should be a fight, and that we should be glad for it just because OEMs are starting to play some lip service, is entirely disingenuous. We’re not Mac users begging Apple for crumbs after all.
March 14th, 2007 at 7:06 pm
I want that little green dragon in a futuristic but simple and elegant case.
I want to follow the ubuntu cult.
It wont be a posh mac or a tacky dell, a ubuntu masterpiece.
A brand on its own, a third outsider, a rebellious look.
The starts are aligned, make that call to china suppliers
The time is now…
March 14th, 2007 at 7:15 pm
One decent computer with a significant amount of bells and whistles - ~$1000
RAM upgrade - $75
The Vista OS pre-installed “tax” - $75 (I don’t really know the price just a guess)
Having UPS drop ship the computer, powering it up, then promptly installing favorite linux distro -
PRICELE$$
March 14th, 2007 at 7:20 pm
Speaking for myself, I want to be able to tell people to buy a certain model of computer - and it will come with Linux installed and all of the devices working properly.
The last 3 people I tried to convert to Ubuntu were never able to use it because they couldn’t get wireless to work.
March 14th, 2007 at 7:22 pm
Small OEMs are already selling some nice systems…like Shafetech and System76.
March 14th, 2007 at 7:29 pm
Instead of companies like Dell and HP providing computers with a Linux distribution, I think a better solution would be to provide 100% Linux compatible solutions. These computers may initially ship with Windows or no OS at all, but would contain hardware that is certified to work with Linux. Perhaps, these solutions would ship with a cd (or available on their website) with all the needed drivers. So if they offer a Linux certified notebook with multimedia keys, embedded camera, sound card, etc; there are either company developed drivers or community-developed drivers available to use. That way, these vendors don’t have to worry about supporting the “Matrix” of distributions and they could even push the non-hardware support out to a community-driven model.
March 14th, 2007 at 7:31 pm
I’d be very happy if pre-built computer manufacturers made technical support, as well as pre-installed software, optional instead of mandatory. For desktop computers this is not really a problem because us fussy Linux users will build our own from parts we purchase separately. This is a problem really only on laptops.
I just bought a Fujitsu P7230, but I could not get it without Windows Vista pre-installed. I got Home Basic because it was the cheapest. Not only did it have Windows pre-installed, it also has a bunch of other Fujitsu software pre-installed. Even if I was still a Windows user, I would be unhappy.
Tech support and all pre-installed software, including the OS, should be optional. Choosing to not have these things should significantly reduce the cost of the machine to the consumer without costing the manufacturer much extra at all.
March 14th, 2007 at 7:36 pm
silentrevolt.com sells pcs with linux installed
March 14th, 2007 at 7:40 pm
Nooooooooo !!
We all understand how the current linux market works, and we are not suggesting that changes any time soon. ie - Informed individuals custom build their own systems (be that hardware and or operating systems) to suit their own needs.
We are not talking about that, and its not something that will ever impact Dell in a big way.
We are talking about the awful imbalances in the ‘mainstream’ market that need addressing.
You mention an anecdote about a clueless consumer accidentally buying a linux box and wondering why it wont run some package he purchased off a shelf. Yes, well, that is exactly the sort of scenario that should concern us all. That is the sad state of the world that we currently live in, and that is the world we are trying to change. MY world is OK - I already have all my custom built linux boxes up and running and doing what needs to be done. Its the rest of the world that I need to interact with that is the source of the problem.
I want to change it.
I want to wake up one morning to a world where Windows is NOT the norm.
And this WILL happen, as soon as alternatives are placed on an equal footing by vendors such as Dell. And I say this in the sincere belief that the average consumer would be far better off living in a world where Linux was the norm - not Windows. So lets bring that day forward.
Microsoft has had its day as top dog, and unfortunately for all of us, didnt make the best use of that opportunity. Greed and fear got the better of them, and now we all had to suffer because of it. Its well overdue time to move on.
Offering a machine with a blank hard disk has absolutely NO VALUE to the ‘average consumer’, and is frankly, insulting. Its telling people loud and clear that if they dont want to play by Microsoft’s rules, then life SHOULD be harder for them. Offering the same thing to ‘the average linux user’ has no value either - since they may as well go fully DIY and build their own machine.
I want to see Dell offer Linux on an even footing with Windows, since that is a step towards righting the wrongs that are currently in place. I want to see Dell lead by example and profit at the same time. I want to see Dell stand up to Microsoft.
THAT is what we are saying on ideastorm.
March 14th, 2007 at 7:44 pm
[...] So, Mark Shuttleworth is someone I really respect. It’s hard not to respect the person behind Ubuntu and so much else. Now he has penned an blog entry about the Dell/Linux/IdeaStorm that really says it all, I think. Users want linux, but they want it to come pre-installed in a nice and tidy little box, just like when they order a new windows computer. [...]
March 14th, 2007 at 7:51 pm
So what if there are different distros, how is that so much different than Windows different editions, like “home edition”, “media edition”, “Professional Edition”. In some cases distros are so different I’m sure that there are issues. I’m new, I use SimplyMEPIS and have looked at OpenSuSE, Edubuntu and Damn Small Linux, and I can preform most of the basics. From all I have heard, if you can run Red Hat/Fedora, SuSE/OpenSuSE, and Ubuntu, then you pretty much know how to work with almost all Linux, and I am sure that they those 3 types are similar in many ways, too.
March 14th, 2007 at 7:56 pm
IMHO, Linux isn’t ready for this huge market.
because it’s a little bit slower than other OSs, yet It is bundled with the buggiest softwares on the planet, and the average user won’t be satisfied when using “Crap Out-of-the-box”.
March 14th, 2007 at 8:01 pm
rubso: are you sure you are talking about Linux or you were addressing Windows?
March 14th, 2007 at 8:03 pm
I like your example regarding wanting a dell with an intel chipset to use the free driver… Since that’s exactly what I did.
I took the survey, and in the case of the dell laptops I’ve used.
First thing I did when I got my laptop is to just wipe windows. A few weeks back my dad was complaining about how you can’t get a dell machine (well a non-business one) without Windows.
So some people do want it, and those should be the types to pick it up, not as you said, some user just looking for a cheap windows machine.
Anyway, besides canonical teaming up with dell (in terms of support options) and making it clear what Linux is… I doubt dual-boot will be allowed due to agreements with MS. I mean come on, even the Linux survey page at the top says Dell recommends Vista Business. Every single OEM vendor I’ve ever seen, regardless of what OS they offer, recommend Windows, with the same exact wording. There are times I wish we could see these secret MS agreements, but that one is obvious…
http://www.birdhouse.org/beos/byte/30-bootloader/
I would bet that another “rule” is no dual or triple boots. For those further interested, go ahead and google MS BeOS and dual boot…
March 14th, 2007 at 8:10 pm
As a technical user, all I want is fully working, fully standard hardware. That’s it. On the face of it, this ought, theoretically, to be simple.
I don’t care what is pre-installed. I’m going to repartition and install what I really want anyway. They could preinstall something totally off the wall like QNX for all the difference it makes to me.
But if I go to install my OS and find that random hardware components don’t work without proprietary drivers that only support certain operating systems, I’m not going to be pleased.
And I’m not a big fan of bleeding-edge hardware standards either. If there’s a new kind of bus, form factor, or drive controller that’s going to be the “next big thing”, I don’t really want to deal with it until it’s been around for several years and the software people have had time to debug their support for it.
March 14th, 2007 at 8:14 pm
What I want from a ‘Linux’ system is:
1. Don’t lie to me about being able to change components (MiniPCI WiFi card in a certain laptop)
2. Be more exact with specifications (What chip exactly is on that card, does it say RaLink, Intel, Broadcom, etc?)
3. Don’t run when you hear Linux because the problem is with the BIOS which only allows boot with a WiFi card in its whitelist. Train your tech support.
HP selling Linux computers? They sold me a laptop which crippleware.
“IMHO, Linux isn’t ready for this huge market.
because it’s a little bit slower than other OSs”
rubso, Linux is slower in what regard? Adaptation of new concepts (Compiz/Beryl do way more GUI effects than Vista or OS X). Slower as in speed? Then you sir are confused.
NTFS = 14 years old (released in 1993)
EXT3 = 6 years old (released in 2001)
EXT4 will be ready this year for production systems (read: STABLE) this year, I don’t see Microsoft’s promised WinFS …
Between Win98 and WinXP, Microsoft created better hardware compatability, after releasing 2 horrible OS (Win2k without SP is no better than WinME which is argued as the worst product MS ever put out). Ubuntu comes out every 6 months and something always becomes better …
March 14th, 2007 at 8:15 pm
The majority of Linux users here are not “6.06.1 of Ubuntu, or 10.2 of SuSE, or Fedora 6″ users, but fall into 2 camps:
* Firefox/Thunderbird users who barely realize it’s not Windows (like my mom),
* Users of whatever their work installed (like most of my co-workers).
So if Dell gets any Linux running, it’ll satisfy most people’s needs.
Furthermore, for the niche audience who cares about the difference between 6.06.1 or 6.06.2 - or even Gentoo vs Ubuntu — the fact that Dell made sure all their hardware/firmware works with at least one Linux is a big improvement over the current states.
March 14th, 2007 at 8:20 pm
Microsoft co-marketing funds aren’t the only extra cash Dell gets for Windows installs.
I used to work for one of he leading oem-preinstalled-sofware vendors (8 of the top 10 OEMs pre-installed our software) - and we paid some OEMs generously for the privilege of putting a feature-reduced version of our software on their desktop. We would make our money from the upgrades later. In some cases we paid the OEMs up front; and in other cases we shared upgrade revenue with them.
Other ways PC OEMs get paid:
* default browser settings (google search)
* Anti-Virus subscriptions
Until Linux gets as big an adware/crippleware/spyware ecosystem as Windows has I think users should expect that Linux computers will cost more. But that’s OK - you get what you pay for. And if Linux is at least a factory supported option people can feel safe that manually installing Linux can be made to work even on the cheaper Windows versions of the same computer.
March 14th, 2007 at 8:25 pm
[...] Mark Shuttleworth has posted a responds to Dell’s Linux survey on his blog. He brings up two main observations: the first being that “margins on PC’s are razor-thin” and the second being that “free software fans are a fussy crowd.” Both of these observations are presented in a way that seems to say it will be hard [impossible?] to make a profit with Linux on Dells. Unfortunately, Shuttleworth doesn’t offer any solutions to these hesitations. [...]
March 14th, 2007 at 8:28 pm
Some of us just want a machine that has the right devices in it that will work in Linux (any distro running the maintree Linux kernel), possibly limited to drivers with source available. But many of us want to avoid the Microsoft tax, if not for the personal savings, at least just to keep Bill’s hands off of it. So it would seem a PC with no OS would be just right.
But OEMs still need to support the hardware (that’s why you’re buying from them instead of building your own, right?). For that, I suggest a Linux based live DVD. In its basic form, it would include all the vendor diagnostic tools. If you need to call the vendor about the ethernet not working, you run the live DVD (doesn’t write on the hard drive) and go to diagnostics. It then checks the ethernet and provides diagnostic codes for the vendor to use to determine what needs to be fixed or replaced. Any distro will do for this, possibly even a custom one. But a stock distro like Ubuntu could so easily be tweaked (add tools and a few RC script changes) to serve all that’s needed. And it can double as a rescue disk, real work disk, and a re-install tool if you want to use the distro contained on it. The issue of the vendor is supporting it. If some distro maker were to package a variation of their distro designed for vendor diagnostic/testing purpose for otherwise no-OS PCs, maybe they could go for that and start making PCs that work with any of our favorite distros (at least those based on a recent kernel).
March 14th, 2007 at 8:39 pm
” i’m getting so sick and tired of hearing excuses and rationalizations. just put the cd in the cupholder, install it and sell it. period. there’s no need to analyze or certify. what is so hard about this? ”
Let me ask you this, since the car analogy is so famous in the OSS community, would you go to a detroit car factory and volunteer to drive a new car that just came off the production line without it being tested first? Dell and other OEM’s do have to choose which distribution to support and stick to their guns. They cant support every distro of Linux on the market.
March 14th, 2007 at 8:53 pm
Mark I appreciated everything you have said above.
I have given my feedback to dell explicitly.
I have also given my feedback to several other vender’s while talking to the sales staff last time I was shopping for a laptop.
To be honest All I want is, When Shopping I want to be able to easily determine what the current state of the hardware is with respect to Linux. What components have Opensource/BLOB drivers. I want them to make an effort to make a good portion of there laptops work 100% with Linux. I only want them to support Drivers for Linux. and I would like to be able to purchase a computer without software at the same price as with.
March 14th, 2007 at 8:55 pm
You don’t have to support “Windows Users” … you have to support Windows ME, Windows 2000, Windows 2000 Professional, Windows 2000 Server, Windows 2000 Advanced Server, Windows 2000 Super Dooper Really Extra Advanced Server…. the what is it, 12 different versions of Vista … so even suggesting that somehow Windows support is SO much easier because it is monolithic is just, well silly. Linux users may be fussy, but they are also very very self sufficient.
Razor thin margins you say, gee, wouldn’t that lead one to think “Gee, if we could not have to pay that $100 a PC to MicroSoft, we could increat profit!”. Co-marketing funds? I’ll bet ya a bag of chips that PC makers pay MS WAY more than they get back in co-marketing funds… these have traditionally been used as a stick to beat PC makers with … don’t slap “Made for Windows” stickers all over a PC and your web site and we’ll make you pay even more!
Lets face it, the REAL reason PC makers can’t afford to pre install Linux is because MS would squash them Lets cut the BS here.
March 14th, 2007 at 9:07 pm
PC Vendors only need to put one stable operating system across all PCs. As long as a PC can connect, download burn and run, then one distro is enough surely?
March 14th, 2007 at 9:31 pm
My second post in this topic to say this:
The laptop is the best option to make to work. The closed hardware that you buy make the best option to have full support with the right .iso.
I think company’s can see the potential. If we have a DVD with Ubuntu with full drivers and codecs for all and have also a few programs like for example VMware server already installed also (the EULA from them dont allow to have it for example with automatix2…).
I see many advantages from the future CNR version. There is room for software that is not free. The Linux advantage is that you have a base system that is. The only hurdle to overcome is having the hardware working from the start.
The other peace of hardware I think is worth to try is PS3 because there is a close hardware and the specs are good for the price. I look forward for is arrival in Europe and what it can bring with it.
To finish the option to have PCs or laptops with Ubuntu brand is also something to think.
March 14th, 2007 at 10:21 pm
About margins: What if they offer no free support whatsoever to people who buy Linux? If a customer accidentally orders a system with Linux, and calls in to complain, charge regular support call cost and only offer to sell them a Windows license as remedy. Also, you could sell the Linux system at the same price as the Windows system, which would alleviate some or all of the problems with Linux support issues. Maybe you could even add a little Linux premium, which would help against ignorant bargain hunters.
I would be happy to buy a system that was without OS, came with an installation media for one of the top 3-5 Linux distros (no OEM customizations preferably, but if there are, make clear what they are), was certified to work with the default install options, and had absolutely no free support. Heck, I could live even with no support from the OEM. I would be willing to pay the same price as the Windows system, maybe even up to 5% higher. The reason is that nowadays when I look to buy a Linux laptop I spend days or weeks researching in advance, have to configure the system over several days, and in the end have to settle on something that won’t work 100% (like failing to suspend or hibernate).
March 14th, 2007 at 10:28 pm
I think the most important thing is that linux provides hardware support for the devices in the computer. It’s no fun buying a notebook (say) and then finding out that no linux driver exists for the ethernet or WiFi because the manufacturer releases it without specifications and Dell (or whoever) doesn’t require linux compatibility before building it into a machine. If Dell can simply ensure that linux supports all devices in their computer, that will be a huge improvement.
March 14th, 2007 at 10:32 pm
[...] Ubuntu founder Mark Shuttleworth has spoken up on his personal blog what he feels about the recent happenings with Dell, and the possibility that users will be offered the chance to have some distribution of Linux (such as Ubuntu, OpenSUSE, or Fedora) pre-installed on a new PC. [...]
March 14th, 2007 at 10:59 pm
I think that we should boycott the companies that boycott linux until this is issue is resolved, not as a solution but as an extra incentive.
I have been trying to compile such a list here:
http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=365630
I have it broken into 3 sections. Boycott, Moderate, and Accepted. These lists are of companies who are boycotting linux from a hardware point of view. Specifically, companies that are particularly boycotting Linux or contributing to hardware companies that do not support linux by selling incompatiable hardware.
Here is our boycott list:
1) Sony
2) Broadcom
3) Lexmark printers
4) Asus
5) Creative
6) Via
7) S3 Graphics Co. Ltd
8 ) Airlink
9) HughNet (Direcway Satellite systems)
10) SpaceCam
11) Line6
12) OKI (Printers)
13) Canon
14) Ricoh (Copiers etc)
15) D-Link (wireless cards)
16) Toshiba (not necessarily a hardware manufacture),
27) ATI.
and here is our acceptance list:
1) Intel
2) Nvidia
3) Visioneer (scanner)
4) HP (except special key functions on keyboards).
5) AMD
6) Brother
7) Orinoco (wireless)
8 )GIGABYTE Technology (First Motherboard using LinuxBios)
9) Twinhead (Redhat and Solaris Certifed Laptops)
10) Seagate (external hard drives)
11) Digium ( Open Source telecommunications supplier, PBX stuff etc)
12) Ralink
13) Maxtor (Hard drives)
14) Umax Astra ( ie, 2000U scanner)
15) Atheros (wireless)
16)
17) Sun Microsystems
We are still looking for more companies and are open to suggestions.
March 14th, 2007 at 11:15 pm
I want to reply to the poster above, I have hughesnet dish service, I hate the FAP limitation, but I was able to use their stuff by activating/registering via firefox under Ubuntu… I didn’t need to install any software to use their modem… I have used 2 of their modems, all through ethernet and plugged into my router…
March 14th, 2007 at 11:20 pm
Just show people there’s plenty of support, even nearby: add yourself to the free(er) software world map at http://homecomputerhelp.org
March 15th, 2007 at 12:07 am
Dell provides no support for MS Windows.. unless you purchase that support. Talking about support as a generically available thing is a red herring. So, too, is the FUD of “Linux has many distros”, “MS Windows, one”..
A) MS has many versions of its cripple ware, & no, they are _not_ the same.
B) Dell need only install one version of one distro. Users will be able to change that if they wish.
What is needed is for corporate & home america to see that a major computer vendor considers Linux/X to be a viable desktop option. That is why it must be preinstalled. Yes, we ‘power users’ will install our OS of Choice.. but then, we always have. That is not the point. Dell offering a choice of MS Windows OR Linux/X (& LinuxMint (Ubuntu) would be an excellent choice for a ‘works out of the box’ system) on all (or at least nearly all) preinstalled on a system would send the world a message. The message of “Linux/X is a Real System”, _not_ a toy. Many corporations & home users consider a thing useful only to the degree that a company sells it. Sad, but true.. america (I am unable to comment on the state of the rest of the world) has traded the ‘can do’ attitude for one of ‘do it for me’. Being able to buy a ‘check my mail, write reports/homework, browse the web, look at pictures from my camera, play music/videos etc’ computer from a major vendor is the thing that will propel Linux/X into the forefront.
March 15th, 2007 at 12:42 am
Hi Mark,
As I read you post and some of the comments, I thought this:
PC part cost + Dell Windows support cost + MS os OEM cost - MS and others ‘Payola’ = Dell/MS PC cost
PC part cost = Dell bare bones or Linux PC cost
Currenly ‘bare bones’ cost > Dell/MS PC cost. so:
PC parts cost > PC parts cost + Dell Windows support cost + MS os OEM cost - MS and others ‘Payola’
thus:
MS and others ‘Payola’ > Dell Windows support cost + MS os OEM cost
It seems that “MS and other ‘Payola’” = ‘Dell’s PC profits’.
This would mean that Dell and other vendors profits are coming directly from ‘Payola’.
So what chance can an OS that, by its very nature, can not provide ‘Payola’ have in getting it installed?
But it seems that the amount any company can provide for this payola will decrease and has decreased in the past as software becomes ‘cheaper’ and more of a commodity.
Perhaps Canonical or other vendors can offer to give ‘payola’ to give support cupons for 6 months. People have no problem paying the huge prices for MS support, ours should be cheaper, no? And this would offset the need for Dell to offer support, which seems to be a factor.
-Kevin Mark
March 15th, 2007 at 12:43 am
I think what is coming clear here is what really needs to happen is that somebody needs to convince there is economic value in producing “open” hardware and labeling it as such. This would personally be the first thing I would look for in a product either for myself or when shopping for others. I feel that “open hardware” tends to have a longer lifetime (more likely to just work not just under alternative operating systems but also newer versions of the Mainstream ones) and tend to be of a higher quality standard. Having a sticker that said open-hardware on the box would help me a great deal when purchasing new hardware. Presumably if Dell could build a configuration using all “open” hardware this would make myself and a lot of respondants happy.
March 15th, 2007 at 12:48 am
I guess I should define “Open” hardware. By that I mean that the specs are available…. This does not necessarily mean that there are Linux drivers available just that there are no barriers imposed on those being created.
March 15th, 2007 at 12:49 am
[...] Fuente: Blog de Shuttleworth [...]
March 15th, 2007 at 2:08 am
Mark,
I don’t think the fussiness of Linux enthusiasts is a problem. They will still buy a PC pre-bundled with Linux because it will be cheaper. They’ll probably format the and install their favourite linux distro withougt even bothering to boot the preinstalled OS, but they’re happy because they’re not killing an OS that they just paid money for.
What you really need to do is start pushing Linux to the ignoramus that are the bulk of end users nowadays. The market would then be:
- Users who will run preinstalled Linux from the box
- Users who will install their own non-Windows OS
- Users who already own a non-OEM copy of Windows (no additional profit to Microsoft)
- Users who plan to install a pirated copy of Windows (no profit to Microsoft)
Any of the above who lack the skills to assemble their own PC from parts will probably end up being forced to fork out for an OEM copy of Windows against their will. If you ship PCs with Linux, the only people who will buy a PC with Windows pre-installed are people who actually want Windows and don’t already own a copy.
March 15th, 2007 at 2:10 am
“…looking at ways to change the model so that there’s a better fit between customer expectations and the economics of the industry.” I suggest the solution is to change the economics of the industry. Windows desktop OS is a loss leader to sell Windows applications and Windows Server OS. If the Linux Community were to make a reasonable payment for the desktop OS and server support contracts, free applications would be economically viable. A linked and financially stable desktop OS and server OS would provide an effective groundwork for a plethora of diverse affordable (free) applications.