Hewlett-Packard is closing custom deals for thousands of desktop PCs running Linux, which has the company assessing the possibility of offering factory-loaded Linux systems, an HP executive said. "We are involved in a number of massive deals for Linux desktops, and those are the kinds of things that are indicators of critical mass. So we are really looking at it very hard," said Doug Small, worldwide director of open source and Linux marketing at HP. "We are in a massive deal right now for multi-thousands of units of a desktop opportunity for Linux. That's an indicator." He declined to give details about the deals.
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Member since:2007-03-04
"Maybe its not so obvious considering every time I boot up into linux there are always updates a lot of which are security updates. There may be no DRM in it at the moment but Linus sure wasn't against adding it to the kernel. So again, if you wanted secure and reliable why would you choose linux?"
I want people to have a choice, I don't care what OS they use as long they choose to use it. People should not be forced to use Windows because a monopolist makes OEM's install it on all PCs.
Member since:2005-07-02
Maybe its not so obvious considering every time I boot up into linux there are always updates a lot of which are security updates.
The fact that there are security updates doesn't mean the system is insecure. First of all, these are updates for *all* apps installed on the Linux PC, not just the OS. Also, in Linux you often get small "piecemeal" updates, while Microsoft usually puts all of its updates together.
In any case, you mustn't boot into Linux often. Over the past week in Ubuntu I think there have been only one or two packages that were updated for security on my install.
Now, let's compare this to Windows history of malware infection, which costs *billions* of dollars every year. It doesn't matter if this is because Windows is more popular or not: the fact is that *right now* Windows is much more at risk than Linux has ever been.
There may be no DRM in it at the moment but Linus sure wasn't against adding it to the kernel.
There's a difference between putting the code in place and making it mandatory.
So again, if you wanted secure and reliable why would you choose linux?
Because it is more secure and reliable. Also, by using it you don't financially contribute to an abusive quasi-monopoly.
Oh, and Beryl blows Aero out of the water.
Member since:2006-04-21
Maybe its not so obvious considering every time I boot up into linux there are always updates a lot of which are security updates.
So you think an OS would be more secure that DIDN'T include security updates?
There may be no DRM in it at the moment but Linus sure wasn't against adding it to the kernel. So again, if you wanted secure and reliable why would you choose linux?
Linux is a pragmatist. Sometimes pragmatists do things that are not a good idea.
Member since:2005-12-25
Member since:2005-07-09
God dude just because there are security updates doesnt mean that it is a bad OS...it just means the community or the maintainers or the developers of that OS and its ecosystem are aware that there are vulnerabilities and that they are working hard to fix them. You should only be lucky that you are getting security updates for free....heck you are getting an entire OS for free so stop your yapping. It doesnt matter if you use XP or if you use Linux. Are you getting your work done as quickly and efficiently as you would like? If yes shut up and if no then go find a different OS. Simple as that.
Member since:
2005-07-06
Maybe its not so obvious considering every time I boot up into linux there are always updates a lot of which are security updates. There may be no DRM in it at the moment but Linus sure wasn't against adding it to the kernel. So again, if you wanted secure and reliable why would you choose linux?