A few weeks back Dell invited ideas from the world at large about what it should put on sale - in other words, what did the so-called 'community' want? It turned out that the 'community' wanted PCs installed with GNU/Linux. But the company has done nothing afterwards. Now, we have a staunch defence of Dell's position by Mark Shuttleworth, the proprietor of Canonical which owns the Ubuntu project.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Member since:2005-11-13
Dell can pre-load many different versions of Vista, then they could also offer Linux and no OS options.
Except that one version of Vista is pretty much the same as any other version, plus or minus a few features. If Dell were to pick one flavor of Linux over another, that would start a pissing contest, the likes of which none of us have ever seen before, and they'd end up pissing off about 75% of the Linux community who's distro didn't get picked.
If they let the consumer choose between 8 different flavors, then they have the burden of supporting them all. This is a no win situation.
But I do think they should just sell at least one of their models with no OS installed. Then the end user can install whatever flavor of Linux they want and don't have to pay the Windows tax.
As for hardware, if Linux is so badass at hardware detection, as many pundets claim it has better hardware support than Windows, then you should be able to install it on almost anything. I've installed it on my 4yo Dell, and it works flawlessly.
Member since:2005-07-06
"But I do think they should just sell at least one of their models with no OS installed. Then the end user can install whatever flavor of Linux they want and don't have to pay the Windows tax. "
It's funny you should mention the MS tax: The linux machines listed in the link from the next commentor (http://www.dell.com/content/products/features.aspx/nseries?c=us&cs=...) cost almost the same as their XP loaded counterparts.
Member since:2005-07-07
. If Dell were to pick one flavor of Linux over another, that would start a pissing contest, the likes of which none of us have ever seen before, and they'd end up pissing off about 75% of the Linux community who's distro didn't get picked.
I have said this before: I consider this a convenient excuse.
Even the "wrong" Linux distribution will be better than any Windows version if one's goal is to use a computer with Linux, since the "wrong" Linux can be used as a show case for all hardware/config related things, while a Windows installation will at most just let you know how the built-in devices are named.
Member since:2006-01-14
I pretty much agree with you. But, if they would just certify some of their products as "Linux Ready" for a specific distribution, then the other distributions would no doubt be able to support it, too.
As for the "badass hardware detection", I think it is better than Window's. I know it is. But, there are some unfortunate cases where even if Linux recognizes the hardware, it still doesn't know how the hardware works internally and thus can't work with it (ie. some winmodems, broadcom wireless).
Member since:2005-07-06
If Dell can pre-load many different versions of Vista, then they could also offer Linux and no OS options.
They do.
http://www.dell.com/content/products/features.aspx/nseries?c=us&cs=...
Member since:
2007-03-04
If Dell can pre-load many different versions of Vista, then they could also offer Linux and no OS options.