Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 24th Sep 2007 17:31 UTC, submitted by twickline
Thread beginning with comment 273925
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[2]: I think you're interpreting bundling wrong
by Soulbender on Tue 25th Sep 2007 05:25
in reply to "RE: I think you're interpreting bundling wrong"
"You should be given the option to not have anything installed, but it should come with something by default."
Well, it doesn't need that. Selecting an OS (or lack of one) would part of the process.
An small unfortunate side effect of this is that it gives more power to the technically clueless sales force that does not necessary care as much for the customer as they do for their sales commission (and possible kickback money from company X).
RE[2]: I think you're interpreting bundling wrong
by pashar on Sun 30th Sep 2007 08:28
in reply to "RE: I think you're interpreting bundling wrong"




Member since:
2005-07-06
Exactly. You should be given the option to not have anything installed, but it should come with something by default.
The problem I think OEMs have is which distribution out of the thousands to use and have to support, if they were to actually give an optional OS specifically, as opposed to leaving the disk blank.
This is what is slowly happening now; Dell with Ubuntu, and HP supposedly doing something soon.