Linked by David Adams on Sun 20th Jun 2010 03:23 UTC, submitted by sjvn
Linux Hardware companies don't tend to have their own Linux distributions. IBM uses Linux everywhere, but they don't have their own Linux. Dell will be happy to sell you notebooks and netbooks with Ubuntu or a workstation or server with RHEL (Red Hat Enterprise Linux). But, no major OEM (original equipment manufacturer) has had a house-brand Linux... until now. HP has recently bought not one, but two Linux distributions. Surely HP is not getting into the Linux distribution business? Are they?
Thread beginning with comment 430895
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Comment by kaiwai
by kaiwai on Mon 21st Jun 2010 14:09 UTC
Member since:

I could see then buying out one in the future but I'd say that you'd see it only in the enterprise server space. As so far as HP and Linux on the desktop, to put it mildly, HP is a Microsoft wh-re who like Dell want to do the least amount humanly possibly by way of R&D and support. If they could get away with not providing support and R&D consisted of choosing the colour of the case (and nothing more), they would do it. HP more or less is the tomb stone for great pieces of technology of the past never more to rise again to challenge Microsoft.

We can all dream of the mythical HP operating system, taking the best of what the OSS world has to offer, sprinkle some pixie dust and voila, a Mac OS X 'for the rest of us' but the reality we know it'll never happen. Microsoft rolls along on its dominance because no one can be figged actually putting the money, time and effort to producing something that actually has a fighting chance against Windows. Every alternative so far on the generic PC world has a major failure because it doesn't address the reason why the adoption never takes off.

Do I think that a FreeBSD + KDE (with a FreeBSD native Solid backend) + Better drivers + KOffice + Enhancements, could wipe the floor with Microsoft? sure it could but there isn't a venture capitalist out there who is willing to accept that'll take at least 2-3 years to accomplish with no money being made until the 4th or 5th year. Until that happens Microsoft will be the dominant player and the only alternative to the Windows ecosystem will be Mac OS X be it on a computer that is more expensive on a strictly hardware basis.

What do I think about Linux right now? still needs a heap of work to be done - and don't get me started on the individual developers such as the lead programmer of glibc *rolls eyes* there is a reason why I dream and hold out for a FreeBSD desktop to emerge off the back of an eccentric millionaires dream of an easy to use operating system that is friendly to developers and users alike. An operating system that provides a stable API and ABI for driver developers, a large selection of middleware for end users, and a large community of enthusiasts who contribute by way of code and enhancements.

Reply Score: 2

RE: Comment by kaiwai
by nt_jerkface on Mon 21st Jun 2010 19:44 in reply to "Comment by kaiwai"
nt_jerkface Member since:

The incredibly lame thing is that companies like Dell and HP have billions in cash on hand but don't have the guts to spend it on projects that compete directly with MS or Apple.

I remember a ways back when Dell was complaining about how Apple wouldn't license OSX to him. How they hell can he complain while sitting on billions in cash? Build your own dude, geez.

Most of the tech giants operate on very conservative strategies and don't take risks against MS or Apple.

I like your desktop plan though, FreeBSD is underrated and deserves its day in the sun.

Edited 2010-06-21 19:49 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 1