backtop


Print 51 comment(s) - last by Khyron320.. on May 5 at 2:46 AM

Ubuntu will officially be the first Linux distribution offered by Dell

Once Dell confirmed that it would offer the Linux operating system on select PCs in the future, Linux enthusiasts anxiously awaited the announcement of which Linux distributions would be offered.  Dell today announced that it would preinstall the Ubuntu operating system on some PC and notebook models.  

Canoncial, the lead sponsor behind the Ubuntu project, has started working on the operating system to ensure that it will properly work on Dell PCs and notebooks.  "Dell are going to work with us to make sure Ubuntu works fully on its hardware," said Chris Keynon, director of business development for Ubuntu.

Along with appealing to popular demand, the computer company will likely save money by stripping out the cost of purchasing the operating system license from Microsoft.  It appears that OS support would be provided by the open source and Linux communities, while Dell would exclusively provide hardware support.

Michael Dell previously disclosed that he has Ubuntu installed on his personal laptop.

Dell has not announced models, configurations or prices of PCs and notebooks that will feature Ubuntu.  Dell also did not eliminate the possibility of other Linux distributions being installed on future product lines.

Linux fans hope that Dell embracing Linux will begin a shift in which more PC vendors will switch to open source technology.


Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

Down with Linux
By miahallen on 5/1/07, Rating: 0
RE: Down with Linux
By Jack Ripoff on 5/1/2007 11:29:20 PM , Rating: 5
As a matter of fact, Ubuntu and Linux/Unix in general are not a mess, they are far more organized than Microsoft Windows.

In Windows, as you said, you must look for software in the Interwebs, download and install it yourself. There is no centralized and official place to get software from (with the possible exception of microsoft.com), and often there is no guarantee the software found in download sites is trustworthy (it may contain malware).

Linux (usually) has something called a package management system. It is a well designed system in which software is organized as packages that can be automatically downloaded and installed from certified repositories on the Internet or on discs (CDs, DVDs). Nothing needs to be compiled (unless the source is available and you really want to do it or there is no binary distribution available). The user does not have to care about Software quality/security, the distributor itself has already verified the software. Software that isn't available on the repositories is usually available to download on its own site in the form of installable packages (and source code as well - if it's open source).

Ubuntu uses a specialized graphical front-end for package management dubbed Synaptic. It can be used to install multimedia codecs, DTP software, libraries, image viewers, web browsers, IDEs, whatever is available on Ubuntu's official repositories.

AFAIK, the first thing you do in case of trouble is reading the official manuals. If you had checked Ubuntu's documentation in the first place, you wouldn't have gone through all that trouble.

http://help.ubuntu.com
https://help.ubuntu.com/6.10/ubuntu/desktopguide/C...
https://help.ubuntu.com/6.10/ubuntu/desktopguide/C...


RE: Down with Linux
By siucdude on 5/1/2007 11:45:20 PM , Rating: 3
See what I don't understand is what is the panic,

Well if you like Windows then use it, if you like Linux, then you finally have a computer company that will sell it pre-installed.

Oh wait I know, people have a choice, Someone finally figured out that people want a choice.

See I have been using Linux for years, but recently I installed it on my Dads PC and almost my entire family, with Ubuntu its user friendly.

You know what they LOVE,

That they can surf the internet, e-mail, and do all the basic stuff with out spending 20 minutes updating firewall, anti-all that stuff that windows makes you do. They turn it on, log in and IT JUST WORKS. NO spyware malware and other ware.

So what why are you afraid?


RE: Down with Linux
By semo on 5/2/2007 9:41:17 AM , Rating: 2
do you think this would be the case if linux was mainstream?

linux is so "secure" because barely any hacker bothers to attack linux users because:
a) there are not that many of them and
b) it is safe to say that most linux users know what they're doing


RE: Down with Linux
By Talcite on 5/2/2007 6:48:20 PM , Rating: 2
That has nothing to do with why Linux is so secure. Linux is OPEN SOURCE. That's the whole beauty of linux and up until relatively recently, the Mac OS.

Open source software is way more secure. You know why? Because everyone can see what your code is, people patch it if there's a fault, and everyone's happy. You don't end up executing random crap because guess what, it's open source so you can see what you're installing! Ontop of that, things like Ubuntu have the repository which ensures that all the software you install through it is not only A: secure, but B: compatible!

Windows is only partially insecure because of exploits. There's alot more to it. Firstly, any account in XP is automatically an Administrator account. That's a no go in Linux. Secondly, alot of security holes are caused by third party software! You can't see what you're installing, so for all you know you just put spyware/trojan/whatever onto your system. Now you have a hole, even if it's up to date. Trust me, Open source is much more secure for security software. Even if you can't read it, atleast someone else can.


RE: Down with Linux
By Jack Ripoff on 5/2/2007 10:59:45 PM , Rating: 1
It's more than just that. Windows has security problems not only because of bugs and poor quality control, but mainly because of bad design. Linux (and Mac OS X, FreeBSD, etc.), on the other side, is designed after rock-solid Unix. It may be a bit more "boring" (e.g.: you have to manually set up execution permission before running an installer), but it's far more secure than, say, UAC.


RE: Down with Linux
By herrdoktor330 on 5/3/2007 12:03:55 AM , Rating: 2
Whoa, cowboy. I'm not trying to pop your bubble, but most people who use computers don't know what the source code even means, let alone are interested in taking the time to look at it. Computer users these days want ease of use. FYI I too am an Ubuntu user, but it is definatly a taste of the strange from moving from Windows. I'm now pretty comfortable with using Linux these days, but there is a learning curve. And it's one where that some people entrenched in the Windows world may find uncomfortable. Much to Ubuntu's credit, it's very noob friendly, hence why I'm using it. But Ubuntu has a long way to go until it's 100% ready for mass consumption.

But... we'll see how this washes over. I hope it does well. I'm sure the Linux option will help drive down prices across the OS market.


RE: Down with Linux
By Talcite on 5/3/2007 12:47:04 AM , Rating: 2
Actually you pointed out an interesting thing there. Yeah, most users can't read source code and don't want to relearn everything, but after using Windows Vista RC2 I ditched the entire windows line for that reason exactly. It changed everything! All the technical settings are gone, or atleast behind 13 different hoops to jump through. It's gotten to a point where it's so dumb that you can't use it functionally. Yes I agree that Linux and Unix variants have a huge learning curve, but so does everything else in the computer industry or field. You can't expect everything in life to remain static. There's always change and if you don't keep learning you'll find that it's easy to fall behind quickly in anything, not only computers.


RE: Down with Linux
By sc3252 on 5/2/2007 1:34:55 AM , Rating: 2
You are an idiot. doing a simple search would have neted you automatix(used to install basic codecs for dvd playback and other video playback) and synaptic(what you use to install packages and programs). You didn't even take the time to log onto Ubuntu's very own forums to understand how you install things. I can understand if you were having hardware problems or having problems installing your video card drivers, but you had the simplest problem and didnt even have the brain capacity to understand very simple gui tools that are very simple to use and don't require command line commands.

I am sorry who is ever reading this and feels like I am attacking him wrongfully. I am not attacking him because he doesn't understand how Ubuntu or Linux works, I am attacking him because he didn't take the time to learn the most basic things he needs to do install things. In comparison to uninstalling a program in windows its like going to the control panel in windows and selecting add/remove programs and removing programs, but in Ubuntu you can also install applications from the same panel called synaptic.


RE: Down with Linux
By Pythias on 5/2/2007 9:37:54 AM , Rating: 4
quote:
You are an idiot. doing a simple search would have neted you automatix(used to install basic codecs for dvd playback and other video playback) and synaptic(what you use to install packages and programs).


You're a pretentious jackass. This is exactly why linux isn't catching on. For every helpful person in the community there's 12 self-important turds like you.

Your behavior enforces the common perception that linux/unix is for elitist eggheads.

Wanna do your part to help linux gain wide-spread adoption? How about shutting your bong hole, and stop re-enforcing the other fellow's argument.


RE: Down with Linux
By Tamale on 5/2/2007 11:38:48 AM , Rating: 2
I totally agree that far too many linux users are elitist bastards... BUT... this guy had to seriously not even bother trying to make a claim that installing software is hard in linux. EVERYONE I know who tries ubuntu is AMAZED at how easy installing software is. It's almost always the first and most apparent feature for most users. Anyone claiming otherwise simply has no clue and shouldn't be spouting out FUD.


RE: Down with Linux
By bubbacub616 on 5/2/2007 12:35:05 PM , Rating: 2
I've been building and using pc's for 20 years and linux and on the 5-6 times that i've installed linux i have come a cropper every time with unhelpful faqs/documentation.

An example the built in faqs for ubuntu cover all the preferences for setting font colour, size and all that useless crap but don't help in setting up hardware to run (e.g. my wireless network card) (if they do help - it certainly wasn't obvious). I realise linux is lots of various bits of code kludged together in way that miagically seems to work but even for an intelligent user its NOT simple or intuitive. If I was 15 again and had the time to piss away learning all the shell commmands I would probably be able to get into it.


RE: Down with Linux
By Talcite on 5/2/2007 6:55:39 PM , Rating: 2
Granted that wireless is one of the most confusing things in Linux you can possibly run into, it's still relatively easy to get help. For example in Ubuntu, there's countless HOWTOs written all over the forums and there's twice as many people offering to help. People have even written short scripts and front-ends for wpasupplicant. Anyways, as of Ubuntu Feisty, wireless is now built into the OS with a much improved GUI.

Linux is a different type of OS. You can crack open a book when you need help, but you can also post onto forums, IRC channels, and everything else when you need help. Windows just doesn't have that kind of community based support AFAIK.

Oh and yeah, 'man' is your friend.


RE: Down with Linux
By Khyron320 on 5/5/2007 2:46:57 AM , Rating: 2
Linux has really changed over the years. I have been installing various distros and trying them out since windows 98 came out and i learned how to duel boot. Things really have changed allot. Todays linux distros are far easier to setup and use. Allot of the linux installs today you dont even have to do any drivers. Ubuntu is even including some funky option where they include ATIs drivers... they make you check a box to enable it. The open source guys are a bit strange like touching anything not open source is the devil so we have to disable it out of the box. But at least its there and its not 30 minutes of your time to read a wiki on how do put it on there.

Today if i were to put together a box for somebody with no knownledge of PCs that just wanted email and the internet i would put them on linux. Less headaches for me with viruses to clean up and cheaper for them.


RE: Down with Linux
By kmmatney on 5/2/2007 1:34:56 AM , Rating: 2
Pretty weird. I also built my first PC in 1990 (386 33DX) and started out around 1986, and have built tons of windows systems. I had pretty much the exact same experience with Ubuntu. Whenever I had to do anything beyond what Ubuntu gave me, I was lost. It took me a while to even do the most basic things. I eventually gave up on it. Maybe there is some deep underlying principle that you need to understand before Linux makes sense, but to me it is a big mess. Its coll that Dell has this option, though. I do like the central installer in Ubuntu.


RE: Down with Linux
By subhajit on 5/2/2007 1:52:52 AM , Rating: 2
Just go to Synaptic Package Management and search for the software you want when you select any package to download and install all dependencies are also indicated and you can select and install those packages also. Actually I found installing software in Ubuntu as one of the easiest things to do. But I had problem with the actual OS. Till this date I haven't been able to install any 32 bit version of the OS on my AMD 64 (though it is backward compatible) and two of the three 64 bit versions I installed got corrupted after using it for some time. I am not saying that I am a Linux guru (far from it, actually) but I was able to mess it up and that is worrying. Currently I am using Ubuntu 7.04 and so far happy with it. It detected all my hardware correctly and installed proper drivers. It also detected my Windows Network with ICS and I didn't have to configured anything, it worked fine right out of the box.


RE: Down with Linux
By Talcite on 5/2/2007 6:58:23 PM , Rating: 2
Did you check your ram?


RE: Down with Linux
By Niv KA on 5/2/2007 3:15:00 AM , Rating: 2
What you describe is called Linspire or Freespire, along with CEGEGA (?spelling? I mean the renming of WineX) or WINE. xSpire has all codecses built in, easy to install software with CNR, and easier to use than Mac (I never used a mac but you can't get much easier than CNR). Personally I am a OpenSUSE person, but neither OpenSUSE or (k)UBUNU fit your description as well as Linspire or Freespire do.

I do respect your opinion, but most people describe Linspire as what they want, and go ranting of about how Ubunu or openSUSE dont fit their needs!

- Niv K Aharonovich


RE: Down with Linux
By cochy on 5/2/2007 4:12:47 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
I'm not an idiot


Yes you are. Or you're a liar. If you can't figure out how to use the Synaptic Package Manager, I'm surprise you can figure out how to turn your PC on.

Also why order Ubuntu when you can download it for free?
Do you work for MS buddy? ;)


RE: Down with Linux
By Pythias on 5/3/2007 3:07:52 AM , Rating: 2
Just about every person I've introduced to ubuntu doesn't understand synaptic. Does YOUR grandma know how to change repositories?

Do you really think your "RTFM n00b" attitude is going to help expand the user base?


RE: Down with Linux
By cochy on 5/2/2007 4:45:49 AM , Rating: 2
You're just used to using Windows for over a decade. Put a completely computer illiterate person in front of a Windows box and see how intuitive it really is, see how far they get. Put that same person in front of a Linux box with Gnome or KDE and I bet it will be just as intuitive as Windows to them. I know cause I've experimented with this idea on my own family.


RE: Down with Linux
By SmokeRngs on 5/2/2007 1:38:56 PM , Rating: 3
quote:
You're just used to using Windows for over a decade.


You have just touched on one of the fundamental truths. Linux is not Windows and it's not supposed to be Windows. Therefore, everything will not be the same. I don't see Windows as being any more intuitive than any of the three mainstream Linux distos I'm playing with (Ubuntu, FC6 and Suse 10.2). It's just the fact that most people are used to using Windows so when anything else is set in front of them, they don't know what to do.

Why do you think MS has never truly had a problem with people pirating their OSes? Even if the person doesn't pay for the OS MS wins. The person learns how to use Windows and probably won't want to switch to anything else since it's what they are used to. Pirating the OS doesn't directly put money in MS's pocket, but it does indirectly as it helps stifle the competition from other OSes keeping their virtual monopoly of the mainstream user OS base.

What I don't understand is why people seem to think they will be able to sit down in front of a Linux system and expect to know everything about it considering they have never used one before. I don't see too many people going from XP to Vista and knowing everything about Vista the first time they use it. It's not going to happen and that's going from one iteration of Windows to another.

If someone truly wants to learn a Linux distro, they can. Google is your friend. I've had a lot of "problems" and google has helped me out on every one of them so far. I do know a bit more than your average computer user so it's a little easier for me. However, I also have a computer setup that's a lot different from the average user. Not too many of your average Joes are going to have to worry about having five different hard drives with a total of around twelve partitions covering three different file systems to manage. This is my current setup and I'm learning how to set it up properly so I have use of everything I have.

One difference between me and most people is I love to tinker and I love to figure out or find a solution to a problem. It's in this way I have gathered the knowledge I have and I'm normally able to pass it on to others to help them.

Linux isn't for everyone. Neither is Windows of any flavor or OSX or OS/2 or any of the myriads of operating systems out there. After a few months, I have found I prefer a 64 bit Linux distro with 32 bit libraries for most of my computing needs. I do the vast majority of my computing using Suse 10.2 with an occasional foray into Windows for a game that won't run or run decent under Wine. Luckily my favored game runs in Linux natively since it's based on the Quake 3 engine.


RE: Down with Linux
By kingpotnoodle on 5/2/2007 8:48:51 AM , Rating: 4
The first time you used Windows I bet it took you longer than 3 sessions to become 100% proficient and at the level you are now? If you wish to learn an entire OS then you put in the time, if you don't wish to make the effort to learn then don't slam it because you don't understand.

Furthermore the % of PC users who actually play games is probably quite small, so the "Linux doesn't play games so its useless" arguement is totally flawed.

Many people in the world find Linux intuitive and would like to buy a PC with it pre-installed, sure it might be the minority at the moment but nobody is forcing you to use it. Dell are providing customer choice and should be applauded for doing so.


RE: Down with Linux
By tehgrump on 5/2/2007 9:21:39 AM , Rating: 2
If you are still curious about *nix in general, I suggest trying out
PC-BSD ( http://www.pcbsd.org/ ). Years ago I moved away from Linux because I too felt it to be a mess. I started playing with FreeBSD and haven't looked back. PC-BSD is kind of like a distro of FreeBSD designed specifically for the desktop. The PBI method of installing and upgrading software is simple ( http://www.pcbsd.org/?p=learnpbi ) and should feel familiar to windows users.


Kubuntu
By leexgx on 5/1/2007 8:28:02 PM , Rating: 2
for new users Kubuntu is more frendly the Main button is where it should be (allso Plug in Pray works better under Kubuntu then Ubuntu)

wunder if thay put extra stuff on it and maybe even test if it can Play stuff from youtube or even Simple winamp/WMV streams

still be intresting how many users will buy these pcs




RE: Kubuntu
By Lonyo on 5/1/2007 9:35:24 PM , Rating: 2
You would assume they will equip it with the basics, i.e. a web browser and media player...


RE: Kubuntu
By Axbattler on 5/1/2007 10:08:12 PM , Rating: 2
The market can prove me wrong, but I am a little skeptical that Dell will have many individual customers willing to forgo a MS OS even with savings involved.

That said, this may have appeals to some teaching institutions. I know my University buy a large number of classroom PCs from Dell. But our Computing department have some Sun stations running Linux, and some Dells with Win2k (last time I used a few years ago) and Linux. I can see them forgo MS OS to save funds if it was an option.


RE: Kubuntu
By Snuffalufagus on 5/1/2007 10:43:06 PM , Rating: 2
I was wondering about a point that you mention, being that everyone seems to assume that these PCs will be cheaper because they have a Open Source OS installed on them. I'm not positive that is the case, I believe that with the Microsoft OSes installed there are discounts given over the normal cost of the hardware that might not be realized with an Open Source OS. Someone here might know better than I, I'm just mentioning it because I believe I've heard such said before.


RE: Kubuntu
By danskmacabre on 5/2/2007 3:20:29 AM , Rating: 2
I Have Ubuntu on one of my PCs, I tried Kubuntu as well, but TBH didn't like it as much as Ubuntu.
Although there isn't a great difference (personal preference I guess).


RE: Kubuntu
By cochy on 5/2/2007 4:25:29 AM , Rating: 1
I believe Kubuntu is targeted at systems with low resources. Integrated systems etc. It can run on minimal RAM.


RE: Kubuntu
By danskmacabre on 5/2/2007 5:14:31 AM , Rating: 2
Ah ok, that's interesting, well it's a nice option then.


RE: Kubuntu
By livinloud on 5/2/2007 6:53:29 AM , Rating: 2
Kubuntu is a version of ubuntu that is using KDE, Ubuntu is using Gnome. Xubuntu is the light version using XFCE for computer with low ram(128 mo). Go tu ubuntu.com and read before saying such things.


RE: Kubuntu
By cochy on 5/2/2007 10:06:05 AM , Rating: 2
Ah right Xubuntu. Too many Buntus got me confused.


RE: Kubuntu
By SmokeRngs on 5/2/2007 1:19:08 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
allso Plug in Pray works better under Kubuntu then Ubuntu


It works the same under both. The basic underpinnings of all the flavors of Ubuntu are the same. The only difference I know of is the default install of the GUI. Ubuntu defaults to Gnome, Kubuntu defaults to KDE and Xubuntu defaults to XFCE if my memory serves me correctly.


RE: Kubuntu
By Souka on 5/2/2007 3:24:02 PM , Rating: 2
I'll be interesting how much they charge for Ubuntu! :)

I can see it now...
$0 ---- Ubuntu install CDs
$10 --- Ubuntu install HD-DVD or Blue-Ray disc
$75 --- Ubuntu installed on PC
$80 --- Ubuntu installed and HD-DVD/Blueray disc (Save $5!!!)
$115 -- Ubuntu w/Game pack - Over $500 in games for $35)
$175 -- Ubuntu Expert Edition - includes DVD disc + Expect Pack

etc etc....


crapware
By Murst on 5/1/2007 10:54:20 PM , Rating: 2
I wonder what sort of crapware Dell will manage to install on a Linux system...

In any case, I'm hopefull there'll be a Linux version of decrappifier within a day.




RE: crapware
By cochy on 5/2/2007 4:39:13 AM , Rating: 4
At least it won't be Norton!


RE: crapware
By Curved on 5/2/2007 7:35:15 AM , Rating: 3
A reason for the crapware is to negate the cost of the license for Windows. Note that this is why hardware-identical Dell windows workstations cost more than dell windows home computers. Also note that a no-OS dell costs only a little less than the home computers. I personally don't mind the crapware, as you can usually just uninstall it all in less than an hour (which is worth the ~$30 savings to me).

Also, because Canonical will be providing the software support, it is likely that the Ubuntu installation on the Dells will be the standard one. :o)


I told you so.
By danskmacabre on 5/2/2007 3:19:07 AM , Rating: 2
Ooh, I get to say "I told you so".

In an earlier article aboutt Linux, I thought Ubuntu would be the one Dell would use and I was right. :)

Anyway, I have used Ubuntu for some time and I love it.
After saying that, I still have a Windows PC for games, wine isn't perfect I'm afraid.




RE: I told you so.
By cochy on 5/2/2007 4:23:17 AM , Rating: 2
It's a good choice. Ubuntu is working hard to make their distro the distro of choice for regular home use. I just installed it on my mother's Dell as she was complained that Windows was slowing down. All she does is surf the web and use office, so I figured to let her try Ubuntu. She loves it. You don't even need an anti virus with Linux. Its role based access control offers much better security than Windows, although Vista is taking a page from Unix in that regard now.
Ubuntu could use a firewall like Suse.


RE: I told you so.
By danskmacabre on 5/2/2007 5:11:28 AM , Rating: 2
I have a firewall on my gateway (adsl router), it works fine, so have no Firewall in ubuntu.

For the uses you specified on your post, Ubuntu is perfect.
It updates itself and everything (prompts for an update when they are available), including your installed programs.

Most spyware viruses etc is for Windows (and mac) anyway, I guess that sort of thing DOES exist for Linux, but I bet it is VERY rare.


I will be the first to BUY
By siucdude on 5/1/2007 11:48:05 PM , Rating: 2
I just wanted to say it on almost every website,

I have waited long time and I will buy the first day its available.

There is one person, and one computer more using Linux

Thank You
TJ




RE: I will be the first to BUY
By livinloud on 5/2/2007 4:28:43 PM , Rating: 2
Why don't you just download and install it on the computer you have right now ??


just as easy?
By superunknown98 on 5/2/2007 9:43:52 AM , Rating: 2
While I admire the benefits that linux has to offer, it still just isn't as easy to use as Windows or Mac. In fact the whole argument is similar to Mac os and Windows advocates touting their choice as best. Sure Linux has a centralized place to get safe and tested software (which is really nice) but what happens when what you want isn't there? you're back to scouring the internet for RPM's or soruce codes. And i'll be damned if I could get anything to compile without some form of error.

What about drivers? sure there are basic compatible drivers for most everything, but not everything. Plus I still have to complie them. Something niether windows or mac requires.

Correct me if It's changed but aren't most Distro's still just a GUI pasted on top of a command line, much like windows 3.1?

I'm not saying Linux isn't a good thing, and for most people who just surf the web and use word, it would suffice. but if you need to anything else besides that, it's not going to be as easy as Windows or Mac.




RE: just as easy?
By ted61 on 5/2/2007 10:19:03 AM , Rating: 2
Linux is hard as hell to maintain but just as easy to use. I have been using it for a few years now and go through hell every time I need to make a change. That may be because Ubuntu does most of the changes for me and I have to look up the line commands every time I need them.

I think Dell installing Linux will be a good thing overall. They know how to install all of the drivers!


I treid Ubuntu too but
By KaerfSusej on 5/2/2007 9:26:31 PM , Rating: 2
Ubuntu doesnt work well with fakeraid. I actually have it installed, dual-booted with xp on raid 0, and everything works fine, until I try to log into ubuntu. It's kinda like there are no users set up. I tried adduser, but it's more of a problem than that tho.

I followed this: https://help.ubuntu.com/community/FakeRaidHowto




RE: I treid Ubuntu too but
By ted61 on 5/3/2007 10:32:11 AM , Rating: 2
Try asking for help here http://www.linuxquestions.org/

I also did a book review for Ubuntu here http://www.linuxquestions.org/reviews/showproduct....

There is a lot of help to be found but the solutions can be difficult to implement.


Woot.
By Ulfhednar on 5/2/2007 4:36:59 AM , Rating: 2
It's about bloody time.




This changes nothing really
By darkpaw on 5/2/2007 9:14:43 AM , Rating: 2
I don't know why so many Linux fans seem to think this is going to be the downfall of MS (read some Linux boards and it sure sounds that way). Dell is only playing to another niche market just like high end gamers. Just because they offer Linux, doesn't mean everyone in the world is going to go out and get it. The ones that will actually buy Linux PCs are the same people that would have just installed it themselves as soon as the got the computer home. As others have mentioned there will also be almost no cost savings if there is any at all. Dell pays next to nothing for those Windows Licensese and makes that up on the shovelware they install.

Regional computer OEMs have been offering Linux as options for a long time on the super budget PC's, but that made no difference. I know quite a few people that bought these PCs from places like Fry's electronics just to bring them home and install their old or a pirated windows version on them.

As a security professional I use a Linux box almost everyday, but I still think there is almost no demand for it in the home. People want to be able to run whatever software they get on their PC and you can't do that on Linux or Mac.




Why all the defense?
By Munkles on 5/2/2007 7:07:13 PM , Rating: 2
I REALLY don't get why so many Linux users get defensive when people say that its not the easiest thing in the world to operate. Like many of you I've used windows since 3.1 and thus know it inside and out. Since so many people use windows the software necessary to make it do certain things has been made popular by third parties, and then more often than not integrated by the next major release of Windows.

Ive used Ubuntu on and off for about 2 years now and while its SEXY as hell and will run on just about anything I find myself pulling my hair out at times with it. Getting Ubuntu to run is seldom a problem as just about everything almost always works right after an install, but that doesn't mean that its installed PROPERLY or functioning to the very best of its ability.

I love Ubuntu and look forward to the next time I have it installed and running properly, but being user-unfriendly is part and parcel with the Linux experience. It maybe because im so used to windows, but thats part of being user friendly.

User friendly isn't about whats logical to YOU its whats logical to ME and to everyone else who will be migrating from Windows. FURTHERMORE; just because I can navigate through the HDD, surf the net, and watch movies/listen to music doesn't mean I know how to use Linux. So please before you make claims that your great auntie who's 94 uses Ubuntu like a pro... take into consideration what shes doing. Its mostly front end things like opening Firefox.

My last comment on this is simply for you nuts who think Linux its not. There are TONS of security reports out there for anyone to find that will compare and contrast many operating systems, most distro's of Linux are among the very worst for security but since no one targets, or is likely to target Linux users its not a big deal; and even if it does become one thank goodness that programs like Nod32 work just fine in Linux.

Just because Linux isn't easy to use doesn't mean its impossible or that no one should try. I love Ubuntu and cant wait for a lot of new users to experience the elation of using Ubuntu w/ xgl or any of the other awesome graphics packages. Just please please please don't act like its the easiest thing in the world to use.




"Intel is investing heavily (think gazillions of dollars and bazillions of engineering man hours) in resources to create an Intel host controllers spec in order to speed time to market of the USB 3.0 technology." -- Intel blogger Nick Knupffer

Related Articles
Dell Commits to Linux PCs and Notebooks
March 29, 2007, 3:00 PM













botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki