Weekly Edition
Return to the Press page
| |||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||
Linspire Founder on Linux, iPod, Zune (Red Herring)
Red Herring interviews
Michael Robertson. "Is Michael Robertson afraid of anything? The
entrepreneur has a made a career--and a fortune--playing rough with
giants. Now, though, he's turning up the volume: predicting an end to
Apple's hold on digital music, shaking up the Linux community by looking to
marry open source smarts with proprietary know how, and talking trash about
Microsoft's new Zune."
(Log in to post comments)
Interesting point of view Posted Sep 6, 2006 4:19 UTC (Wed) by bojan (subscriber, #14302) [Link] > The purists have really protested any sort of mainstreaming of Linux, and because of that, you can’t walk in to the average computer store today and buy a Linux laptop.
Most certainly not true with two of the last laptops I purchased. One was from HP (purchased in a regular retail store, very popular in Australia) and the other from Dell (purchased online from Dell, also very popular in Australia). With both, I was forced to buy a Windows licence - there was no other choice (I asked!), although both companies support, for instance, RHEL on servers and workstations (so, Linux wasn't out of reach for them due to "purists"). I had to pay because Microsoft has contracts with both companies to ship _every_single_laptop_ with Windows preinstalled.
> I think without question if you want to go mainstream you have to recognize that people want to watch Flash movies or play MP3 tracks or Windows Media Tracks, you have to see that and if you don’t, you’re simply hurting yourself.
I understand users' desire to do MP3 stuff, Flash (which apparently needs MP3 support for sound) and all other stuff like that. I just think it is unfair to apply pressure regarding this on 100% open source developers and distributors. They are not doing all this because they legally cannot do it within the framework of open source. And it's certainly not their fault that such proprietary and patented technologies became defacto standards on the Internet.
Interesting point of view Posted Sep 6, 2006 4:58 UTC (Wed) by NightMonkey (subscriber, #23051) [Link] Yes, this straw man argument certainly doesn't help to move anything in any positive direction. I just purchased a Fujitsu Lifebook P7120D. It rocks. Before I killed my credit card, I called Fujitsu several times (and had my call escaled to a sales engineer!) to ask if I could purchase it with less memory (256MB) than their web site allowed (512MB), due to compliance "requirements" for Windows Vista, which I was never going to run. They were very polite, and returned my calls, but said that due to agreements with Microsoft, and the right to put the sticker stating "Windows Vista Ready" on their products, they could not deviate from their agreement with Microsoft.
I don't really blame Fujitsu - Linux laptop purchases are not going to really compare to Windows sales anytime in the near future. But, hey, it works rather well, and at least I let them know my intentions and my desire to avoid a Microsoft tax. ;)
Interesting point of view Posted Sep 6, 2006 5:09 UTC (Wed) by bojan (subscriber, #14302) [Link] > I don't really blame Fujitsu - Linux laptop purchases are not going to really compare to Windows sales anytime in the near future.
Absolutely. And that's something that some people don't seem to understand very well. This is Microsoft at their best - using their near monopoly position to make sure contracts with OEMs are written in such a way that if OEMs even _think_ of putting anything else on high volume items, they lose the discounts Microsoft gives them and therefore have to pay _a_lot_ more for the Windows licences (something like double the price than when "Windows exclusive" discounts apply). And no sane OEM is going to hurt their business like that.
Interesting point of view Posted Sep 6, 2006 8:54 UTC (Wed) by khim (subscriber, #9252) [Link] Heh. You think you got it bad ? I'm working for a huge company - it orders workstations from both HP and Dell. ALL workstations come with Windows preinstalled. Most are just used with Linux and few - with Windows, but never with the preinstalled Windows, instead different installation (with separate corporate license) is used. The end result: zero Windows OEM licenses are used yet they all are paid for and accounted as "sold" by Microsoft accounters... I'm pretty sure it's the same story in other big corporations: they have corporate Windows license but still they pay for OEM version shipped with computers! Why not just leave computers without an OS ? I think Dell/HP/etc contracts forbid to do so...
Windows licensing Posted Sep 6, 2006 9:21 UTC (Wed) by odie (guest, #738) [Link] At my former place of employment, a 600 person office, we used Windows PC's from HP (later on Compaq). These all came preloaded with Windows 2000 or later on XP, and we wiped them and installed volume licensed Windows NT4. We got refunds from Microsoft for all these OEM licenses we did not use.
When we switched to a local supplier, we got better service, faster delivery, better quality components, lower prices and no pre-installed Windows, so no refund hassle from Microsoft. There is likely no conspiracy here, just the big manufacturers streamlining their process by shipping all computers identical.
Interesting point of view Posted Sep 6, 2006 10:46 UTC (Wed) by HenrikH (guest, #31152) [Link] Actually when you buy from HP you can buy without Windows and choose FreeDOS as OS when configuring the workstations. We have never paid any Windows-license for the HP machines that we have here at work,
Interesting point of view Posted Sep 6, 2006 16:20 UTC (Wed) by pbardet (subscriber, #22762) [Link] I still don't quite understand where you bought a Linux (pre-installed) laptop. I understand that you were able to get it installed successfully and that you had to pay the MS tax, but I don't see where your example contradicts his opinion.
I only know one online store that sells linux pre-installed, in north america. Real stores where you can walk into (where most of the people buy a computer), nada, zero.
Interesting point of view Posted Sep 6, 2006 20:47 UTC (Wed) by bojan (subscriber, #14302) [Link] > I still don't quite understand where you bought a Linux (pre-installed) laptop.
I didn't. Both had Windows on them.
> I understand that you were able to get it installed successfully and that you had to pay the MS tax, but I don't see where your example contradicts his opinion.
He's saying laptops with preinstalled Linux are not available in average stores because the software (i.e. desktop Linux flavours) isn't good enough due to "purists" keeping out the proprietary bits. I'm saying it's because Microsoft are using their monopoly position to squeeze everyone else out of that space.
Linspire Founder on Linux, iPod, Zune (Red Herring) Posted Sep 6, 2006 15:56 UTC (Wed) by pointwood (subscriber, #2814) [Link] I generally like him, but he is wrong on certain points. He basically saysthat installing software on Linux is very difficult. That's simply not true.
Linspire Founder on Linux, iPod, Zune (Red Herring) Posted Sep 6, 2006 16:30 UTC (Wed) by pbardet (subscriber, #22762) [Link] In my entourage, I'm one of the only computer literate. I've almost no problem installing a software on any platform (I still do on occasion but I can eventually figure out the problem). It's not the case of my relatives who encounter issues even when the software can be installed straight from CDrom. So just think about having to download it from the net, find out where the software was downloaded, run a manual install... It sure is a lot better right now than it used to be 1-2 years ago, but it's still not ready for mainstream.
It sure is easier to deny the problems than trying to fix them. But to do so, we have to talk to people who have no clue about computers and see what they need. Currently Open source movement copies what proprietary software does. When will it become a leader and be close to the user and its needs ?
Linspire Founder on Linux, iPod, Zune (Red Herring) Posted Sep 6, 2006 16:32 UTC (Wed) by pointwood (subscriber, #2814) [Link] Would you say that installing new software on Ubuntu is difficult? I wouldsay it is very easy - easier than on Windows.
Linspire Founder on Linux, iPod, Zune (Red Herring) Posted Sep 6, 2006 17:01 UTC (Wed) by pbardet (subscriber, #22762) [Link] So one (fairly new) distribution (that includes proprietary software BTW, not a purist distro as pointed out by Red Herring) = Linux ?
What about Debian, Suse, Fedora Core, Red Hat, Mandriva ?
For the record, IMO Gentoo is theoretically very simple for all the stuff it does, handling dependancies and features. From a user perspective, it's not. There used to be a GUI to do installs, it's gone, apparently replaced by a newer, better one... The fact is, changing constantly the software does not give a lot of trust to people who may look for open source software as a possible replacement for their proprietary one.
Linspire Founder on Linux, iPod, Zune (Red Herring) Posted Sep 6, 2006 17:58 UTC (Wed) by niner (subscriber, #26151) [Link] So, your point is, that you can always find some distribution where installing software is difficult and so installing software on Linux in general is difficult?
I don't see how this is any better argumentation than denying that it could still be easier.
|
|||||||||||