Guaranteeing "no demand" through poor products
Posted Feb 1, 2013 20:45 UTC (Fri) by khim
In reply to: Guaranteeing "no demand" through poor products
Parent article: LCA: The future of the Linux desktop
Have you actually read the article?
The crapware vendors and Microsoft put heavy pressure on them not to admit the truth.
Not even close. Crapware vendors pay them money. Nothing more, nothing less. Price of Windows+Crapware for major vendors is negative (that is: vendors actually receive more money from crapware vendors then they pay Microsoft) and for some strange reason Linux-lovers are unwilling to pay more for a system with Linux preinstalled to compensate for the loss.
If they were to offer Linux in a truly valuable way, of course their vendors would be very upset, and might even withdraw their support.
Crapware vendors don't care, but Microsoft is very aware and it makes it hard to sell computers with Linux (actually any OS other then Windows): Linux system must be separate entity, you can not offer dual-boot and you can not offer pick-your-OS-at-the-checkout-time service (not if you want to keep the discounts). This is well-known phenomenon, I don't see where your make it as unattractive as possible so that people won't buy it, and then point to the lack of interest in the product as a "justification" of the strategy of not offering it in the first place idea comes from.
Hardware vendors do offer the best possible Linux support they realistically can, but well, they are businesses, to sell Linux systems with a loss to satisfy some strange ideas is not something publicly trading company can justify for long.
to post comments)