Real or fake Linux PC? Everex will know (Linux World) [LWN.net]

Don Marti examines an effort by Everex to track Linux installations on their products. "PC vendors haven't been eager to know how many users actually run Linux when it's preloaded on their low-end PCs, and how many of the users replace it with an infringing copy of Microsoft Windows. But Everex, the latest company to introduce a low-priced desktop Linux system, will have the information, thanks to the software update system behind its Linux distribution."

to post comments

Real or fake Linux PC? Everex will know (Linux World)

Posted Nov 1, 2007 18:09 UTC (Thu) by fsphil (guest, #44932) [Link] (2 responses)

How do they know if it's infringing? Even better, how do they know it's Windows? It could just
as easily be an 'infringing' Ubuntu or Fedora.

Real or fake Linux PC? Everex will know (Linux World)

Posted Nov 2, 2007 8:23 UTC (Fri) by Cato (guest, #7643) [Link] (1 responses)

How exactly can a copy of Linux be 'infringing' anything (ignoring patents which may well not
stand up in court)?

Real or fake Linux PC? Everex will know (Linux World)

Posted Nov 2, 2007 15:39 UTC (Fri) by pjs (guest, #10927) [Link]

I believe that is exactly the point.  If the original installed image is wiped and replaced
with any other linux distro or a legit (retail) copy of Windows (perhaps win98 or win2k which
would run nicely on it), the assumption that the PC has been loaded with a pirated copy of
Windows is false.  Likewise if the configuration is changed, or perhaps if the PC isn't
connected to the internet, or if it fails and isn't replaced, another pirated copy of Windows
is false accounted.

Real or fake Linux PC? Everex will know (Linux World)

Posted Nov 1, 2007 18:15 UTC (Thu) by lkundrak (subscriber, #43452) [Link] (1 responses)

I'd be more interested statistics about amount of users who bought a PC with OEM Windows
installation and replaced it with Linux. This happens fairly often especially with laptops.

Real or fake Linux PC? Everex will know (Linux World)

Posted Nov 1, 2007 20:11 UTC (Thu) by ncm (guest, #165) [Link]

Microsoft typically knows the answer to that, but they're not telling.  It would be very, very
interesting to get that information via discovery in some legal action.

Real or fake Linux PC? Everex will know (Linux World)

Posted Nov 1, 2007 22:46 UTC (Thu) by jimmybgood (guest, #26142) [Link]

It would be interesting to know how they propose tracking windows installations.  The article
doesn't seem to go into that detail at all.  I can only imagine.

Does the onboard LAN place a serial number in outgoing packets?  What then if someone added a
USB network card?  As noted above, just subtracting computers getting updated from computers
sold won't get that info.  Some computers will never be connected to the internet.  Some will
be stolen and cannibalized.  Somebody will buy a hundred and place them behind a router on a
private network.  Me, I will never run someone else's OS on my computer.  Who knows what crap,
like tracking software, they put on it?

One thing I can say for sure Don Marti didn't examine anything.  He copied and pasted a press
release.

Why use an x86 processor then?

Posted Nov 2, 2007 0:28 UTC (Fri) by proski (guest, #104) [Link] (7 responses)

If they care so much that Windows is not installed on their machines, perhaps they should use a CPU that Windows doesn't support. It's not like Via C7-D is the pinnacle of the CPU design. There are ARM processors that can rival it in terms of speed, price and power consumption, and that would be a pretty good protection against Windows, Fedora and Ubuntu. But probably not against Debian. Anyway, that would work without any tracking and legally dubious post-sale enforcement.

Why use an x86 processor then?

Posted Nov 2, 2007 0:43 UTC (Fri) by ncm (guest, #165) [Link] (4 responses)

What?

I don't see anything about "enforcement".

Why use an x86 processor then?

Posted Nov 2, 2007 2:46 UTC (Fri) by proski (guest, #104) [Link] (3 responses)

The story might suggest that if your PC doesn't go online for updates, you get a friendly visit from BSA to check if you are OK.

Why use an x86 processor then?

Posted Nov 2, 2007 8:08 UTC (Fri) by ncm (guest, #165) [Link] (1 responses)

Let's all be sure, out there, to take our meds on schedule.

Has the BSA ever raided a private home?  What are the chances a deep-pockets business is going
to buy $200 PCs from Walmart?

Why use an x86 processor then?

Posted Nov 2, 2007 21:29 UTC (Fri) by proski (guest, #104) [Link]

First of all, imagine a Beowulf cluster of these :) Although I think it's easier to use more middle-of-the-road systems for the best performance/price ratio, low power consumption may be an important factor for some installations.

Actually, it makes sense for a business to buy cheap PCs if they tend to break fast for whatever reason, at least for non-critical operations. Think dirt, sand, vibration, changing temperatures, unreliable power, enemy attacks. Again, low power consumption could help if the power is limited.

Replacing Linux with infringing Windows

Posted Nov 9, 2007 0:50 UTC (Fri) by giraffedata (guest, #1954) [Link]

The story might suggest that if your PC doesn't go online for updates, you get a friendly visit from BSA to check if you are OK.

I agree paranoid people might take that suggestion, and I believe the article is thin enough on details to be irresponsibly misleading, but what I got from it is that the point is to gather statistical information.

And I don't believe anyone supposes those statistics will give a precise number of copyright infringements. What they will give is an upper bound: if 99% of customers keep getting Ubuntu updates, we can assume at most 1% of the customers have stolen a copy of Windows. And that means that when people talk about legislation to prevent that kind of theft, at the expense of legitimate users of Linux, they'll know they don't have to do that.

If the number is instead 80%, that might justify additional investigation to find out what the Windows infringement number is.

Binary compatibility

Posted Nov 2, 2007 6:35 UTC (Fri) by eru (subscriber, #2753) [Link] (1 responses)

One good reason for sticking with x86 intruction set in a product like this is proprietary browser plugins and popular proprietary programs like Google Earth. It won't sell if there is no way to watch YouTube with it...

Fortunately, there does seem to be a Flash 9 player for ARM

Posted Nov 2, 2007 9:04 UTC (Fri) by edmundo (guest, #616) [Link]

The Nokia N800, which is ARM11-based, has a Flash 9 player, according to various sources on
the web, so you can watch youtube at least.