billybob2 writes "Lenovo has stopped selling laptops pre-installed with Linux on its web site, only 8 months after starting the trial program. This means that home customers won't be able to buy a Thinkpad without paying the Microsoft tax. Word has it that the decision to pull the plug on Linux came down from the highest levels of the Chinese company's corporate headquarters. For those looking to buy full-sized laptops and desktops with Linux pre-loaded Dell, System76, ZaReason and Everex all still offer such products."
Most likely it was a combination of low volume and pressure from Microsoft. If M/S keeps the pressure on and the sales don't make it worthwhile fighting then they drop the line.
Most likely it was a combination of low volume and pressure from Microsoft. If M/S keeps the pressure on and the sales don't make it worthwhile fighting then they drop the line.
Most likely it was an example of Boyle's law in action: the higher the pressure, the lower the volume.
So do you subtract the amount they're paid to bundle adverts? Do you subtract the support costs that would be required to support more options for purchase? You have to assume that Dell/IBM/HP/etc are all evaluating their full cost structure including those things. If so, is it possible the "Microsoft Tax" is actually a negative value meaning it's cheaper for IBM to sell a Windows machine and be paid by advertisers than it is to sell a machine with nothing on it? Again, not trying to troll... just seems like its become one of those buzzwords with no actual meaning any more.
That is because their Linux option was to offer SuSE on their T series laptops. It is now popular to hate SuSE because of the MS deal. I am surprised that there weren't pictures/videos of the SuSE lizard being burned in effigy after the deal.
It does not cost them anything to pre-install Linux in the first place, any more than tweaking a copy to run on each model they have, which is not the worlds hardest job. Roll out and copy, that is it. And no need to pay royalties to MS. The decision was probably made as a result of suits taking a meeting with another group of suits that told their "friends" that their product is superior in every way and there is absolutely no reason to even consider Linux. This is the way of recent ISO-votes and it works.
Not true, if you release an OS with your system you "have" to test it, along with all the drivers for each hardware configuration you offer. At larger PC vendors a lot of time and money is spent on this test phase, and a lot of issues are found. The bar is a lot lower for consumer grade stuff, but the testing does still happen. This is why you can't always find the exact combo of hardware you want, for the exact flavor of OS you want.
In order to deliver the cheapest, fastest, greenest, whateverist, people do tend to deviate from Intel's reference design for a given platform. They deviate from other IC vendor reference designs as well, to, in theory, provide a better end user experience, more integration, etc.
The result is that a stock OSes (linux, windows, or "other") may not necessarily work as well, unless/until patches are sent upstream and accepted by whatever OS community is responsible. I am personally aware of a number of OS bugs in both Linux and Windows, found during this testing, that are corrected with the OS shipped with the product by the mfg, that are not yet part of the mainstream OS release. They will be released in a service pack or hotfix, update, etc. at some point, but OS release schedules rarely correlate with hardware releases. Sometimes they never are in the OS release and are in registry changes etc. YMMV.
It may be that some PC vendors are choosing to absorb these costs because Microsoft has been rubbing everyone the wrong way. Lenovo clearly doesn't wish to be one, except perhaps in markets where there's a different expectation of quality & support or where piracy is acceptable.
Actually I did not say that it is a automatic process, where manufacturers just install vanilla Ubuntu. I said it is not the worlds hardest job. And if you count in the savings of royalties they otherwise pay to MS, it is is very cheap to maintain Linux.
I am well aware Linux does not behave nicely either, given I have a Thinkpad T61, half of which functionality I had to tweak to work properly.
Still, even in the short run Linux does pay off. Also, people can choose Windows still, nobody forces them to run Li
It does not cost them anything to pre-install Linux in the first place, any more than tweaking a copy to run on each model they have
That's not really true. While the copy of Linux itself does not necessarily cost them anything, the fact that it is another option for the customer DOES make it cost more. General rule of thumb is that the more stock keeping units (SKU), the more it will cost you as a company. Basically, if you only sold one model of widgets, in one color with no options at all, it is cheaper than selling one model of widget that comes in either red or blue. It's not about the paint - the red and blue paint cost the same. It's the fact that your production line now has to support two variations. You now have two different packages for the product and on your web site, you now have to add in the capability for the customer to choose their color, and then you have to make sure that they get the right one. Going back to Lenovo, having a second operating system option means a lot of extra investment in their supply chain. Granted, if there is significant customer demand, the extra investment in the supply chain may be worth it. However, if the demand is not there, then the company shouldn't be selling that extra SKU.
On a non-business note, though, I'm sad to hear that they will no longer be selling pre-installed Linux. In fact, I didn't even know they had been selling pre-installed Linux until now. I like that the option is there. At the very least, I don't pay the Microsoft tax when I won't be installing any Microsoft software and hardware compatibility and driver support becomes more robust. I'm glad Dell is hanging in there. I won't comment on whether this is a conspiracy or not. I'm a dedicated Linux user and I love to bash Microsoft, but even I can admit that the demand just may not be there. It could have even been a factor of them failing at getting the message out to those who would be interested (I at least didn't get the memo). Although I will never completely rule out the possibility of an MS conspiracy, we can't exactly jump to that conclusion here.
Picture this: some company, a laptop manufacturer, hears about Linux and decides that it wants to sell units with pre-installed Linux. It makes some changes to the process and cranks out(for example) 2000 units. Only 22 units sell.
The company could do a few things: they could allow the other 1078 to collect dust
Personally, I would be looking to find who stole the other 900 units. Probably find them listed on ebay.
Maybe the "demand" was small because no one could find it on their f-ing web site.
I wanted a new laptop w/ Linux last month, and I looked at virtually every Thinkpad on their web site, and I could select Linux on almost none of them.
I can almost say the same thing about Dell. Only a small fraction of their laptops can I find Linux available.
Most of these companies just are paying lip service to Linux.
I think as *nix advocates (at least some of us), we need to realize that it's not all about being altruistic to these guys. It's about money, and if it's doesn't make money then why would they do it? But why speculate on motivations. It's just a fact and we can accept it, make Linux better where we can, and move forward.
Linux isn't the answer to everything. Typical linux users don't pay the premium lenovo/IBM pricing anyway for the most part. They would go HP/Dell and put their own OS on since the "MS tax" has little to do with the price differences of Lenovo and other options.
In partnership with a hardware company in India called Zenith [theregister.co.uk], Microsoft is a PC OEM for a system called the IQpc. That was really not a smart move on Microsoft's part.
All the next billion users are not belong to Microsoft. Not theirs. The backlash from this decision is just now reaching the upper levels of Microsoft management as their platform is deprecated by long term partners who understand that if Microsoft gets share in this market, they're dead. This is the same reason you don't have a Microsof
Some of us do. Unfortunately, laptops often have strange new combinations of components that are not yet stable in Linux, such as scrollbars, new graphics chipsets, strange RAID controllers, etc., that were only tested with Windows by the manufacturers. Maintaining good quality for such components, and making sure the drivers work well together, takes real effort by competent people. And if you're trying to trim costs, those people may not stick around.
The Microsoft tax isn't that big a deal, at least not in the Thinkpad price range. Were their Linux-based laptops any cheaper? I know some other companies that offer Linux don't offer any discount for it.
A bigger concern is whether they're providing driver support for Linux installation or not.
So let me get this straight. There was no MS tax on these, NO one was apparently buying them, so they're dropping the line and we still have to rattle on and on about a MS tax?
If i buy an apple, how do i get rid of the OSX/Apple tax?
If I buy a ford, how do i put a Mazda engine it it from the getgo and not pay the Ford tax?
"If I buy a ford, how do i put a Mazda engine it it from the getgo and not pay the Ford tax?" Ford and Mazda use mostly use the same motors. Ford owns a bit part of Mazda. And it really isn't the same thing. X86 has always run many different Operating System. IBM didn't bundle PC-DOS with the PC you had a choice of PC-DOS, CP/M-86 and I think at one point Xenix. PC-DOS is the cheapest so that is what most people bought. So buying a PC is not like buying a car without a motor. So you analogy was flawed on many
If i buy an apple, how do i get rid of the OSX/Apple tax?
If I buy a ford, how do i put a Mazda engine it it from the getgo and not pay the Ford tax?
Apple makes the computers. Ford makes the cars. So there really isn't a way to not pay them in some way (unless you stole their products...but that's beside the point)
Microsoft, on the other hand, does not manufacture the computers. So if I want to buy a computer I shouldn't have to pay them as well if I don't want their product to come with it.
The Microsoft tax isn't that big a deal, at least not in the Thinkpad price range.
If it was possible to burn the money in a fire instead of giving it to Microsoft, then format the laptop and put Linux on it, then no, it wouldn't be a big deal. But that's not the case here. Microsoft is actually getting stronger off that tax, and I think we'll all agree, that is a big deal...
I know a few really smart, really nice people who work at Microsoft. I don't have a problem with MS making money. I'd much rather have the money go to MS and then get filtered back into the US economy and partially eventually back into my pocket than burned or sent to China where the money doesn't come back this way.
I bought a T61 several months ago from them with Suse pre-installed (I then installed the latest version of OpenSuse instead as the pre-installed one was an older, stable and supported version.)
I like it a lot and was planning on doing the same for any future laptop purchases. It's a shame because these are great machines and perfect for Linux (and the kind of person that normally runs Linux.)
However, I ran through the various options before purchasing and it was hard to tell if I was really saving money this way. For the Linux systems the choice of hardware options was more limited than with Windows (which does make sense) and I don't think I was able to set up equal systems which to compare prices with. In the end I think I paid the same or possibly even more for this system than if I had got one with Windows with the intention of not using it.
I think, then, their trial of selling Linux machines failed because they failed to make it a compelling option to the buyer, either financially or otherwise (limited options.)
I still feel good about myself for not giving any money to Microsoft.
> I think, then, their trial of selling Linux machines failed because they failed to make > it a compelling option to the buyer, either financially or otherwise (limited options.)
We also bought a SUSE loaded Thinkpad recently. Normally we do RedHat based distros but since this one did come with a supported load left it alone. Yes SUSE is different but the user adapted pretty quick.
The point of preload is not just to avoid giving Microsoft money, I'm smart enough to realize Lenovo almost certainly gave Microsoft their per unit tax (no amount of court orders will ever end that practice) but we got three other important things:
1. PRELOAD. Take it out, plug it in and go. Don't underestimate the value of that.
2. NO SUPRISES. If they are preloading Linux on it they won't suddenly switch vendors on wireless chipsets, etc. and hose you. Even if you decide you don't like the flavor of the month a vendor ships the odds are good you can load any other recent distro.
3. SUPPORT. If a vendor preloads Linux you can call them up and get warranty support without having to worry about reloading Windows before shipping it off or ensuring the drive is yanked out.
In the past we bought Thinkpads because they were the best hardware and nobody offered Linux as a supported option so their lack of that didn't hurt them. That isn't true anymore so future purchases won't go to them.
Many of those laptops that can be configured have "FreeDos" as an option for the OS. Sure, that means it doesn't come with an installed Linux distro, but you can get a customized laptop without the MS tax.
Sure, that means it doesn't come with an installed Linux distro, but you can get a customized laptop without the MS tax.
If a laptop comes without an installed Linux distro, it also comes without the manufacturer's assurance that there exists a Linux driver for all hardware in the laptop.
On Dell's website, all the Ubuntu models have a note: Ubuntu 8.04 with DVD Playback. What does that mean? That they installed the unlicensed work-around for you or is there some licensed linux DVD decoder?
I know when I was looking previously I stumbled upon some other options, such as http://www.emperorlinux.com/ [emperorlinux.com] which is still perhaps a viable route.
Having just purchased a T61 (as it was being discontinued), I suspect they have good reasons for not offering Linux right now.
The new T400/T500 use Intel's newest wireless chipset (Wifi 5100), which wasn't supported under Linux at the time of launch (early August). Intel announced support on August 14th, and as far as I know, it's not supported in any stable release of any major distribution. This will change in the coming months, of course, but it makes sense that there's no Linux option now.
The video card is in a similar situation. The laptops with discrete graphics also have integrated graphics which are switchable via driver (for power savings). As far as I know, this switching isn't implemented at all in X and I don't know if you can disable one or the other card. If you order a version with only integrated graphics, I believe it's supported only by the latest version of the intel driver (which isn't yet packaged for many distributions).
Even though I use my T61 for Linux, I still bought a Vista Home version for three reasons: 1.) Every so often I like to have Windows for something, 2.) The hardware options for the Linux version were crippled - slower processor line, etc. and 3.) OpenSuse isn't my distro of choice anyway. You'd have to buy the dock separately (no big deal), because the support for it under Linux isn't official (and it took some time to get things to work reasonably well for me).
For the typical consumer how has no idea what Linux is, there is little point in a preloaded Linux system. Windows is fine for them, and has more consumer-type software.
That leaves as the market for these things the people that actually want Linux. But people who know enough about Linux to actually want it probably want a specific distribution. If the preloaded distribution is that one, great!
But if the one they want is not the preloaded one, then they are going to end up doing their own install anyway. In that case, the only advantage they really get buying one of the preloaded Linux systems is that they know the hardware works with Linux (maybe--some companies that do preloads simply don't support all of their own hardware under Linux).
But there is also a disadvantage. Windows often comes bundled with third party software, and there also often ads from third parties included in the packaging. The companies that make the bundled software, or that the ads are for, pay the computer companies to be included. The computer company often makes enough money that way to more than pay for the Windows license. Because of this, it is often cheaper for them to sell a given model with Windows than to sell it without Windows.
If this is the case, the Linux fan who is going to install his own distro over the preloaded one is better off, financially, buying the Windows computer and wiping it.
Bottom line: the market for whom Linux preloads makes sense is only a small subset of the people that want to run Linux on their new computer. Hence, it is no surprise that manufacturers are not finding it worthwhile.
i bought my laptop for dual-booting, WinXP MCE and Linux. After 4 months of getting tired of it telling me "Use *our* antivirus of choice!" in windows I just gave up and installed linux. Truth be told, I kept my MCE key around, because that gives me the legal right to use it in a VM should the need arise. (But it hasn't, thanks, in part, to everything moving to the web)
After 4 months of getting tired of it telling me "Use *our* antivirus of choice!" in windows I just gave up and installed linux.
Let me be sure I understand this clearly to confirm you aren't trolling.... you were annoyed by Windows Security Center telling you to install Anti-Virus software? You were not able to simply turn this off? Did you believe you MUST have Anti-Virus software to use the computer rather than rely on common sense practices? Something doesn't quite add up here.
Actually you can turn that off. That lovely little nag feature is a part of "Security Center". It's a service that you can disable. It's one of the first things I do on XP after install.
You probably have a better defense having the OEM licence than none at all, especially if you were running a single copy in a VM on the machine it was tied to.
The clause was likely intended to prevent someone from running a copy of windows in a VM on some super-powered server or something.
And that is why Linux is a bad idea for them. Every linux nerd that wants a pre install, wants their favorite "flavor" of pre install. And gets pissy when their favorite brand name isn't in first place. And half the time people buy linux machines for their computer-illiterate relatives, making them take up huge amounts of phone-support time.
Easier to pitch it and say "eh, we have windows. Enjoy."
Precisely. I bought one of the Lenovo Suse lappys, but never even booted it into Suse. I had an Ubuntu disc sitting on my counter before the UPS guy showed up.
I bought the Suse one for two reasons- known linux-supported hardware, and not paying MS.
The laptop, by the way, is fantastic. Durable, high-performance, and with a docking station, replaced both my desktops.
From the KDE 4.1 announcement page: "While KDE 4.1 aims at being the first release suitable for early adopting users..."
If you want to be an early adopter, you need to live with the consequences. I've run KDE for years and would never consider moving to KDE 4+ for a least another year or two.
Linux is communist in a sense because the community 'owns' it, anyone can contribute to it regardless of social class, and the community governs itself without need of outside interferance.
These are all fundamental ideals of communism [wikipedia.org] - that all property is communally owned, that all people are equal regardless of class, and that the workers (common people) should be in charge of governing themselves.
The way the Chinese run their country is very far from the ideals of communism, in fact no country that I know has ever had a successful communist government. There has been plenty of dictatorships masquerading as communist though.
Ironically, it's also close to the ideals of a free market. There's no friction, no real barrier to entry, and competition is very pure and open. Supply is limitless, thus cost goes to $0, which isn't happening elsewhere in the software industry. In a way, free market economics says that the ease of reproducing software would drive the cost to zero, which has happened in a lot of ways.
Morally speaking, while most people would argue that there's nothing wrong with charging money for software, almost everyone will agree that the community that's sprung up around open source is very right. It's heart warming, really.
1) F/OSS supporters don't (generally) claim that all property should be communally owned. The concept of ownership -- communal or otherwise -- doesn't even apply to things which lack scarcity, such as code. To the extent that some people claim it does apply ("IP") it isn't "owned" by the community, but rather by the individual contributors. Cooporation between individual property owners for mutual benefit is a tenet of capitalism, not communism.
2) The idea that all individuals have equal rights under the la
Linuz also has a property that is never true in the physical world, it's in infinite supply. That means it must also be maintenance-free, since you could always get a "new" one and so noone has to be forced to work just to maintain the status quo. It also takes care of all control issues, while in the real world many resources are naturally limited (say beluga caviar), others can be made limited (limit production, hoarding) and the ones in control of that scarce resource now has power. That can be bargained
> Is it really that hard for them to make Ubuntu an option in the OS choice box?
Yes it is. Because above all else, end users MUST NEVER become aware of the amount Windows adds to the sticker price. That is what is behind all of these games. Windows must be an invisible component lest users begin questioning why they must buy Windows and keep on rebuying it with each and every hardware purchase. The entire monopoly depends upon this, thus Microsoft would mercilessly punish any OEM who broke that rule.
AC comment from TFA (Score:5, Insightful)
I suspect the decision was made because of comparatively small demand.
Not every disappointment in life is the result of a Grand Microsoft Conspiracy. (grin)
Re:AC comment from TFA (Score:5, Insightful)
Parent
Re:AC comment from TFA (Score:5, Funny)
Most likely it was a combination of low volume and pressure from Microsoft. If M/S keeps the pressure on and the sales don't make it worthwhile fighting then they drop the line.
Most likely it was an example of Boyle's law in action: the higher the pressure, the lower the volume.
Parent
Re:AC comment from TFA (Score:5, Interesting)
Parent
Re:AC comment from TFA (Score:4, Insightful)
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
It does not cost them anything to pre-install Linux in the first place, any more than tweaking a copy to run on each model they have, which is not the worlds hardest job. Roll out and copy, that is it. And no need to pay royalties to MS. The decision was probably made as a result of suits taking a meeting with another group of suits that told their "friends" that their product is superior in every way and there is absolutely no reason to even consider Linux. This is the way of recent ISO-votes and it works.
Re:AC comment from TFA (Score:5, Informative)
Not true, if you release an OS with your system you "have" to test it, along with all the drivers for each hardware configuration you offer. At larger PC vendors a lot of time and money is spent on this test phase, and a lot of issues are found. The bar is a lot lower for consumer grade stuff, but the testing does still happen. This is why you can't always find the exact combo of hardware you want, for the exact flavor of OS you want.
In order to deliver the cheapest, fastest, greenest, whateverist, people do tend to deviate from Intel's reference design for a given platform. They deviate from other IC vendor reference designs as well, to, in theory, provide a better end user experience, more integration, etc.
The result is that a stock OSes (linux, windows, or "other") may not necessarily work as well, unless/until patches are sent upstream and accepted by whatever OS community is responsible. I am personally aware of a number of OS bugs in both Linux and Windows, found during this testing, that are corrected with the OS shipped with the product by the mfg, that are not yet part of the mainstream OS release. They will be released in a service pack or hotfix, update, etc. at some point, but OS release schedules rarely correlate with hardware releases. Sometimes they never are in the OS release and are in registry changes etc. YMMV.
It may be that some PC vendors are choosing to absorb these costs because Microsoft has been rubbing everyone the wrong way. Lenovo clearly doesn't wish to be one, except perhaps in markets where there's a different expectation of quality & support or where piracy is acceptable.
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Actually I did not say that it is a automatic process, where manufacturers just install vanilla Ubuntu. I said it is not the worlds hardest job. And if you count in the savings of royalties they otherwise pay to MS, it is is very cheap to maintain Linux.
I am well aware Linux does not behave nicely either, given I have a Thinkpad T61, half of which functionality I had to tweak to work properly.
Still, even in the short run Linux does pay off. Also, people can choose Windows still, nobody forces them to run Li
Re:AC comment from TFA (Score:5, Informative)
That's not really true. While the copy of Linux itself does not necessarily cost them anything, the fact that it is another option for the customer DOES make it cost more. General rule of thumb is that the more stock keeping units (SKU), the more it will cost you as a company. Basically, if you only sold one model of widgets, in one color with no options at all, it is cheaper than selling one model of widget that comes in either red or blue. It's not about the paint - the red and blue paint cost the same. It's the fact that your production line now has to support two variations. You now have two different packages for the product and on your web site, you now have to add in the capability for the customer to choose their color, and then you have to make sure that they get the right one. Going back to Lenovo, having a second operating system option means a lot of extra investment in their supply chain. Granted, if there is significant customer demand, the extra investment in the supply chain may be worth it. However, if the demand is not there, then the company shouldn't be selling that extra SKU.
On a non-business note, though, I'm sad to hear that they will no longer be selling pre-installed Linux. In fact, I didn't even know they had been selling pre-installed Linux until now. I like that the option is there. At the very least, I don't pay the Microsoft tax when I won't be installing any Microsoft software and hardware compatibility and driver support becomes more robust. I'm glad Dell is hanging in there. I won't comment on whether this is a conspiracy or not. I'm a dedicated Linux user and I love to bash Microsoft, but even I can admit that the demand just may not be there. It could have even been a factor of them failing at getting the message out to those who would be interested (I at least didn't get the memo). Although I will never completely rule out the possibility of an MS conspiracy, we can't exactly jump to that conclusion here.
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Picture this: some company, a laptop manufacturer, hears about Linux and decides that it wants to sell units with pre-installed Linux. It makes some changes to the process and cranks out(for example) 2000 units. Only 22 units sell.
The company could do a few things: they could allow the other 1078 to collect dust
Personally, I would be looking to find who stole the other 900 units. Probably find them listed on ebay.
Comment from me (Score:4, Informative)
because of comparatively small demand.
Maybe the "demand" was small because no one could find it on their f-ing web site.
I wanted a new laptop w/ Linux last month, and I looked at virtually every Thinkpad on their web site, and I could select Linux on almost none of them.
I can almost say the same thing about Dell. Only a small fraction of their laptops can I find Linux available.
Most of these companies just are paying lip service to Linux.
Parent
Maybe the word actually came from consumers? (Score:5, Interesting)
And people just weren't buying them?
Re:Maybe the word actually came from consumers? (Score:5, Insightful)
Yeah All kinds of possibilities can lead to this.
I think as *nix advocates (at least some of us), we need to realize that it's not all about being altruistic to these guys. It's about money, and if it's doesn't make money then why would they do it? But why speculate on motivations. It's just a fact and we can accept it, make Linux better where we can, and move forward.
Parent
Re:Maybe the word actually came from consumers? (Score:5, Interesting)
Agreed..
Linux isn't the answer to everything. Typical linux users don't pay the premium lenovo/IBM pricing anyway for the most part. They would go HP/Dell and put their own OS on since the "MS tax" has little to do with the price differences of Lenovo and other options.
BTW, when will Apple get rid of the Apple Tax? :)
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Maybe when Microsoft starts selling PCs, so that your comparison is really an apples-to-Apples one? ;)
Microsoft is now a PC OEM (Score:3, Informative)
In partnership with a hardware company in India called Zenith [theregister.co.uk], Microsoft is a PC OEM for a system called the IQpc. That was really not a smart move on Microsoft's part.
All the next billion users are not belong to Microsoft. Not theirs. The backlash from this decision is just now reaching the upper levels of Microsoft management as their platform is deprecated by long term partners who understand that if Microsoft gets share in this market, they're dead. This is the same reason you don't have a Microsof
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
IBM isn't Lenovo. It's as simple as that.
They don't deserve whatever consideration you would give a PC builder because it's a part of Big Blue.
What about driver support etcetera? (Score:5, Insightful)
The Microsoft tax isn't that big a deal, at least not in the Thinkpad price range. Were their Linux-based laptops any cheaper? I know some other companies that offer Linux don't offer any discount for it.
A bigger concern is whether they're providing driver support for Linux installation or not.
Re:What about driver support etcetera? (Score:4, Insightful)
So let me get this straight. There was no MS tax on these, NO one was apparently buying them, so they're dropping the line and we still have to rattle on and on about a MS tax?
If i buy an apple, how do i get rid of the OSX/Apple tax?
If I buy a ford, how do i put a Mazda engine it it from the getgo and not pay the Ford tax?
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
"If I buy a ford, how do i put a Mazda engine it it from the getgo and not pay the Ford tax?"
Ford and Mazda use mostly use the same motors. Ford owns a bit part of Mazda.
And it really isn't the same thing. X86 has always run many different Operating System. IBM didn't bundle PC-DOS with the PC you had a choice of PC-DOS, CP/M-86 and I think at one point Xenix. PC-DOS is the cheapest so that is what most people bought. So buying a PC is not like buying a car without a motor.
So you analogy was flawed on many
Re:What about driver support etcetera? (Score:5, Insightful)
If i buy an apple, how do i get rid of the OSX/Apple tax? If I buy a ford, how do i put a Mazda engine it it from the getgo and not pay the Ford tax?
Apple makes the computers. Ford makes the cars. So there really isn't a way to not pay them in some way (unless you stole their products...but that's beside the point)
Microsoft, on the other hand, does not manufacture the computers. So if I want to buy a computer I shouldn't have to pay them as well if I don't want their product to come with it.
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
The Microsoft tax isn't that big a deal, at least not in the Thinkpad price range.
If it was possible to burn the money in a fire instead of giving it to Microsoft, then format the laptop and put Linux on it, then no, it wouldn't be a big deal. But that's not the case here. Microsoft is actually getting stronger off that tax, and I think we'll all agree, that is a big deal...
I know a few really smart, really nice people who work at Microsoft. I don't have a problem with MS making money. I'd much rather have the money go to MS and then get filtered back into the US economy and partially eventually back into my pocket than burned or sent to China where the money doesn't come back this way.
I have one (Score:5, Interesting)
I bought a T61 several months ago from them with Suse pre-installed (I then installed the latest version of OpenSuse instead as the pre-installed one was an older, stable and supported version.)
I like it a lot and was planning on doing the same for any future laptop purchases. It's a shame because these are great machines and perfect for Linux (and the kind of person that normally runs Linux.)
However, I ran through the various options before purchasing and it was hard to tell if I was really saving money this way. For the Linux systems the choice of hardware options was more limited than with Windows (which does make sense) and I don't think I was able to set up equal systems which to compare prices with. In the end I think I paid the same or possibly even more for this system than if I had got one with Windows with the intention of not using it.
I think, then, their trial of selling Linux machines failed because they failed to make it a compelling option to the buyer, either financially or otherwise (limited options.)
I still feel good about myself for not giving any money to Microsoft.
More reasons for preloading (Score:5, Interesting)
> I think, then, their trial of selling Linux machines failed because they failed to make
> it a compelling option to the buyer, either financially or otherwise (limited options.)
We also bought a SUSE loaded Thinkpad recently. Normally we do RedHat based distros but since this one did come with a supported load left it alone. Yes SUSE is different but the user adapted pretty quick.
The point of preload is not just to avoid giving Microsoft money, I'm smart enough to realize Lenovo almost certainly gave Microsoft their per unit tax (no amount of court orders will ever end that practice) but we got three other important things:
1. PRELOAD. Take it out, plug it in and go. Don't underestimate the value of that.
2. NO SUPRISES. If they are preloading Linux on it they won't suddenly switch vendors on wireless chipsets, etc. and hose you. Even if you decide you don't like the flavor of the month a vendor ships the odds are good you can load any other recent distro.
3. SUPPORT. If a vendor preloads Linux you can call them up and get warranty support without having to worry about reloading Windows before shipping it off or ensuring the drive is yanked out.
In the past we bought Thinkpads because they were the best hardware and nobody offered Linux as a supported option so their lack of that didn't hurt them. That isn't true anymore so future purchases won't go to them.
Parent
HP Small Business still has FreeDos Laptops (Score:3, Insightful)
http://www.hp.com/sbso/busproducts_notebooks.html [hp.com]
Many of those laptops that can be configured have "FreeDos" as an option for the OS.
Sure, that means it doesn't come with an installed Linux distro, but you can get a customized laptop without the MS tax.
No Linux option? Probably has winhardware. (Score:3, Insightful)
Sure, that means it doesn't come with an installed Linux distro, but you can get a customized laptop without the MS tax.
If a laptop comes without an installed Linux distro, it also comes without the manufacturer's assurance that there exists a Linux driver for all hardware in the laptop.
DVD Playback? (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:DVD Playback? (Score:5, Informative)
They install LinDVD.
Parent
3rd party (Score:3, Interesting)
Possible reasons (Score:5, Interesting)
Having just purchased a T61 (as it was being discontinued), I suspect they have good reasons for not offering Linux right now.
The new T400/T500 use Intel's newest wireless chipset (Wifi 5100), which wasn't supported under Linux at the time of launch (early August). Intel announced support on August 14th, and as far as I know, it's not supported in any stable release of any major distribution. This will change in the coming months, of course, but it makes sense that there's no Linux option now.
The video card is in a similar situation. The laptops with discrete graphics also have integrated graphics which are switchable via driver (for power savings). As far as I know, this switching isn't implemented at all in X and I don't know if you can disable one or the other card. If you order a version with only integrated graphics, I believe it's supported only by the latest version of the intel driver (which isn't yet packaged for many distributions).
Even though I use my T61 for Linux, I still bought a Vista Home version for three reasons: 1.) Every so often I like to have Windows for something, 2.) The hardware options for the Linux version were crippled - slower processor line, etc. and 3.) OpenSuse isn't my distro of choice anyway. You'd have to buy the dock separately (no big deal), because the support for it under Linux isn't official (and it took some time to get things to work reasonably well for me).
Too many distros for preloads (Score:3, Insightful)
For the typical consumer how has no idea what Linux is, there is little point in a preloaded Linux system. Windows is fine for them, and has more consumer-type software.
That leaves as the market for these things the people that actually want Linux. But people who know enough about Linux to actually want it probably want a specific distribution. If the preloaded distribution is that one, great!
But if the one they want is not the preloaded one, then they are going to end up doing their own install anyway. In that case, the only advantage they really get buying one of the preloaded Linux systems is that they know the hardware works with Linux (maybe--some companies that do preloads simply don't support all of their own hardware under Linux).
But there is also a disadvantage. Windows often comes bundled with third party software, and there also often ads from third parties included in the packaging. The companies that make the bundled software, or that the ads are for, pay the computer companies to be included. The computer company often makes enough money that way to more than pay for the Windows license. Because of this, it is often cheaper for them to sell a given model with Windows than to sell it without Windows.
If this is the case, the Linux fan who is going to install his own distro over the preloaded one is better off, financially, buying the Windows computer and wiping it.
Bottom line: the market for whom Linux preloads makes sense is only a small subset of the people that want to run Linux on their new computer. Hence, it is no surprise that manufacturers are not finding it worthwhile.
Well fuck them! (Score:3, Funny)
Who are they to say I can't use Linux just because I decided to buy a home?!
(Gotta love the English language)
Re:Well up-theirs (Score:4, Interesting)
i bought my laptop for dual-booting, WinXP MCE and Linux. After 4 months of getting tired of it telling me "Use *our* antivirus of choice!" in windows I just gave up and installed linux. Truth be told, I kept my MCE key around, because that gives me the legal right to use it in a VM should the need arise. (But it hasn't, thanks, in part, to everything moving to the web)
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
After 4 months of getting tired of it telling me "Use *our* antivirus of choice!" in windows I just gave up and installed linux.
Let me be sure I understand this clearly to confirm you aren't trolling.... you were annoyed by Windows Security Center telling you to install Anti-Virus software? You were not able to simply turn this off? Did you believe you MUST have Anti-Virus software to use the computer rather than rely on common sense practices? Something doesn't quite add up here.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Actually you can turn that off. That lovely little nag feature is a part of "Security Center". It's a service that you can disable. It's one of the first things I do on XP after install.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
You probably have a better defense having the OEM licence than none at all, especially if you were running a single copy in a VM on the machine it was tied to.
The clause was likely intended to prevent someone from running a copy of windows in a VM on some super-powered server or something.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Don't feed the trolls please. It wastes everyone's time involved, and only makes them more likely to do it.
Trolls hate being ignored.
Re:Well up-theirs (Score:5, Funny)
if it doesnt run linux, it doesnt exist.
Dude. You just made my car disappear.
Parent
Re:Well up-theirs (Score:5, Funny)
Fortunately, my toaster is safe.
Parent
Re:It's clear why (Score:4, Informative)
To be fair, the F/OSS for playing MP3s and DVDs is very good. It just isn't legal in the US.
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Easier to pitch it and say "eh, we have windows. Enjoy."
Re:Maybe they shouldn't have used Suse (Score:5, Insightful)
Precisely. I bought one of the Lenovo Suse lappys, but never even booted it into Suse. I had an Ubuntu disc sitting on my counter before the UPS guy showed up.
I bought the Suse one for two reasons- known linux-supported hardware, and not paying MS.
The laptop, by the way, is fantastic. Durable, high-performance, and with a docking station, replaced both my desktops.
Parent
Re:Maybe Vista is better? (Score:5, Informative)
From the KDE 4.1 announcement page:
"While KDE 4.1 aims at being the first release suitable for early adopting users..."
If you want to be an early adopter, you need to live with the consequences. I've run KDE for years and would never consider moving to KDE 4+ for a least another year or two.
Also KDE != Linux.
Parent
Re:Communist Plot Against Linux? (Score:4, Interesting)
These are all fundamental ideals of communism [wikipedia.org] - that all property is communally owned, that all people are equal regardless of class, and that the workers (common people) should be in charge of governing themselves.
The way the Chinese run their country is very far from the ideals of communism, in fact no country that I know has ever had a successful communist government. There has been plenty of dictatorships masquerading as communist though.
Parent
Re:Communist Plot Against Linux? (Score:4, Insightful)
Morally speaking, while most people would argue that there's nothing wrong with charging money for software, almost everyone will agree that the community that's sprung up around open source is very right. It's heart warming, really.
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
1) F/OSS supporters don't (generally) claim that all property should be communally owned. The concept of ownership -- communal or otherwise -- doesn't even apply to things which lack scarcity, such as code. To the extent that some people claim it does apply ("IP") it isn't "owned" by the community, but rather by the individual contributors. Cooporation between individual property owners for mutual benefit is a tenet of capitalism, not communism.
2) The idea that all individuals have equal rights under the la
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Linuz also has a property that is never true in the physical world, it's in infinite supply. That means it must also be maintenance-free, since you could always get a "new" one and so noone has to be forced to work just to maintain the status quo. It also takes care of all control issues, while in the real world many resources are naturally limited (say beluga caviar), others can be made limited (limit production, hoarding) and the ones in control of that scarce resource now has power. That can be bargained
Hiding the price (Score:3, Insightful)
> Is it really that hard for them to make Ubuntu an option in the OS choice box?
Yes it is. Because above all else, end users MUST NEVER become aware of the amount Windows adds to the sticker price. That is what is behind all of these games. Windows must be an invisible component lest users begin questioning why they must buy Windows and keep on rebuying it with each and every hardware purchase. The entire monopoly depends upon this, thus Microsoft would mercilessly punish any OEM who broke that rule.