- Site menu:
- Latest Discussions
- Latest Newswire
- Archives
- Submit Story
- Story HOWTO
- Syndicate
- E-mail Alerts
Windows license refund donated to Mint
|
|
|
Comments (59)
Very nice...
Well said, well done and indeed each individual person makes a difference.
Dell bars Win 7 refunds from Linux lovers
38 earlier comments in the full thread.
I'm not at all sure Dell and Quality are words that belong together. Every Dell Laptop and Desktop and Server that has been purchased by the company I work for has had at least one service call out during the first year.
On the other hand just comparing notes with my colleagues, it would appear that most other brands, including the No Name brands that I can get wholesale, with the exception of HP, are very reliable and (in this admittedly small sample) have never had to be serviced during their lifetime.
On the other hand just comparing notes with my colleagues, it would appear that most other brands, including the No Name brands that I can get wholesale, with the exception of HP, are very reliable and (in this admittedly small sample) have never had to be serviced during their lifetime.
Indeed, like told, I 'built' my own desktop - because it was the best deal (Dell doesn't offer energy efficient Gentoo-certified desktops). Also durability was an issue; my 280W PSU is 5 years old but still better than most of the #### you find in OEM-pre-assembled cases even when not grounded. But nonetheless I ended up paying pretty much for memory and CPU.
Consider this: 1) Intel CPU's are manufactured in Taiwan (TSMC?), put on some foam, with 1000 of them put in a box, shipped to India and put in a Dell, 2) Intel CPU's are manufactured in Taiwan (TSMC?), separately packaged in boxes thirty times as big as the CPU's (labour costs), manual / guarantee certificate added, (maybe) shipped to the US (transport costs), put in a climate controlled warehouse (energy costs + labour costs), then shipped to the Netherlands (transport costs), 19% VAT added (administration costs), again in some temperature controlled warehouse (energy + labour costs) at some wholesale company (labour costs), then they're sold (administration costs) to some smaller distributor (value added), transported (transport costs) to the small company and then I walk across the street to buy them (some VAT added in the process again!)
So if someone is able to put a desktop together with 'local' components and ends up with a cheaper solution than Dell, it would surprise me.
Apart from that, Dell probably pays less for a typical CPU than System76, so there's no level playing field between those OEM's that install Windows on 90%+ of their PC's and those that install Linux on 90%+. Given Windows is installed on Dell PC's even _before_ those desktops enter the US, you probably know why Dell Ubuntu desktops are more expensive: Some expensive US worker probably has to remove Windows, send the license back to India + added cost to transfer that Windows license to some brand new Indian-assembled PC (They don't let the Windows users pay for that!), and then they add Ubuntu. So you have to pay for removing Windows as well as adding buntu and because it's done by adults in the US and not in India it's expensive.
So there's no level playing field between Linux computers and Windows computers, that's all I'm saying. [1]You can buy a Linux Dell-desktop and then _you_ will be the one paying for removing Windows + adding Linux. [2]Or you can buy a Windows Dell-desktop and ask for a refund and add Linux yourself, end Dell will end up paying.
Please note in [1] there's more work done by Dell, so they make more profit. Even if much people buy one, there's no reason for them to change the process in India. Even better, US Dell employees having to remove Windows and adding Ubuntu means more employment for Dell US and more profit, that's the normal way (some) companies work. They'd rather do more work to make more profit than make the process more efficient to avoid work and earn less. Sounds contradictory, but I've encountered this in real life: More work means a higher margin on your products. So buying [1] only enforces the status quo, unless more than 10% of people buy their Dell with Linux.
However, if a lot of people do [2] then Dell ends up losing lots of money, even if only 1% of their customers do so. That's the only way to change their sw-installation process and stop 100% of the Dells having Windows pre-installed in India before the computers are boxed. It's disrupting their Windows-centered helpdesk employees who are trained to guide people through Windows GUI's and are now asked to consider legal EULA-stuff and fix refunds instead of virusses.
If I were to buy some Dell, I'd certainly know what I'd choose.
Consider this: 1) Intel CPU's are manufactured in Taiwan (TSMC?), put on some foam, with 1000 of them put in a box, shipped to India and put in a Dell, 2) Intel CPU's are manufactured in Taiwan (TSMC?), separately packaged in boxes thirty times as big as the CPU's (labour costs), manual / guarantee certificate added, (maybe) shipped to the US (transport costs), put in a climate controlled warehouse (energy costs + labour costs), then shipped to the Netherlands (transport costs), 19% VAT added (administration costs), again in some temperature controlled warehouse (energy + labour costs) at some wholesale company (labour costs), then they're sold (administration costs) to some smaller distributor (value added), transported (transport costs) to the small company and then I walk across the street to buy them (some VAT added in the process again!)
So if someone is able to put a desktop together with 'local' components and ends up with a cheaper solution than Dell, it would surprise me.
Apart from that, Dell probably pays less for a typical CPU than System76, so there's no level playing field between those OEM's that install Windows on 90%+ of their PC's and those that install Linux on 90%+. Given Windows is installed on Dell PC's even _before_ those desktops enter the US, you probably know why Dell Ubuntu desktops are more expensive: Some expensive US worker probably has to remove Windows, send the license back to India + added cost to transfer that Windows license to some brand new Indian-assembled PC (They don't let the Windows users pay for that!), and then they add Ubuntu. So you have to pay for removing Windows as well as adding buntu and because it's done by adults in the US and not in India it's expensive.
So there's no level playing field between Linux computers and Windows computers, that's all I'm saying. [1]You can buy a Linux Dell-desktop and then _you_ will be the one paying for removing Windows + adding Linux. [2]Or you can buy a Windows Dell-desktop and ask for a refund and add Linux yourself, end Dell will end up paying.
Please note in [1] there's more work done by Dell, so they make more profit. Even if much people buy one, there's no reason for them to change the process in India. Even better, US Dell employees having to remove Windows and adding Ubuntu means more employment for Dell US and more profit, that's the normal way (some) companies work. They'd rather do more work to make more profit than make the process more efficient to avoid work and earn less. Sounds contradictory, but I've encountered this in real life: More work means a higher margin on your products. So buying [1] only enforces the status quo, unless more than 10% of people buy their Dell with Linux.
However, if a lot of people do [2] then Dell ends up losing lots of money, even if only 1% of their customers do so. That's the only way to change their sw-installation process and stop 100% of the Dells having Windows pre-installed in India before the computers are boxed. It's disrupting their Windows-centered helpdesk employees who are trained to guide people through Windows GUI's and are now asked to consider legal EULA-stuff and fix refunds instead of virusses.
If I were to buy some Dell, I'd certainly know what I'd choose.
The only Dell I'm likely to buy is recycled.
> So, what exactly do you think that buys you?.... You certainly can't rely on any language in the EULA to ask for a refund....
Dino, the EULA is what says you can't get a refund. If it's not binding, then neither is the no refund clause.
Not that it's anything other than a intellectual exercise for me. If I need/want Windows, I'll by a Windows machine. If I don't, I'll build my own or buy a Linux machine. There are times it's good to have a valid Windows license lying around.
Dino, the EULA is what says you can't get a refund. If it's not binding, then neither is the no refund clause.
Not that it's anything other than a intellectual exercise for me. If I need/want Windows, I'll by a Windows machine. If I don't, I'll build my own or buy a Linux machine. There are times it's good to have a valid Windows license lying around.
Quoting:So if someone is able to put a desktop together with 'local' components and ends up with a cheaper solution than Dell, it would surprise me.
But if they're serious about business, they would buy CPU's just like Dell does, in trays of 1000. Building desktops for sale using retail parts is insane.
Also, you forgot that the assembled Dell box in your scenario 1) goes through the same packaging-shipping-taxing-shipping-again routine as the CPU from scenario 2), only later in the production pipeline :)
Quoting:I wonder whether parts are cheaper in the UK than the Netherlands?
It's not expensive here either. When I build myself I can build cheaper than Dell if I want. The difference being mainly the cost of a Windows license. Usually I can match price on Dell machines. That is: Build a machine that matches the specs of Dell but uses quality parts instead, for the same price as Dell (but sans Windows of course).
Quoting:1) goes through the same packaging-shipping-taxing-shipping-again routine as the CPU from scenario
No, I didn't forgot, and no, it's not the same routine in my opinion. At Dell, the CPU is in the case and then it's done for the CPU.
My separate case goes through the same scenario, but without a CPU in it, that's the difference. More boxes, more loose parts, more warehouses and personnel needed and such. More steps are more times value added. A Dell has one manual, my computer may have six of the separte parts, six boxes with foam (before RoHS) etc. The CPU in the Dell is in the case - and the case had to come to me anyway so putting the CPU in the case is much cheaper than shipping them separately.
It's only for the VAT that it doesn't matter, however if someone has to calculate VAT for a CPU on Monday, for memory Tuesday and for a case Wednesday it's more expensive than if they do it for one Dell at the same time.
I've tried to match certain Dell PC's in the past using the same hardware, but I couldn't. It was more than four years ago however, so I'm not sure, maybe Dell's just became more expensive or something, I'm not sure. But given I buy one CPU and Dell buys 1 million of them, I cannot imagine Dell's cost price of their desktops not being much lower than mine, so maybe it's just their profit that makes doing it yourself almost as cheap?
Hans --
I can never afford to buy Dell or HP or any pre-built machine, but only because of a cheat that comes from building your own ---
I rarely upgrade everything at once.
A new motherboard can usually slip right into my existing case and use my current power supply. Keyboards, mice and DVD drives often overlap system upgrades,
Etc.
Not so easy when buying Dells.
I can never afford to buy Dell or HP or any pre-built machine, but only because of a cheat that comes from building your own ---
I rarely upgrade everything at once.
A new motherboard can usually slip right into my existing case and use my current power supply. Keyboards, mice and DVD drives often overlap system upgrades,
Etc.
Not so easy when buying Dells.
Indeed, that's true. I saw this when my father bought some Packard Bell pre-built etc., a nightmare to add new hardware to.
So in the long run building yourself is cheaper and if people say they can build cheaper than Dell I believe them.
Nonetheless the few times I tried listing some configuration comparable to some Dell computer, it was more expensive than the pre-built one.
I think the desktop is diminishing in importance however, the next-gen will be tablets / smart- / cloud- / netbooks and smartphones who are not configurable, just like most laptops, so configurable DIY-changeable computers might be a thing of the past for a short while.
So in the long run building yourself is cheaper and if people say they can build cheaper than Dell I believe them.
Nonetheless the few times I tried listing some configuration comparable to some Dell computer, it was more expensive than the pre-built one.
I think the desktop is diminishing in importance however, the next-gen will be tablets / smart- / cloud- / netbooks and smartphones who are not configurable, just like most laptops, so configurable DIY-changeable computers might be a thing of the past for a short while.
An Asus Eee Box PC, prebuilt, with Red Flag Linux, small enough to mount on the back of a monitor (bracket and screws included), all hardware addition via USB2.
Nothing in the warranty statement about binding the installed software to the hardware for return or service purposes.
For US$230 from NewEgg.
It now has Fedora 12, but I did make sure to exercise the hardware before wiping the HD.
Nothing in the warranty statement about binding the installed software to the hardware for return or service purposes.
For US$230 from NewEgg.
It now has Fedora 12, but I did make sure to exercise the hardware before wiping the HD.
Several years ago, I believe in the LXer forums, on just such a topic as this, I posed the question:
"What if, because of these software kickbacks, a Linux computer ends up costing only $5 less, or even MORE than with Windows?"
Well, now we know.
"What if, because of these software kickbacks, a Linux computer ends up costing only $5 less, or even MORE than with Windows?"
Well, now we know.
BR --
I remember those discussions well. I made the same point -- why do people assume a Linux system must be cheaper than a Windows box?
The cost of the system is the sum of the parts, and some of those Windows parts are negative, coming in the from of payments from software and service providers for the right to install their crapware.
I remember those discussions well. I made the same point -- why do people assume a Linux system must be cheaper than a Windows box?
The cost of the system is the sum of the parts, and some of those Windows parts are negative, coming in the from of payments from software and service providers for the right to install their crapware.
So.....
the net value of Windows is negative!
Kind of demolishes the anti-FOSS argument that "it can't be any good if it's free."
the net value of Windows is negative!
Kind of demolishes the anti-FOSS argument that "it can't be any good if it's free."
gus3 -
Wouldn't that be nice!
Unfotunately, it's also great support for the proposition that Windows offers superior ROI. It makes you money before you even use it.
Wouldn't that be nice!
Unfotunately, it's also great support for the proposition that Windows offers superior ROI. It makes you money before you even use it.
dino,
[I would not be saying such nasty truths if my checks were not bouncing. Shill now, shill forever, but you have got to pay.]
YBT
Quoting: It makes you money before you even use it.But it loses it at a frightful rate once you do.
[I would not be saying such nasty truths if my checks were not bouncing. Shill now, shill forever, but you have got to pay.]
YBT
Quoting:It makes you money before you even use it.Again, false. That's like buying mustard instead of caviar, and claiming you "made money" in the difference. Kind of like "baseline budgeting."
gus3 -
No, it isn't.
Buying mustard doesn't get you cheaper hot dogs. It seems that buying Windows gets you cheaper computers.
No, it isn't.
Buying mustard doesn't get you cheaper hot dogs. It seems that buying Windows gets you cheaper computers.
dino, it's the "making money" part. You don't "make money" by not spending it. You "make money" by adding value.
gus3 --
Hmmmmmmmmmmm. OK. I can buy that, even if it's a bit on the tomato/tomahto side of things.
Hmmmmmmmmmmm. OK. I can buy that, even if it's a bit on the tomato/tomahto side of things.
Dino, I wouldn't have said that Windows has negative value, just that Windows has a positive net value to the OEM.
The negative net-value is to the CUSTOMER, who has to be bribed with a lower cost into taking Windows.
Whereas, installing Linux doesn't gain Dell anything.
So what we need is some Linux gaming sites, like S2Games, to pay Dell to put demos of their games on Linux installs.
The negative net-value is to the CUSTOMER, who has to be bribed with a lower cost into taking Windows.
Whereas, installing Linux doesn't gain Dell anything.
So what we need is some Linux gaming sites, like S2Games, to pay Dell to put demos of their games on Linux installs.
Post a comment
A free account is needed to post. Write your comment here first: your text is kept in this browser while you sign up or log in, and is waiting for you when you come back.
Your message:Markdown: **bold**, *italic*, [text](https://link), - lists, > quotes, $x^2$ for math. Formatting help
Sign up and post (it is free) or Log in and post