- Site menu:
- Latest Discussions
- Latest Newswire
- Archives
- Submit Story
- Story HOWTO
- Syndicate
- E-mail Alerts
Re-thinking the Windows Refund
The Pricing ProblemTypically, computers sold without a copy of Microsoft Windows pre-installed cost more than those sold with Windows pre-installed. Obviously, it appears that the user who does not want Windows pre-installed is getting ripped off, since the operating system accounts for the lion's share of the cost of the whole computer. Since some kind of software is required to make the computer actually do anything, it would seem to follow logically that a computer with an operating system should be more valuable than a computer without an operating system. Some people get really bent out of shape over having to pay more for less. On the other hand, I would like to draw your attention to the real estate market. In my subdivision in Charlotte, North Carolina, we are allegedly sitting on a gold mine, vis a vis our property values. Our community is centrally located to 2 Interstates, the soon-to-arive outer beltway, two lakes, a brand spanking new mall, and one of the best darned barbecue joints in the state. Property values around us are going up - as are property taxes. Yet, because our community has experienced a high volume of distressed property sales, the values have actually gone down. My house is now worth less than what I paid for it. Consider Microsoft Windows in a similar light. It has the lion's share of the desktop market. It has a huge selection of applications that people can choose from. Yet, because of its historical instability, insecurity, and because it's practically impossible to fix without re-installing the whole OS, for which the vendor no longer includes any media, it has lost tremendous value. Indeed, one needs to deduct about 10% from the value just for the Windows Registry alone. I won't mention Internet Explorer. In fact, Windows has lost so much value, that computer manufacturers can actually dump Windows PCs on the marketplace cheaper than they can offer computers without any OS. The value of a PC With No OSComputers without an operating system actually have tremendous value. Consider that having Windows (or any OS) pre-installed robs you of control over how the system is installed and what packages to run. You lose the opportunity to optimize the system for your specific hardware. Until the next version of Windows comes out, it is still possible to accidentally connect to the Internet while logged in as an administrator, especially if you aren't the advanced user you think you are. Having Windows pre-installed also means a serious lack of initial choices in Internet applications. For example, you actually have to use Internet Explorer to download Firefox, since Microsoft does not include other browsers with their operating system. Being able to install the operating system yourself offers a number of advantages, including what operating system to install to begin with, as well as the packages that system will run. You can choose from a wide range of operating systems, including various GNU/Linux systems, the BSDs and even those old legacy systems. Most GNU/Linux systems don't even require a web browser (though it's usually helpful) to find new software to download. Users typically get to choose from a variety of office suites and other useful applications when installing the GNU/Linux or BSD system of their choice. Save Your MoneyInstead of fretting about getting a refund for a nice box with that legacy system that bogs down and crashes for no reason every other week, I would encourage users to save their money a little longer until they can afford the nicer boxes with no operating system, or that comes with a modern, robust system, such as GNU/Linux, already installed. After all, we sure don't want to encourage the folks at Microsoft to develop more shoddy software. It's kind of like buying a Yugo because it's cheap. It's cheap for a reason, and you get what you pay for. If you value your hardware, you'll choose an operating system that will help your hardware hold its value. If that means saving up a little extra money to get a PC without an operating system, then by all means, that is the way to go. It is frequently necessary to make short-term sacrifices for long-term gains. If you're willing to pass on cheap, you can install an operating system that will extend the life of your hardware almost indefinitely. I know. I've still got some old 450 MHz machines running the latest versions of Ubuntu and SUSE. Well, there you have it. You can either throw your money away on legacy, shoddy software, or you can save a little longer to get good hardware and install an operating system that will help you maintain the value for years to come. It's your choice. |
|
|
Comments (130)
GNU/Linux pre-installed
I like the closing comment:
'You can either throw your money away on legacy, shoddy software, or you can save a little longer to get good hardware and install an operating system that will help you maintain the value for years to come."
Purchasing good hardware makes a big difference no matter what operating system you put on the box. It hurts me to say anything that could be interpreted as even the tiniest bit kind towards microshaft, but the truth is a fair number of windoze problems are caused by poor-quality hardware. Because of the extreme Windows bias in most consumer-level PC hardware, Windows covers up for a lot of hardware flaws and keeps limping along, where Linux will say "oh get real, I'm not rowing this leaky boat" and go on strike. Whether this is desirable behavior is up to the end user; of course I prefer the Linux way, because it includes all kinds of tools to diagnose and repair problems. I would rather pay more up front on good hardware; it saves money over the long term.
'You can either throw your money away on legacy, shoddy software, or you can save a little longer to get good hardware and install an operating system that will help you maintain the value for years to come."
Purchasing good hardware makes a big difference no matter what operating system you put on the box. It hurts me to say anything that could be interpreted as even the tiniest bit kind towards microshaft, but the truth is a fair number of windoze problems are caused by poor-quality hardware. Because of the extreme Windows bias in most consumer-level PC hardware, Windows covers up for a lot of hardware flaws and keeps limping along, where Linux will say "oh get real, I'm not rowing this leaky boat" and go on strike. Whether this is desirable behavior is up to the end user; of course I prefer the Linux way, because it includes all kinds of tools to diagnose and repair problems. I would rather pay more up front on good hardware; it saves money over the long term.
We're lucky in Croatia. While we probably can buy brand name computers like Dell and deal with them just as others, there are some which offer machines with GNU/Linux preinstalled cheaper than the equivalents with WinXP preinstalled.
Here's an example by HGSpot (Croatian PC maker): http://www.hgspot.hr/office.aspx (the page is in croatian, but you can easily see configurations and compare the price, even though it's in Croatian Kuna ($1 = 5.7 Croatian Kunas)).
Here's an example by HGSpot (Croatian PC maker): http://www.hgspot.hr/office.aspx (the page is in croatian, but you can easily see configurations and compare the price, even though it's in Croatian Kuna ($1 = 5.7 Croatian Kunas)).
Take advantage of the windows refund
At the risk of raising many a nape hair I'll suggest that it might be best to take advantage of the windows "refund." Go ahead, buy the PC you really want with a Windows OS pre-installed at a really good price. Then when you bring that puppy home, fire it up the first time and go directly to the BIOS setup to boot from the CD/DVD drive to install [Insert your favorite distro here] Linux on the new machine. Just go ahead and wipe out the Windows OS completely before it even boots the first time. No more proprietary software. No more "Genuine Advantage." No more risky security.
I see it as kind of buying a "fixer-upper" and enhancing its value. It will surely make your neighbors happy because you can share your Free OS with them and enhance the value of their PC as well. It will also enhance the value of the new PC you just brought home. Think of it - actually having a piece of equipment appreciate as soon as you get it home! Just the opposite of driving a new car off the dealers lot.
I see it as kind of buying a "fixer-upper" and enhancing its value. It will surely make your neighbors happy because you can share your Free OS with them and enhance the value of their PC as well. It will also enhance the value of the new PC you just brought home. Think of it - actually having a piece of equipment appreciate as soon as you get it home! Just the opposite of driving a new car off the dealers lot.
The one little flaw in that scheme is your money still goes to Redmond. Or is part of this requesting a refund for your unused Windows?
>The one little flaw in that scheme is your money still goes to Redmond. Or is part of this requesting a refund for your unused Windows?
Actually, it doesn't matter if a refund is obtained. The same amount of money still goes to Redmond because major PC vendors must sign an agreement to pay for a copy of Windows for every PC they sell, regardless of whether it's installed or not. If they don't sign the agreement, they pay a much higher price for the copies of Windows that they do sell.
So, by getting the refund you punish the PC vendor, but not Macroshaft.
Actually, it doesn't matter if a refund is obtained. The same amount of money still goes to Redmond because major PC vendors must sign an agreement to pay for a copy of Windows for every PC they sell, regardless of whether it's installed or not. If they don't sign the agreement, they pay a much higher price for the copies of Windows that they do sell.
So, by getting the refund you punish the PC vendor, but not Macroshaft.
And it is the vendors who must be punished for their continued abuse of the marketplace. That's why I took Toshiba to court as part of Windows Refund Day II. Think of the progress that could be made if 1 person from every state filed an action against their vendor of choice on the same day. Not only would this overdue situation finally be brought to the 6pm news, it would establish a solid path toward a large scale class action.
Unfortunatley, most people seem to be quite content chearing on the sidelines instead of taking action. If we want this problem to be solved, it will take more than 1 person. In fact, with the number of people affected and who are therefore eligable to participate, I'd think this situation could be repaired in a very short time. This should be low hanging fruit.
Unfortunatley, most people seem to be quite content chearing on the sidelines instead of taking action. If we want this problem to be solved, it will take more than 1 person. In fact, with the number of people affected and who are therefore eligable to participate, I'd think this situation could be repaired in a very short time. This should be low hanging fruit.
My argument is focused on the end user. It will cost me less to purchase a Windows pre-loaded PC. But once I get the box home it is not compulsory for me to actually use the Macroshaft software. If it is the PC vendors who get shafted, so be it. That is the game they are playing with their eyes wide open - and perhaps their hands tied.
Ultimately, there would be fewer copies of other M$ applications in use that do not necessarily come bundled with the OS (i.e. Office). That is the stream of money going to Redmond that would dry up.
Forgive me folks but I don't see a lot of downside here ...
Ultimately, there would be fewer copies of other M$ applications in use that do not necessarily come bundled with the OS (i.e. Office). That is the stream of money going to Redmond that would dry up.
Forgive me folks but I don't see a lot of downside here ...
NoDough -
>major PC vendors must sign an agreement to pay for a copy of Windows for every PC they sell,
That's not right. It may have been the case before the antitrust verdict, but would constitute a violation of their court order now.
For that matter, such an arrangement, I believe, is illegal in the EU. Probably illegal elsewhere, too.
>major PC vendors must sign an agreement to pay for a copy of Windows for every PC they sell,
That's not right. It may have been the case before the antitrust verdict, but would constitute a violation of their court order now.
For that matter, such an arrangement, I believe, is illegal in the EU. Probably illegal elsewhere, too.
ExWindowsUser,
Your approach left alone justifies every move the vendors are making. The vendors define the rules of the market and justify them with your actions.
Your approach left alone justifies every move the vendors are making. The vendors define the rules of the market and justify them with your actions.
It's double punishment actually. IIRC vendors can't reveal how much Windows costs them, so they have to refund you the retail price :-)
>That's not right. It may have been the case before the antitrust verdict, but would constitute a violation of their court order now.
That's not my understanding. I'm no expert on this topic so I could be wrong, but my understanding is that MS can no longer refuse to sell licenses to a PC vendor based on the vendor's refusal to sign the agreement. This, however, does not prohibit MS from offering an agreement for $50/PC and charging $100/license for those who refuse.
Am I wrong?
That's not my understanding. I'm no expert on this topic so I could be wrong, but my understanding is that MS can no longer refuse to sell licenses to a PC vendor based on the vendor's refusal to sign the agreement. This, however, does not prohibit MS from offering an agreement for $50/PC and charging $100/license for those who refuse.
Am I wrong?
NoDough -
You are wrong. MS cannot require vendors to pay for Windows Licenses on non-Windows PCs.
BTW - Microsoft absolutely can refuse to sell licenses to a PC Vendor who refuses to sign the licensing agreement.
You are wrong. MS cannot require vendors to pay for Windows Licenses on non-Windows PCs.
BTW - Microsoft absolutely can refuse to sell licenses to a PC Vendor who refuses to sign the licensing agreement.
wind0wsr3fund:
The move that they are making is providing the market with less expensive hardware. Once I purchase the hardware, I own it. But I do not own the M$ OS pre-loaded on the HD. So asking for a refund on a discounted PC seems a bit cheeky to me.
The move that they are making is providing the market with less expensive hardware. Once I purchase the hardware, I own it. But I do not own the M$ OS pre-loaded on the HD. So asking for a refund on a discounted PC seems a bit cheeky to me.
ExWindowsUser,
I'm not going to pick apart your justification piece by piece. Instead, I'm going to remind you that every time you purchase a PC with Windows on it, you are adding to the problem and justifying every tactic that both Microsoft and the vendors use to control and exploit the market.
I'm not going to pick apart your justification piece by piece. Instead, I'm going to remind you that every time you purchase a PC with Windows on it, you are adding to the problem and justifying every tactic that both Microsoft and the vendors use to control and exploit the market.
OK - I realize I've confounded two different things. Thank you wind0wsr3fund for the hyperlink. I had not read that article before posting. I am NOT advocating asking for a monetary refund because I think it is just too cheeky. A nicely discounted PC is enough for me - and the bonus in loading my own OS is that I get EXACTLY what I want.
Isn't the real revenue stream that M$ is after based in application software and OS upgrades? Am I missing something?
Isn't the real revenue stream that M$ is after based in application software and OS upgrades? Am I missing something?
ExWindowsUser,
No one knows how much revenue is accounted for as a result of this initiative because the tied product is never represented as a line item. Ever Tom, Dick, and Harry has shared his opinion of how much these vendors actually pay M$ behind the scenes but those opinions are just that...... opinions. This issue has been the industry's little dirty secret for far too many years now. The sad part is that consumers have gotten quite comfy with the issue and appear to have no intention of doing anything to repair the marketplace. Too busy sharing their opinions to actually do anything...
Every once in awhile, someone comes out and writes an article (hmm... kind of like the one that inspired this thread) and 400 posts are contributed. Then the issue subsides for another year until the next article is written. The cycle contines and people just accept the situation as is....
Quite sad actually...
No one knows how much revenue is accounted for as a result of this initiative because the tied product is never represented as a line item. Ever Tom, Dick, and Harry has shared his opinion of how much these vendors actually pay M$ behind the scenes but those opinions are just that...... opinions. This issue has been the industry's little dirty secret for far too many years now. The sad part is that consumers have gotten quite comfy with the issue and appear to have no intention of doing anything to repair the marketplace. Too busy sharing their opinions to actually do anything...
Every once in awhile, someone comes out and writes an article (hmm... kind of like the one that inspired this thread) and 400 posts are contributed. Then the issue subsides for another year until the next article is written. The cycle contines and people just accept the situation as is....
Quite sad actually...
Quoting:the same amount of money still goes to Redmond because major PC vendors must sign an agreement to pay for a copy of Windows for every PC they sell, regardless of whether it's installed or not.
That doesn't seem to be true! I have a document from Acer about Acer's refund policy. The last step in their policy is to contact MS to get a refund from MS.
It is a pity my Gentoo system is broken to such a level I can't use it anymore, and therefore my scanner doesn't work, but if it works again, I will try to upload their policy.
That the marketplace is in need of repair is simply another opinion. The marketplace is what it is. Making the best of what is that we as consumers have to choose from is my point. I have no more inclination to do anything to repair the marketplace than I do in using M$ products. Today, though, I do have a Genuine Choice in replacing M$ with whatever I want that is Free.
I already know you don't agree with me, wind0wsr3fund, and that is OK. That's what these forums are for, to express our opinons, aren't they?
I already know you don't agree with me, wind0wsr3fund, and that is OK. That's what these forums are for, to express our opinons, aren't they?
hkwint,
Can you send me a copy of that Acer policy?
Can you send me a copy of that Acer policy?
Would like to - when Gentoo is fixed again.
Getting the "cost" of Windows repaid
My girlfriend recently bought a new Dell laptop. When it arrived, she turned it on and it showed her the EULA and asked if she agreed to the terms. We talked about it for a bit and decided, we did not agree. We wrote down the phone number listed on the screen, rebooted and installed GNU/Linux.
My girlfriend then called Dell and explained she did not agree to the terms of the Windows license and asked for her money back, specifically, what was paid for the license. I wasn't around when she called so I don't know how it went but she said it wasn't as bad as expected and she did get them to send a cheque. A few weeks later, she got a cheque in the mail for 50$ and that was that.
So to anyone getting a new laptop, I would recommend Dell. Get your money back since that's the clearest way to send a message to the vendor and to M$ that you don't agree to their terms. YMMV.
-- Dom
My girlfriend then called Dell and explained she did not agree to the terms of the Windows license and asked for her money back, specifically, what was paid for the license. I wasn't around when she called so I don't know how it went but she said it wasn't as bad as expected and she did get them to send a cheque. A few weeks later, she got a cheque in the mail for 50$ and that was that.
So to anyone getting a new laptop, I would recommend Dell. Get your money back since that's the clearest way to send a message to the vendor and to M$ that you don't agree to their terms. YMMV.
-- Dom
Hmm. Good call. Although I'm not a huge fan of Dell's hegemony on the market their product isn't horrible.
Holy crap..this is pretty cool. Just did it and it worked! The check is in the mail!
Hmm curious. Are either of you in the USA or another country. Last I knew many of the OEM's had modified their refund wording to basically say that the software and the PC were not seperable. Which agrees with MS's current stated view on OEM software licensed with a computer. In other words if you don't agree to the license return the whole PC.
What surprises me more is that by this way Dell reveals that XP costs them about $50 a pop, instead of the $199 or so that end users normally pay. IIRC it's against Dell's EOM license to reveal that. Someone sue them ;-)
Quoting:In other words if you don't agree to the license return the whole PC.
If that's the case, they'll have to provide that license in writing along with the OEM PC. I didn't receive that license. I checked it out and couldn't find any reference to the PC being inseparable from the OS. So Dell hasn't done it yet evidently.
Dominic,
First off, good job on following through. I'm happy to hear that you did not encounter the level of resistance I had to endure when dealing with Toshiba several years ago. However, I'll suggest that the $50 check was in fact, a standard "customer satisfaction" discount and did not actually represent a reimbursement for the unwanted Microsoft products that were bundled with your hardware.
Did your invoice include a line item for the Microsoft Products that showed what was charged?
Did the check include any language indicating that the refund amount was Microsoft-product specific?
Personally, I'd love to see some hard evidence of a Dell policy which allows customers to be refunded the cost of these tied products. If you have any evidence of such a policy, I'd love to publish it on windowsrefund.info so others can learn of it.
First off, good job on following through. I'm happy to hear that you did not encounter the level of resistance I had to endure when dealing with Toshiba several years ago. However, I'll suggest that the $50 check was in fact, a standard "customer satisfaction" discount and did not actually represent a reimbursement for the unwanted Microsoft products that were bundled with your hardware.
Did your invoice include a line item for the Microsoft Products that showed what was charged?
Did the check include any language indicating that the refund amount was Microsoft-product specific?
Personally, I'd love to see some hard evidence of a Dell policy which allows customers to be refunded the cost of these tied products. If you have any evidence of such a policy, I'd love to publish it on windowsrefund.info so others can learn of it.
FYI, I am in Canada.
No, neither the invoice nor the cheque itemized the cost of the MS Windows. Either way, it costs Dell 50$ on something they make little enough margin on so the message is clear. We're not satisfied with the product, we do not agree to the MS EULA.
No, neither the invoice nor the cheque itemized the cost of the MS Windows. Either way, it costs Dell 50$ on something they make little enough margin on so the message is clear. We're not satisfied with the product, we do not agree to the MS EULA.
dominic -
Will wonders never cease? W3f is actually right on this one.
If you're Dell, you have to decide whether or not it's worth your time and effort to offer Linux pre-installed. Any kind of volume business incurs a cost by offering different choices. Doesn't even have to be that high volume -- think of Southwest Airlines and their all 737 plane fleet.
If Dell can make money selling computers to Linux users without having to set up any kind of provision for supporting Linux -- not even having to change their web site product listings -- it might well be worth the $50 to them.
Will wonders never cease? W3f is actually right on this one.
If you're Dell, you have to decide whether or not it's worth your time and effort to offer Linux pre-installed. Any kind of volume business incurs a cost by offering different choices. Doesn't even have to be that high volume -- think of Southwest Airlines and their all 737 plane fleet.
If Dell can make money selling computers to Linux users without having to set up any kind of provision for supporting Linux -- not even having to change their web site product listings -- it might well be worth the $50 to them.
Well, I bought the cheapest Dell desktop I could get and got a discount because of an agreement with my employer, plus free shipping (that saved 100 bucks!). I asked them for a refund and no luck. Maybe it's because I'm in the US or maybe because my machine was so cheap but whatever. I just popped in an 80 gig drive and installed Slackware, then i got 512 Meg of Kingston ram after a rebate so it has 768 Meg in it, which makes it a pretty decent machine. I logged it as a support issue.
In my view, M$ owes me for oem pricing on XP Home and another machine I have which had XP Professional. I'm not holding my breath but afaic, the pirates are all up in Redmond.
In my view, M$ owes me for oem pricing on XP Home and another machine I have which had XP Professional. I'm not holding my breath but afaic, the pirates are all up in Redmond.
Did you ever have to make up your mind?
With apologies for those too young to recognize the Lovin' Spoonful reference...
At some point, you have to decide what's important to you.
Do you care about seeing Linux pre-installed on more computers?
If so, don't buy Windows boxes with the intention of installing Linux.
Put yourself in Michael Dell's shoes for a minute. Hey!! Ignore the nice leather and supple feel -- we've got serious things to discus...
If Linux users are going to buy your computers anyway, why would you bother to offer the option?
I can't think of a single reason.
If, however, offering Linux generates enough business to compensate for the cost of offering it (and yes -- it does cost money to offer more options), then you have a reason to do so.
PS --
I hear all of this "extra cost" BS. That may be true if you stay within Dell, but several vendors offer very inexpensive Linux PCs. You don't have to pay more to avoid Windows.
At some point, you have to decide what's important to you.
Do you care about seeing Linux pre-installed on more computers?
If so, don't buy Windows boxes with the intention of installing Linux.
Put yourself in Michael Dell's shoes for a minute. Hey!! Ignore the nice leather and supple feel -- we've got serious things to discus...
If Linux users are going to buy your computers anyway, why would you bother to offer the option?
I can't think of a single reason.
If, however, offering Linux generates enough business to compensate for the cost of offering it (and yes -- it does cost money to offer more options), then you have a reason to do so.
PS --
I hear all of this "extra cost" BS. That may be true if you stay within Dell, but several vendors offer very inexpensive Linux PCs. You don't have to pay more to avoid Windows.
Quoting:If Linux users are going to buy your computers anyway, why would you bother to offer the option?
That's why refunds work. It costs the vendor more than the License costs alone. But I fear that many, many more people will need to ask for refunds before they start taking notice of it.
Dean,
I was doing really well having my customers buy Microtel boxes for use as X terminals with Linux pre-installed from Amazon for $199. But then it just got to where I couldn't compete on price.
They started coming to me showing me how they could buy Dells with Windows cheaper.
How is that possible? Well, you have to look at the whole package.
The Microtels don't come with a monitor.
So the price really works out to $300+ up front if you go with a cheap CRT.
My customers find these specials at Dell where they can get a *nice* Pentium 4 with twice the memory, a much better warranty, and (drum roll please) a nice 15" flat panel with Dell's name on it for $399. (And the whole thing just looks *much* nicer.)
Granted, the memory and P4 don't really help on an X Terminal.
But the flat panel does. And I can't match that price with a flat panel with *anyone's* name on it. (And what if it is a standalone PC and not an X Terminal? The memory and P4 are very significant, then.)
I still convert them to my own custom installation of CentOS as X Terminals.
But a PC that comes with Windows is still a much better deal than anything I can offer with Linux or no OS pre-installed.
Chaps my hide, but it's true.
I was doing really well having my customers buy Microtel boxes for use as X terminals with Linux pre-installed from Amazon for $199. But then it just got to where I couldn't compete on price.
They started coming to me showing me how they could buy Dells with Windows cheaper.
How is that possible? Well, you have to look at the whole package.
The Microtels don't come with a monitor.
So the price really works out to $300+ up front if you go with a cheap CRT.
My customers find these specials at Dell where they can get a *nice* Pentium 4 with twice the memory, a much better warranty, and (drum roll please) a nice 15" flat panel with Dell's name on it for $399. (And the whole thing just looks *much* nicer.)
Granted, the memory and P4 don't really help on an X Terminal.
But the flat panel does. And I can't match that price with a flat panel with *anyone's* name on it. (And what if it is a standalone PC and not an X Terminal? The memory and P4 are very significant, then.)
I still convert them to my own custom installation of CentOS as X Terminals.
But a PC that comes with Windows is still a much better deal than anything I can offer with Linux or no OS pre-installed.
Chaps my hide, but it's true.
I'm very curious about the real financial shenanigans behind windows pricing. Like what kind of kickbacks is Dell getting to make windoze PCs such a good deal? Or is it just typical Microsoft strongarming that elevates the prices on non-Windows PCs?
Maybe hardware vendors throw some inducements into the pot as well, to get their cheap useless Win-poo parts in Dell systems. I would really like to see meaningful options, like starting out with hardware package A. One price. Add operating system, add cost. Upgrades, add whatever. Nice and clearcut, so you know exactly what you're paying for. As it is, Dell is playing a big ole deceitful shell game.
Maybe hardware vendors throw some inducements into the pot as well, to get their cheap useless Win-poo parts in Dell systems. I would really like to see meaningful options, like starting out with hardware package A. One price. Add operating system, add cost. Upgrades, add whatever. Nice and clearcut, so you know exactly what you're paying for. As it is, Dell is playing a big ole deceitful shell game.
I've never thought about it until today, but I have never purchased a PC for myself or my family with Windows pre-installed. All of our PCs have been custom-built by yours truly. :-)
Unfortunately, I cannot say the same for PCs purchased for my clients and/or employers.
Unfortunately, I cannot say the same for PCs purchased for my clients and/or employers.
Many of us build our barebones servers and desktops. This approach does not solve the problem since it is completely outside the means of Joe User and can not be applied to laptops. In addition, the many parts which compose the whitebox generic can not compete with the marketing dollars of providers pushing "all in one" solutions.
This "whitebox" response is a common mistake made by people who don't quite understand the true scope of the problem.
This "whitebox" response is a common mistake made by people who don't quite understand the true scope of the problem.
>This "whitebox" response is a common mistake
It is not remotely a mistake, and is not the only answer, as a number of vendors do sell Linux boxes.
It is a mistake to think you will change a Dell's mind without an economic club.
As to bargain basement Dell bundles --
Hey Steve!!! Sometime ya gotta do what ya gotta do. Everybody's heard of Dell, and you can't see the cut corners from the outside.
It is not remotely a mistake, and is not the only answer, as a number of vendors do sell Linux boxes.
It is a mistake to think you will change a Dell's mind without an economic club.
As to bargain basement Dell bundles --
Hey Steve!!! Sometime ya gotta do what ya gotta do. Everybody's heard of Dell, and you can't see the cut corners from the outside.
The Dell model makes money by including all sorts of stuff from third parties who pay Dell for the privilege. That will never work for Linux because everything is already freely available. There is no one who is going to pay Dell to include 3rd party software pre-configured with Linux. The Linux community would reject it anyway. To sell Linux with hardware, you have to charge enough to make money off the hardware alone. I don't think Dell can do that.
Quoting:Many of us build our barebones servers and desktops. This approach does not solve the problem since it is completely outside the means of Joe User and can not be applied to laptops.
1) I build by own kit for more reasons than just dodging the Windows tax. Pre-built PC's hardly ever come with the hardware that I'm looking for. Building myself is cheaper than a standard PC + the upgrades I'd need.
2) There are plenty of shops that will build to spec for Joe Average. The problem is that joe Average doesn't know what to choose if given a free hand.
3) You can build your own laptop (but it's a lot harder than building desktops)
Quoting:To sell Linux with hardware, you have to charge enough to make money off the hardware alone.
Commercial Linux vendors can. Linux vendor pays for installs and makes money off end-user support. Or HW vendor installs Linux for free and outsources all the OS support to the Linux vendor (lowerering the support costs for the HW vendor)
In support of tuxchick2's point, see http://lxer.com/module/newswire/view/65762/index.html
I've heard Dell described as an eclectic combination of the least expensive hardware that will survive the warranty period, just coasting on former reputation. I wouldn't know first-hand because I haven't purchased a new computer with an OS installed in many years.
When I need a computer, I pick out the components based on compatibility, quality, standards, price and vendor.
Compatibility: If it doesn't work with GNU/Linux, without some closed driver, it's pure scrap. Landfills don't need me buying new scrap.
Quality: A computer should be serviceable for at least 5 years. The most important part of a computer is *my* data; I don't want to risk a single byte of it due to skimping on hardware to pay for a logo or the MS tax.
Standards: Standardized components are replaceable. Custom components (see Compaq power supplies of some years ago) are a trap.
Price: It's a highly competitive market, but it is also cluttered with junk. The bottom of the barrel priced part might be the most expensive in the long run.
Vendor: If a vendor promotes Microsoft, they're eliminated from my list. No special offer overrides that. Promoting Microsoft is advocating the single biggest threat to computer users in the world. I consider an online vendor to be promoting Microsoft if I see any form of .asp in the address, any ASP* cookie is attempted, or even if Netcraft shows IIS or MS. I still find enough quality vendors to pick and choose my components. (This applies for all other purchases online, too. I've bought everything from a replacement seal for an air compressor to a carrier bearing for an old Volvo online without violating that policy).
I've heard Dell described as an eclectic combination of the least expensive hardware that will survive the warranty period, just coasting on former reputation. I wouldn't know first-hand because I haven't purchased a new computer with an OS installed in many years.
When I need a computer, I pick out the components based on compatibility, quality, standards, price and vendor.
Compatibility: If it doesn't work with GNU/Linux, without some closed driver, it's pure scrap. Landfills don't need me buying new scrap.
Quality: A computer should be serviceable for at least 5 years. The most important part of a computer is *my* data; I don't want to risk a single byte of it due to skimping on hardware to pay for a logo or the MS tax.
Standards: Standardized components are replaceable. Custom components (see Compaq power supplies of some years ago) are a trap.
Price: It's a highly competitive market, but it is also cluttered with junk. The bottom of the barrel priced part might be the most expensive in the long run.
Vendor: If a vendor promotes Microsoft, they're eliminated from my list. No special offer overrides that. Promoting Microsoft is advocating the single biggest threat to computer users in the world. I consider an online vendor to be promoting Microsoft if I see any form of .asp in the address, any ASP* cookie is attempted, or even if Netcraft shows IIS or MS. I still find enough quality vendors to pick and choose my components. (This applies for all other purchases online, too. I've bought everything from a replacement seal for an air compressor to a carrier bearing for an old Volvo online without violating that policy).
sbergman27:
> But a PC that comes with Windows is still a much better deal than anything I can offer with Linux or no OS pre-installed.
Don't forget to compare Dell's N series to their normal computers when pricing. They're available without Windows. You have to select at least small business and then open source desktops to get to them, so they're well hidden.
> But a PC that comes with Windows is still a much better deal than anything I can offer with Linux or no OS pre-installed.
Don't forget to compare Dell's N series to their normal computers when pricing. They're available without Windows. You have to select at least small business and then open source desktops to get to them, so they're well hidden.
>"Many of us build our barebones servers and desktops. This approach does not solve the problem since it is completely outside the means of Joe User and can not be applied to laptops."
'All my own work!' -- 9 y.o. builds her own Linux box. http://www.lesbell.com.au/FamilyWeb.nsf/3cf90a23430db5a98525...
'All my own work!' -- 9 y.o. builds her own Linux box. http://www.lesbell.com.au/FamilyWeb.nsf/3cf90a23430db5a98525...
sbergman27,
One thing you can offer that Dell cannot with Windows is multi-seat X. I have just ordered parts to make a thin client out of an AMD64. It has a gigabit/s interface. It has five PCI slots. I put in one AGP and five PCI video cards and I can make a six-seater. With Linux you can do this. I haven't heard of anyone doing it with Windows. If you make a thick client this way, it costs perhaps, $700 for a complete box but, averaged over six users, it is way less than $200 per seat. With the gigabit/s interface, you can really move video from a server.
As for monitors, last week prices of LCDs fell to Earth. So did the AMD64 this weekend. It is a great time to be buying hardware and putting Linux to work on it. The less expensive and more powerful the hardware, the more conspicuous the stuck price of Windows becomes.
One thing you can offer that Dell cannot with Windows is multi-seat X. I have just ordered parts to make a thin client out of an AMD64. It has a gigabit/s interface. It has five PCI slots. I put in one AGP and five PCI video cards and I can make a six-seater. With Linux you can do this. I haven't heard of anyone doing it with Windows. If you make a thick client this way, it costs perhaps, $700 for a complete box but, averaged over six users, it is way less than $200 per seat. With the gigabit/s interface, you can really move video from a server.
As for monitors, last week prices of LCDs fell to Earth. So did the AMD64 this weekend. It is a great time to be buying hardware and putting Linux to work on it. The less expensive and more powerful the hardware, the more conspicuous the stuck price of Windows becomes.
Waste of Time
If you don't want to use windows - install something else.
This "windows refund" rant is a complete waste of time.
The world is full of examples of buying stuff that comes bundled with things you have no choice over.
Try buying a car without a basic radio pre-installed. Try getting a sunroof without the "sports package".
Every purchase a laptop that has a game port - I don't play games on my laptop - so should I start a rant demanding that manufactures give me a refund for the unwanted and unused game port?
As to the refund - is your time really so worthless that you go thru all this for $50?
This "windows refund" rant is a complete waste of time.
The world is full of examples of buying stuff that comes bundled with things you have no choice over.
Try buying a car without a basic radio pre-installed. Try getting a sunroof without the "sports package".
Every purchase a laptop that has a game port - I don't play games on my laptop - so should I start a rant demanding that manufactures give me a refund for the unwanted and unused game port?
As to the refund - is your time really so worthless that you go thru all this for $50?
It is this very attitude that allows the vendors to get away with tying the sale of Windows with the sale of hardware. What a shame.
Game port manufacturers don't dominate the entire SOHO computing industry with their monopoly. If they did, I'd ask for refunds :-)
> This "windows refund" rant is a complete waste of time.
You must be referring to some other Windows Refund rant. *This* Windows Refund rant is basically saying you should choose computers without Windows, instead of buying PCs with Windows pre-installed. Please re-read the article.
You must be referring to some other Windows Refund rant. *This* Windows Refund rant is basically saying you should choose computers without Windows, instead of buying PCs with Windows pre-installed. Please re-read the article.
For those that want to actually DO something
22 earlier comments in the full thread.
> how many users in those 6% care about Refund's case
Not arguing. I personally think that does little or nothing to promote Linux.
Not arguing. I personally think that does little or nothing to promote Linux.
dinotrac:
The monopoly has some of its strongest tentacles into workplaces. I hope that's changing, but witnessed the problem up close at a local independent auto parts store. They had to keep 1 MS XP box because they couldn't get their "jobber" parts and pricing database on anything else. (As an independent, AutoZone was one of their competitors, so they couldn't get the data from there).
My last computer with MS on it was a used one I bought around 2000, I think. Both my son and my daughter have to deal with MS at their jobs, though. Thankfully neither has to have it at home.
The monopoly has some of its strongest tentacles into workplaces. I hope that's changing, but witnessed the problem up close at a local independent auto parts store. They had to keep 1 MS XP box because they couldn't get their "jobber" parts and pricing database on anything else. (As an independent, AutoZone was one of their competitors, so they couldn't get the data from there).
My last computer with MS on it was a used one I bought around 2000, I think. Both my son and my daughter have to deal with MS at their jobs, though. Thankfully neither has to have it at home.
lies, damned lies, and market share numbers :)
Keep in mind that the server and desktop markets are very different. winduhs is a minority shareholder on the server side, though unfortunately they are making gains. But the free nixes are making greater gains, both linux and the BSDs. All are feasting on the corpses of the old commercial Unixes.
On the desktop it gets seriously screwy. "Journalists" love to spout "windoze is on 95% of the world's computers." No, it isn't. It's not even on 95% of desktop PCs. Apple has long been reported as holding a 5% share of the desktop market, but we all know it's more than that, maybe 8-9% or more. I can't trot out any shiny studies, but I estimate that Linux/BSD hold 7-10% of the desktop market.
Somewhere in there are still a sizable gaggle of Unix workstations; some folks just won't give up their pizza boxes.
"Journalists" never bother to count, or even acknowledge the impact of millions of daily free downloads, or dual-boot/re-purposed winderz boxen. I know I'm not the only one here making a nice living from converting older PCs into nice file and printer servers, and sometimes even Linux desktops.
So non-windows platforms are a significant minority, and the continual "Linux is too small to matter " croaking is hooey.
But you already knew that.
Keep in mind that the server and desktop markets are very different. winduhs is a minority shareholder on the server side, though unfortunately they are making gains. But the free nixes are making greater gains, both linux and the BSDs. All are feasting on the corpses of the old commercial Unixes.
On the desktop it gets seriously screwy. "Journalists" love to spout "windoze is on 95% of the world's computers." No, it isn't. It's not even on 95% of desktop PCs. Apple has long been reported as holding a 5% share of the desktop market, but we all know it's more than that, maybe 8-9% or more. I can't trot out any shiny studies, but I estimate that Linux/BSD hold 7-10% of the desktop market.
Somewhere in there are still a sizable gaggle of Unix workstations; some folks just won't give up their pizza boxes.
"Journalists" never bother to count, or even acknowledge the impact of millions of daily free downloads, or dual-boot/re-purposed winderz boxen. I know I'm not the only one here making a nice living from converting older PCs into nice file and printer servers, and sometimes even Linux desktops.
So non-windows platforms are a significant minority, and the continual "Linux is too small to matter " croaking is hooey.
But you already knew that.
"Journalists" believe sales figures whispered in their little ears. All that's good for is determining where the money goes; it has nothing to do with what people use.
> it has nothing to do with what people use.
Exactly. All of the figures quoted are tied to sales, so, that 10% for desktops could well be twice that. The point is that we just don't know, and, I know of no way to track it accurately. I do know that when I started running Linux the word just got a blank stare, now, nearly everyone is running it, is considering trying it, or has at least heard of it. I'm guessing that's progress.
Exactly. All of the figures quoted are tied to sales, so, that 10% for desktops could well be twice that. The point is that we just don't know, and, I know of no way to track it accurately. I do know that when I started running Linux the word just got a blank stare, now, nearly everyone is running it, is considering trying it, or has at least heard of it. I'm guessing that's progress.
> I can't trot out any shiny studies, but I estimate that Linux/BSD hold 7-10% of the desktop market.
I actually agree with that assessment.
I actually agree with that assessment.
Maybe a better way to estimate GNU/Linux market share is to observe website statistics. I think most systems connected to the net transmit OS information along with the browser information and since most of everyone is connected these days the outcome may be closer to the truth.
In essence we could employ the same way that Firefox market share is measured.
For example, the market shares among visitors of one of my sites (Libervis.com) is:
Windows: 65.7% GNU/Linux: 17.6% Mac: 3.1%
For the other site (Nuxified.org) it's like this:
Windows: 70.7 % GNU/Linux: 17.8 % Mac: 4.8 %
The rest of the percentage falls on "unknown" so we could probably count it as "the rest".
At least these seem like more reasonable numbers, though I am not sure considering that most of visitors of these sites should be Free Software supporters, at least to an extent..
I think the overall GNU/Linux market share shouldn't be lower than 10% at this point...
In essence we could employ the same way that Firefox market share is measured.
For example, the market shares among visitors of one of my sites (Libervis.com) is:
Windows: 65.7% GNU/Linux: 17.6% Mac: 3.1%
For the other site (Nuxified.org) it's like this:
Windows: 70.7 % GNU/Linux: 17.8 % Mac: 4.8 %
The rest of the percentage falls on "unknown" so we could probably count it as "the rest".
At least these seem like more reasonable numbers, though I am not sure considering that most of visitors of these sites should be Free Software supporters, at least to an extent..
I think the overall GNU/Linux market share shouldn't be lower than 10% at this point...
I should clarify. I'm willing to go so far as to guestimate the number of GNU/Linux-only users at @ 5-7%, and the number of dual-booting users at more like 10-12%.
That still beats Macs. :)
Btw, the percentages I've posted above are only for July so far. The whole year 2006 results are a bit more positive towards GNU/Linux. I guess we've just started getting more "mainstream" traffic (probably due to netstumbler refferals).
It would be interesting to see what Google stats say. :)
Btw, the percentages I've posted above are only for July so far. The whole year 2006 results are a bit more positive towards GNU/Linux. I guess we've just started getting more "mainstream" traffic (probably due to netstumbler refferals).
It would be interesting to see what Google stats say. :)
I believe Apple was passed by GNU/Linux in the past year or two. In my school, for instance, in September there will be 150 Linux seats, 50 Linux/Windows dual boots, and 0 Apples, unless someone smuggles a laptop in. The school had 50 old machines running Windows last year and it made no sense to put a 7 year old OS, XP, on shiny new hardware. We could have only afforded 75 new machines with Windows for the money we are spending. I sometimes see cheap XP boxes for $500 but our thin clients boxes are costing an average of $175 per seat. We put our real money into servers that will actually do the work. We get efficiencies in several channels that way: no licence fees, no malware, fewer moving parts, less electrical power, fewer hard drives, less noise, etc.
Lots of wholesale migrations to Linux have been in the news. When was the last time you heard of mass migration to Apple? Of course, many institutions are locked into Windows. I fled one last year. They will stick with WIndows to the bitter end. When people encounter Linux in stores, in school, and in business, Linux will gain mindshare. Two years ago people politely turned away when I suggested they switch to Linux. This year, they are taking my advice.
Lots of wholesale migrations to Linux have been in the news. When was the last time you heard of mass migration to Apple? Of course, many institutions are locked into Windows. I fled one last year. They will stick with WIndows to the bitter end. When people encounter Linux in stores, in school, and in business, Linux will gain mindshare. Two years ago people politely turned away when I suggested they switch to Linux. This year, they are taking my advice.
You can also ignore the numbers and just look at what MS has been doing. The call for a truce, courting of open source, desperate battle to delay ODF uptake, MS in the online news about something every day, the stock buyback, the WGA fiasco, the stepping down of the emperor, executive blogging, and the advertising all indicate the walls of the monopoly are no longer sound. The prisoners are escaping and the wardens are getting frantic.
Excellent points everyone. Grouch, you nailed it- M$ is getting clobbered on several fronts, one of the biggest ones being their own paralysis. They're investing all kinds of money and energy into everything but delivering good products.
Interestingly though, their own paralysis seems like a natural development within a proprietary software system which is so much more about proprietarization than opennes. I think in the longest term proprietary software is showing to be self destructive. But then again, aren't all flawed systems ending up like that?
So sure, if nothing else, they'll crush themselves in time.
So sure, if nothing else, they'll crush themselves in time.
> Maybe a better way to estimate GNU/Linux market share is to observe website statistics
Yes, actually that could be entirely valid, but, only if the site is neutral... That is not MS, or Linux, or Mac, or BSD.
Yes, actually that could be entirely valid, but, only if the site is neutral... That is not MS, or Linux, or Mac, or BSD.
That's why we'd have to ask Google Jimf. :) They probably suck up most of webs traffic and are completely neutral.
Surely someone can put a number to the likely error in analyzing a very large number of sites. But what exactly would be analyzed?
Would could just use this site and declare linux the clear winner :)
I'm with you grouch, I DO SOMETHING..like write for a Linux news website, advocate the use of open source software to any and all I know.
Just tonight I put Open Office on my step-mothers computer. She and my Father just got a new laptop and were 'pissed' to use a word I can repeat to describe how they took the news that M$ Office would cost them another $500 to have on it, or as my Father said, "Just to type up a ****ing letter". I guess you had to be there. :-)
I said "I can put a program on there that will not cost $500 and it will do all the things that M$ Office can do and more". My Dad said "You want steaks or chicken?", I picked steaks. Duh!
What is really cool about it is, up to this point they both have not really taken me very seriously when talking about Linux and FOSS. They seemed to be a little more receptive than before.
Let the conversion begin..
Just tonight I put Open Office on my step-mothers computer. She and my Father just got a new laptop and were 'pissed' to use a word I can repeat to describe how they took the news that M$ Office would cost them another $500 to have on it, or as my Father said, "Just to type up a ****ing letter". I guess you had to be there. :-)
I said "I can put a program on there that will not cost $500 and it will do all the things that M$ Office can do and more". My Dad said "You want steaks or chicken?", I picked steaks. Duh!
What is really cool about it is, up to this point they both have not really taken me very seriously when talking about Linux and FOSS. They seemed to be a little more receptive than before.
Let the conversion begin..
> I guess you had to be there. :-)
Oh, we've been there ;-)
Honestly though, Desktop linux has become a no brainer as a replacement for MS.
Oh, we've been there ;-)
Honestly though, Desktop linux has become a no brainer as a replacement for MS.
> Would could just use this site and declare linux the clear winner
You mean it's not? ;-)
You mean it's not? ;-)
Wow, another article, another opinion
5 earlier comments in the full thread.
Writing articles and submitting forum posts do nothing to combat this issue. Building barebones desktops also does nothing. Stop complaining about the MS-Tax if you're not willing to do anything about it.
Hmmmmm.
If I understand w3f correctly, nobody does anything about the MS-Tax unless they buy Windows PCs....
Now THERE'S an interesting concept.
If I understand w3f correctly, nobody does anything about the MS-Tax unless they buy Windows PCs....
Now THERE'S an interesting concept.
dinotrac:
That hurts my head.
That hurts my head.
Well, I wasn't complaining about the MS tax - but mainly because I don't buy PCs with Windows pre-installed. Not that I buy PCs on a regular basis anyway, but I sure don't get 'em with Windows. My 2nd PC had a test Win98 installation simply so the local shop could demonstrate to me that all the hardware worked as advertised. I took the box home, blew it away, and installed a dual-boot config using a previously handed down copy of Win98 and Red Hat 5.1.
I also ordered my refurbished laptop with no OS - and in my case got about $80 knocked off the price (since they hadn't already installed it). :-) Yessirree! I actually haven't paid the MS tax since Windows 3.11. :-D
I also ordered my refurbished laptop with no OS - and in my case got about $80 knocked off the price (since they hadn't already installed it). :-) Yessirree! I actually haven't paid the MS tax since Windows 3.11. :-D
> Building barebones desktops also does nothing. Stop complaining about the MS-Tax if you're not willing to do anything about it.
Building barebones desktops does nothing about the Microsoft tax? Since the builder does not pay the tax, but still supports the manufacturers and suppliers of his/her choice, I fail to see how that's true. As for the second sentence, show me one post here where I've complained about the Microsoft tax. Since I do build my own systems, I have no reason to complain about it.
Building barebones desktops does nothing about the Microsoft tax? Since the builder does not pay the tax, but still supports the manufacturers and suppliers of his/her choice, I fail to see how that's true. As for the second sentence, show me one post here where I've complained about the Microsoft tax. Since I do build my own systems, I have no reason to complain about it.
Exactly what jdixon said :D
>Exactly what jdixon said :D
Ditto, and ditto again, the dinotrac said.
Ditto, and ditto again, the dinotrac said.
I could be really slimey and point out that nearly every product or service you buy has a bit of MS tax in it. Somewhere along the way, from producer to consumer, the cost of licenses, license audits, downtime, data corruption, ad infinitum, touched the cost of that product. I won't be slimey like that, though.
It seems to me that the best way to deal with the ms tax is to support the companies that don't charge you it. If more people would buy from these companies and not from the big ones, the big ones would get smaller and the small ones would get bigger. That's one of the great things about capitalism, the consumer has the power. If we can get enough people to value their freedom enough not to use windows and to buy linux or no OS pcs the market will change.
My wife didn't know about linux before I told her and now that she has seen what MS does, how they limit freedom, etc. and compared that to linux she will never go back and she talks to others about it as well. We are in a battle for freedom right now against companies and organizations like MS, the MPAA and the RIAA. Our major obstacle is not the power these companies are buying in governments its that most people seem oblivious to what is going on and not exercising their power, their dollars.
Buying computers from Dell, HP, Gateway, etc. and seeking for a refund on the software you don't want isn't going to help much because they are part of the problem, they are the ones not offering choice to their customers. If they see a drop in customers they will try to get those customers back. But if they are still selling the computers and then having to give a small refund to some they have no incentive to change their behavior. Which is what I do believe Don was trying to say in his article.
Mail in rebates are huge these days and the windows refund is nothing more than a mail in rebate it offers no incentive for the company to change their practices. We need to do what we can to get people to not buy computers from companies that do not offer linux or no OS systems, and let the companies know why we didn't buy from them, so they'll know how to get our business back. Buying a computer from them anyway and asking for a mail in rebate isn't going to help anything.
My wife didn't know about linux before I told her and now that she has seen what MS does, how they limit freedom, etc. and compared that to linux she will never go back and she talks to others about it as well. We are in a battle for freedom right now against companies and organizations like MS, the MPAA and the RIAA. Our major obstacle is not the power these companies are buying in governments its that most people seem oblivious to what is going on and not exercising their power, their dollars.
Buying computers from Dell, HP, Gateway, etc. and seeking for a refund on the software you don't want isn't going to help much because they are part of the problem, they are the ones not offering choice to their customers. If they see a drop in customers they will try to get those customers back. But if they are still selling the computers and then having to give a small refund to some they have no incentive to change their behavior. Which is what I do believe Don was trying to say in his article.
Mail in rebates are huge these days and the windows refund is nothing more than a mail in rebate it offers no incentive for the company to change their practices. We need to do what we can to get people to not buy computers from companies that do not offer linux or no OS systems, and let the companies know why we didn't buy from them, so they'll know how to get our business back. Buying a computer from them anyway and asking for a mail in rebate isn't going to help anything.
Grouch:
> I could be really slimey and point out that nearly every product or service you buy has a bit of MS tax in it.
The same type of thing can be said about organized crime, repressive goverments, various religions, and pretty much anything else under the sun anyone objects to. Things tend to be interconnected in the messy world we live in. You do the best you can, worry about affecting things you have some control over, and let the rest go. Doing otherwise tends to cause more problems then it solves.
> I could be really slimey and point out that nearly every product or service you buy has a bit of MS tax in it.
The same type of thing can be said about organized crime, repressive goverments, various religions, and pretty much anything else under the sun anyone objects to. Things tend to be interconnected in the messy world we live in. You do the best you can, worry about affecting things you have some control over, and let the rest go. Doing otherwise tends to cause more problems then it solves.
jdixon:
Rube Goldberg would've hated your attitude.
You just wait. As soon as I can get this stupid bowling ball to land with the 3 holes down so the rubber fake fingers tap out the 3-finger salute on the wireless keyboard transmitting to the cell phone tower across the river, you'll see those _legacy_ systems randomly rebooting all over the US. That should put a dent in the monopoly. I think the problem is with the hamster's appetite. He's just not enthusiastic enough when pulling the string.
Rube Goldberg would've hated your attitude.
You just wait. As soon as I can get this stupid bowling ball to land with the 3 holes down so the rubber fake fingers tap out the 3-finger salute on the wireless keyboard transmitting to the cell phone tower across the river, you'll see those _legacy_ systems randomly rebooting all over the US. That should put a dent in the monopoly. I think the problem is with the hamster's appetite. He's just not enthusiastic enough when pulling the string.
Why don't you unleash your snails?
> I think the problem is with the hamster's appetite. He's just not enthusiastic enough when pulling the string.
Easy solution grouch, replace the hamster with a squirrel... Works every time :) .
Easy solution grouch, replace the hamster with a squirrel... Works every time :) .
The snails have been busy since Saturday, hauling packages to upgrade one of my computers from Sarge to Etch. (They say it will only take 15 hours more, but they're pretty nonchalant about time).
Been waiting for DSL here for years. The telephone wires are the same, but the telephone company has changed from Contel to GTE to Verizon to Alltel to Windstream. The last improvement was made by Contel, long before there was a Web -- eliminating party lines and burying the cables so every little breeze or drizzle didn't disrupt service. Maybe if its successors-in-interest had paid less to get all those MS licenses and audits and viruses and IIS licenses and worms and downtime and data recovery and forced upgrades and spyware, one of them could have afforded to put a "remote office" within 18000 (line) feet of my telephone and a few hundred of my neighbors and I could join the 21st century with broadband.
Meanwhile, I'm devising a way to catch a squirrel to trigger a bowling ball...
Been waiting for DSL here for years. The telephone wires are the same, but the telephone company has changed from Contel to GTE to Verizon to Alltel to Windstream. The last improvement was made by Contel, long before there was a Web -- eliminating party lines and burying the cables so every little breeze or drizzle didn't disrupt service. Maybe if its successors-in-interest had paid less to get all those MS licenses and audits and viruses and IIS licenses and worms and downtime and data recovery and forced upgrades and spyware, one of them could have afforded to put a "remote office" within 18000 (line) feet of my telephone and a few hundred of my neighbors and I could join the 21st century with broadband.
Meanwhile, I'm devising a way to catch a squirrel to trigger a bowling ball...
My Pa, up in WV, had to resort to his cable provider. He was promised DSL some months ago - it just hasn't materialized. Anyway, he's 'up to speed' now. His racoons and skunks are much happier, now that they can spend less time helping him select the seeds for next years garden, and get back to raiding this year's crop. ;-)
He's better off with cable Don. I've been on cable broadband since they put it in here in Kenosha in 98, It's dead reliable and faster than almost anything else. If they offer the VOP phone option, he should take them up on that too.
grouch,
I know exactly how you feel. Neither cable nor DSL is available at my home. Drives me knuts. I asked one of the phone guys about it when he was in the neighborhood, and he said I'm 20miles from the nearest switch. Don't see things changing anytime soon.
I know exactly how you feel. Neither cable nor DSL is available at my home. Drives me knuts. I asked one of the phone guys about it when he was in the neighborhood, and he said I'm 20miles from the nearest switch. Don't see things changing anytime soon.
> Neither cable nor DSL is available at my home.
While it's a poor alternative to either cable or DSL, Internet via satellite is a viable option if neither of those is available. It's more expensive than either cable and DSL, and many of the providers limit your bandwith to the point you can really only use it for browsing the web, but it does work.
The best of the lot seems to be Wild Blue. http://www.wildblue.com/
While it's a poor alternative to either cable or DSL, Internet via satellite is a viable option if neither of those is available. It's more expensive than either cable and DSL, and many of the providers limit your bandwith to the point you can really only use it for browsing the web, but it does work.
The best of the lot seems to be Wild Blue. http://www.wildblue.com/
>The best of the lot seems to be Wild Blue.
Yeah, my electric coop offers WildBlue, but it ain't cheap!
The problem with Internet over satellite is, even with high bandwidth, the latency eliminates opportunities to use VPNs, VOIP, and other near-real-time applications.
I keep thinking about starting up a WiMax mesh to bring broadband to us hillbillies, but I have neither the time nor the money to undertake a start-up business right now.
Yeah, my electric coop offers WildBlue, but it ain't cheap!
The problem with Internet over satellite is, even with high bandwidth, the latency eliminates opportunities to use VPNs, VOIP, and other near-real-time applications.
I keep thinking about starting up a WiMax mesh to bring broadband to us hillbillies, but I have neither the time nor the money to undertake a start-up business right now.
> The problem with Internet over satellite is, even with high bandwidth, the latency eliminates opportunities to use VPNs, VOIP, and other near-real-time applications.
Yep. The latency completely shoots those type of applications. As noted, it's really only useful for browsing the web and (if your provider doesn't hit you with a bandwith limit) downloading. Fortunately, that's what most people want to do.
Yep. The latency completely shoots those type of applications. As noted, it's really only useful for browsing the web and (if your provider doesn't hit you with a bandwith limit) downloading. Fortunately, that's what most people want to do.
Windows already saves Linux users money
The value in a new PC sale is NOT reflected in the price you pay. When you buy a new computer with Windows installed, you also get many other software packages and offers included by the hardware vendor. Each of those companies paid the hardware vendor for the opportunity to be included with that new computer. This increases the revenue of the hardware vendor. With these cross-marketing programs, the hardware vendor can even sell their computers to you at a loss (on the hardware portion) and still make lots of profit.
When you wipe all that stuff out and install Linux, you get the benefit of the discount, without having to use Windows and all the rest.
The actual cost of a PC with no OS and bundled marketing would be a lot higher. Therefore, I say: "Thank you, Microsoft, Dell, AOL, and all the rest, for subsidizing my new Linux computer!"
When you wipe all that stuff out and install Linux, you get the benefit of the discount, without having to use Windows and all the rest.
The actual cost of a PC with no OS and bundled marketing would be a lot higher. Therefore, I say: "Thank you, Microsoft, Dell, AOL, and all the rest, for subsidizing my new Linux computer!"
Well there's an interesting point.
jkouyoumjian, one up for you. Excellent observation.
I'd love to find out how much each sale is worth in "extras". Perhaps there is an artilce out there indexed in Google. It would be really interesting.
My observation has been that most companies that play games with 'extras' also play games with the hardware quality, essentially low-balling everything. Most times you really do get what you pay for.
My advise is to build, or at least spec everything. If that isn't possible, then go to one of the outfits that will supply either a computer with Linux installed, or a no-OS one. At least you know that Linux will probably run on it.
My advise is to build, or at least spec everything. If that isn't possible, then go to one of the outfits that will supply either a computer with Linux installed, or a no-OS one. At least you know that Linux will probably run on it.
I'm with jimf on this. I'd rather *know* what motherboard, case, power supply, RAM, drives, monitor, mouse, keyboard, etc. that I'm getting.
jimf and grouch ----
YES SIR AND BOY HOWDY!!!
I have found that the real savings in building my own machine doesn't come with the first machine so much as the iterations I am able to achieve through a rather long life cycle that may include additions and upgrades.
Of course, I have saved money, too. For example, back when I put my Athlon 64 together, I was able to choose components that most sellers wouldn't match up...fast cpu, fast memory, fast and large but not huge disk, so-so graphics (but decently fast 2d) and carry forward my old sound card.
Why? For video editing, which requires lots of cpu performance, good disk, plenty of memory, but is actually very easy on the graphics card.
YES SIR AND BOY HOWDY!!!
I have found that the real savings in building my own machine doesn't come with the first machine so much as the iterations I am able to achieve through a rather long life cycle that may include additions and upgrades.
Of course, I have saved money, too. For example, back when I put my Athlon 64 together, I was able to choose components that most sellers wouldn't match up...fast cpu, fast memory, fast and large but not huge disk, so-so graphics (but decently fast 2d) and carry forward my old sound card.
Why? For video editing, which requires lots of cpu performance, good disk, plenty of memory, but is actually very easy on the graphics card.
> Why? For video editing, which requires lots of cpu performance, good disk, plenty of memory, but is actually very easy on the graphics card.
Suprisingly, it's the same for still graphics. most of the time I don't even bother to compile the ATI drivers for my 8500.. a lot of card memory means that only open gl doesn't work well... Big loss ;-)
Suprisingly, it's the same for still graphics. most of the time I don't even bother to compile the ATI drivers for my 8500.. a lot of card memory means that only open gl doesn't work well... Big loss ;-)
jimf,
you make an interesting point.
Yesterday LXER linked to an article on El Reg (http://lxer.com/module/newswire/ext_link.php?rid=65762)
The article explored how Google saves money by building their own servers. The conventional wisdom says to buy from the big, just in time server OEM's. Someone like Dell. These big guys can use economies of scale to produce the servers for less than Google can, and Google will save.
If you translate that conventional wisdom into English, You realize that the 'economies of scale' thing just means that Dell can spend the time to look for the cheapest parts, in order to underprice all of their competitors. So the benefit to Google is supposed to be cheaper costs.
This may lower Google's cost for purchasing servers, but not for maintaining them. Google has found that building their own servers with better quality components lowers their cost of operations.
For instance, using better but costlier power supplies increases up time and lowers Google's air conditioning bill. They actually end up saving more by buying costlier servers and bucking the conventional wisdom.
This is probably why Google implemented Linux back when they did.
However, for the individual buyer, using the discounts applied to a machine may make the purchase of a laptop or higher end machine possible. Even though the components would be better if they spent a little more.
you make an interesting point.
Yesterday LXER linked to an article on El Reg (http://lxer.com/module/newswire/ext_link.php?rid=65762)
The article explored how Google saves money by building their own servers. The conventional wisdom says to buy from the big, just in time server OEM's. Someone like Dell. These big guys can use economies of scale to produce the servers for less than Google can, and Google will save.
If you translate that conventional wisdom into English, You realize that the 'economies of scale' thing just means that Dell can spend the time to look for the cheapest parts, in order to underprice all of their competitors. So the benefit to Google is supposed to be cheaper costs.
This may lower Google's cost for purchasing servers, but not for maintaining them. Google has found that building their own servers with better quality components lowers their cost of operations.
For instance, using better but costlier power supplies increases up time and lowers Google's air conditioning bill. They actually end up saving more by buying costlier servers and bucking the conventional wisdom.
This is probably why Google implemented Linux back when they did.
However, for the individual buyer, using the discounts applied to a machine may make the purchase of a laptop or higher end machine possible. Even though the components would be better if they spent a little more.
Introducing the New! Improved! DuAwl Surreal Stereo system! Now with 7 convenient cupholders actually molded into the top of the luxurious, walnut-grain vinyl cabinet! You and your friends can now keep track of your drinks while jamming to the tunes from AM, FM, Cassette and 8-track! All of these come built-in and ready to play! The big power of the INCLUDED 4 inch woofers keep you rocking all night long! Act now and get 14 music tapes FREE!
I think I'll stick to picking my own parts.
I think I'll stick to picking my own parts.
does not work for everyone
you raise some good points there.
unfortunately, not everyone can follow them.
trying to find a 9" subnotebook with a decent keyboard was hard enough. but once i had managed to find a few acceptable models (after throwing out more than a dozen unacceptable ones) there was not one left which would come without windows.
so what could i do, other than gulp, refuse the eula and install linux as soon as i had the machine in my hands?
greetings, martin.
trying to find a 9" subnotebook with a decent keyboard was hard enough. but once i had managed to find a few acceptable models (after throwing out more than a dozen unacceptable ones) there was not one left which would come without windows.
so what could i do, other than gulp, refuse the eula and install linux as soon as i had the machine in my hands?
greetings, martin.
Martin -
Sometimes, you're just stuck.
Some here might not agree, but, in those times, you do what you have to do.
I actually have a notebook running XP Pro because my wife needed to run some Windows software for her job.
Sigh.
The shower helped, but not enough.
Sometimes, you're just stuck.
Some here might not agree, but, in those times, you do what you have to do.
I actually have a notebook running XP Pro because my wife needed to run some Windows software for her job.
Sigh.
The shower helped, but not enough.
I am actually posting this from Windows XP, because I am REQUIRED to run it for my work. But when I'm not at work, this puppy runs Ubuntu.
I hear wonderful things about irradiation as a disinfectant. Probably wouldn't reach from your house to the employer's, though.
OT and BTW, the recent WGA fiasco really illustrates that the moniker 'eXtortion Protection' is fitting. (I need more acronyms).
OT and BTW, the recent WGA fiasco really illustrates that the moniker 'eXtortion Protection' is fitting. (I need more acronyms).
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
As Don pointed out:
"Consider Microsoft Windows in a similar light. It has the lion's share of the desktop market. It has a huge selection of applications that people can choose from. Yet, because of its historical instability, insecurity, and because it's practically impossible to fix without re-installing the whole OS, for which the vendor no longer includes any media, it has lost tremendous value."
Don't buy property in that computer slum; MS has ruined the neighborhood and depressed the property values. (If all the hidden costs were properly calculated, MS should have to pay quite a bit to each computer owner to get that stuff pre-installed. See also http://lxer.com/module/newswire/view/65771/index.html and http://lxer.com/module/newswire/view/65762/index.html ).