- Site menu:
- Latest Discussions
- Latest Newswire
- Archives
- Submit Story
- Story HOWTO
- Syndicate
- E-mail Alerts
Dell gives desktop Linux its "full attention"
|
|
|
Comments (28)
8 earlier comments in the full thread.
>Michael Dell is a big fat poopy-faced fibber who is trying to have it all without actually delivering anything of substance.
Can't argue with you there. It's also possible that, in his backroom calculations, he's wrong about what's best for Dell.
I, knowing nothing of their costs, etc, have no clue.
But then, as noted, I don't buy Dell, so it doesn't much matter to me.
Can't argue with you there. It's also possible that, in his backroom calculations, he's wrong about what's best for Dell.
I, knowing nothing of their costs, etc, have no clue.
But then, as noted, I don't buy Dell, so it doesn't much matter to me.
> Yes, folks do just what you say: buy doze and install Linux.
That's true, but guys like me buy HP/Compaq computers also and install Linux. All else equal, I'd stop buying HP/Compaq and buy Dell. I'm putting off a laptop purchase to see what they'll do. If I had the option to buy any Dell computer with a $50 discount for the no-OS option, they'd get a lot of my money and I guess the money of a lot of other Linux users.
One other thing to consider is what percentage of hardware sales go to Linux users. I know the share of Linux desktops in use is somewhere between 0.5% and 5%, but I would also guess that the average Linux user buys more hardware than the average Windows user (for one reason, because they spend less on software). If Dell could become "the" Linux hardware company, there might be a significant advantage.
That's true, but guys like me buy HP/Compaq computers also and install Linux. All else equal, I'd stop buying HP/Compaq and buy Dell. I'm putting off a laptop purchase to see what they'll do. If I had the option to buy any Dell computer with a $50 discount for the no-OS option, they'd get a lot of my money and I guess the money of a lot of other Linux users.
One other thing to consider is what percentage of hardware sales go to Linux users. I know the share of Linux desktops in use is somewhere between 0.5% and 5%, but I would also guess that the average Linux user buys more hardware than the average Windows user (for one reason, because they spend less on software). If Dell could become "the" Linux hardware company, there might be a significant advantage.
> a big fat poopy-faced fibber who is trying to have it all without actually delivering anything of substance.
Sounds like a typical CEO, or any politician, or elected Government official, or any Lawyer (excluding dino?), or any car salesman, or.... sigh....
Sounds like a typical CEO, or any politician, or elected Government official, or any Lawyer (excluding dino?), or any car salesman, or.... sigh....
> ...but I would also guess that the average Linux user buys more hardware than the average Windows user...
I'm not sure that's true. More hardware probably, but that doesn't necessarily translate to more money spent. Many Linux users are "value shoppers", who demand fair value for their dollar.
Which to some folks is just another way of saying cheap. :)
I'm not sure that's true. More hardware probably, but that doesn't necessarily translate to more money spent. Many Linux users are "value shoppers", who demand fair value for their dollar.
Which to some folks is just another way of saying cheap. :)
> cheap. :)
Hey, I resemble that! :D
I'd say that the more experienced Linux user is likely to do a lot more research and comparison (for any consumer product) than the average consumer. We have a dislike of being ripped off. Perhaps a result of our experience with MS.
Hey, I resemble that! :D
I'd say that the more experienced Linux user is likely to do a lot more research and comparison (for any consumer product) than the average consumer. We have a dislike of being ripped off. Perhaps a result of our experience with MS.
dino, I think you and I view these sorts of stories from opposite perspectives. You seem to think that businesspeople are smart and generally try to do what's best, whatever they think that may be. I've found most of them are not that smart, have blind spots as large as their egos, and make lots of mistakes. Lying is a bad thing, especially when it's stupid and unnecessary. Either sell Linux or don't sell Linux- it's that easy. Dell has a long history of playing games with Linux users. No one with a memory of their past shenanigans is going to believe them now, and raising up a new generation of Linux users who don't trust Dell isn't very smart.
>You seem to think that businesspeople are smart and generally try to do what's best, whatever they think that may be
As to intelligence, that's all over the map. I have, however, been blessed to know some very smart folks. I do think that most try to do what they think makes sense (duh! Don't we all).
However, I also remember working for a company that decided porting its Unix product to Windows NT via porting libraries made sense, and wouldn't even do a linux port that consisted of little more than new make files and some QA because much of the development had actually been done on Linux.
They went bankrupt. Their major competitor, however, brought out a Linux product.
As to intelligence, that's all over the map. I have, however, been blessed to know some very smart folks. I do think that most try to do what they think makes sense (duh! Don't we all).
However, I also remember working for a company that decided porting its Unix product to Windows NT via porting libraries made sense, and wouldn't even do a linux port that consisted of little more than new make files and some QA because much of the development had actually been done on Linux.
They went bankrupt. Their major competitor, however, brought out a Linux product.
> If he sees it making business sense, Dell will pursue Linux desktops.
'business sense' is different than 'sense'.
E.g., Dell refuses to sell AMD systems despite demand, leading to customer bleed. That doesn't make 'sense'. However, they do this because it makes 'business sense' to get paid off by Intel to not support their rival.
I'd rather he have 'sense' as it's better for the consumer.
'business sense' is different than 'sense'.
E.g., Dell refuses to sell AMD systems despite demand, leading to customer bleed. That doesn't make 'sense'. However, they do this because it makes 'business sense' to get paid off by Intel to not support their rival.
I'd rather he have 'sense' as it's better for the consumer.
Quoting:I trust Mr. Dell about as far as I can throw a Hummer2 (hint: not at all.)
Wuss. I can throw a Hummer2 around 6 meters if I ate my Wheaties for breakfast. ;p
Quoting:Wuss. I can throw a Hummer2 around 6 meters if I ate my Wheaties for breakfast. ;p
Hey, I can toss the MatchBox one that far too! ;)
>However, they do this because it makes 'business sense' to get paid off by Intel to not support their rival.
Hmmm. Sounds like somebody has a one track mind. I guess nobody does business with anybody unless they're being paid off. Hey!! Does that mean that AMD has finally started paying Dell off? Must be. Why else would Dell start using AMD processors?
I'll bet that's the reason Southwest Airlines uses nothing but Boeing 737s in their fleet. Must be. Boeing's paying them off! All that crap about operational efficiency -- fewer spare parts to inventory, less training for mechanics and flight crews, ability to put any mechanic/pilot on any plane/flight, etc is just a bunch of bunk.
Yup. There's never any reason to do anything in business unless somebody is paying you off.
Hmmm. Sounds like somebody has a one track mind. I guess nobody does business with anybody unless they're being paid off. Hey!! Does that mean that AMD has finally started paying Dell off? Must be. Why else would Dell start using AMD processors?
I'll bet that's the reason Southwest Airlines uses nothing but Boeing 737s in their fleet. Must be. Boeing's paying them off! All that crap about operational efficiency -- fewer spare parts to inventory, less training for mechanics and flight crews, ability to put any mechanic/pilot on any plane/flight, etc is just a bunch of bunk.
Yup. There's never any reason to do anything in business unless somebody is paying you off.
> Why else would Dell start using AMD processors?
Because they bought out Alienware, who had previously been getting paid off by AMD to counter Intel paying off Dell. Dell still won't sell you AMD systems outside of their Alienware branch, which should be a clue if you still need one.
Because they bought out Alienware, who had previously been getting paid off by AMD to counter Intel paying off Dell. Dell still won't sell you AMD systems outside of their Alienware branch, which should be a clue if you still need one.
> Dell still won't sell you AMD systems outside of their Alienware branch, which should be a clue if you still need one.
Sigh. Please folks, get your facts straight when you're criticizing someone. Otherwise you make yourself and us look like idiots. Dell does indeed offer AMD systems. See:
http://configure.us.dell.com/dellstore/config.aspx?c=us&cs=1... http://configure.us.dell.com/dellstore/config.aspx?c=us&cs=1... http://www.dell.com/content/products/productdetails.aspx/opt...
for all the gory details.
Sigh. Please folks, get your facts straight when you're criticizing someone. Otherwise you make yourself and us look like idiots. Dell does indeed offer AMD systems. See:
http://configure.us.dell.com/dellstore/config.aspx?c=us&cs=1... http://configure.us.dell.com/dellstore/config.aspx?c=us&cs=1... http://www.dell.com/content/products/productdetails.aspx/opt...
for all the gory details.
Dell, the company, has gone "all out" in it's AMD line since the AlienWare announcement.
Thank you jdixon, for setting the record straight.
Here are some thoughts for the community to chew on:
Dell has had a strategy of setting suppliers competitively against each other to get the best price on parts. One easy example is Broadcom vs Intel for network chips.
My question, prior to the AMD announcement, was, "Why not do this for CPU's?"
Now they do. After nearly 2 decades of Intel-only sales.
There are many many components that can and are leveraged against their suppliers to get the best price: Power supplies come to mind as one that is unattractive to the media, but affect bottom line cost in a quantifiable fashion.
But the final question on this point is, "If the dual-supplier strategy is so profitable, and drives end-customer prices down (which it does), why is the component at the highest profile, the OS, not leveraged in such fashion?"
Next, tuxchick stated, in inimitable fashion:
>"It's the unnecessary lying that turns me off."
This is a big, obvious complaint, that Dell is regularly taken to task for and should be.
However, like all large companies, Dell contains segments that will contradict each other, and even connive against each other. Only strong leadership from the top can prevent this inefficiency, and settle these internal disagreements in a consistent fashion.
Sun is another company that has been taken to task in our community for this ambiguity of vision, strategy, and execution. Sometimes I think that the whole personal computer industry needs a Wikipedia disambiguation page.
Oh, one last thing, tuxchick, the proper term is not "towel boy," use "lapdog" instead.
(Disclaimer for anyone who does not already know: I was employed by Dell from 2000-2005, have no relevant inside knowledge, and only speak for myself.)
Thank you jdixon, for setting the record straight.
Here are some thoughts for the community to chew on:
Dell has had a strategy of setting suppliers competitively against each other to get the best price on parts. One easy example is Broadcom vs Intel for network chips.
My question, prior to the AMD announcement, was, "Why not do this for CPU's?"
Now they do. After nearly 2 decades of Intel-only sales.
There are many many components that can and are leveraged against their suppliers to get the best price: Power supplies come to mind as one that is unattractive to the media, but affect bottom line cost in a quantifiable fashion.
But the final question on this point is, "If the dual-supplier strategy is so profitable, and drives end-customer prices down (which it does), why is the component at the highest profile, the OS, not leveraged in such fashion?"
Next, tuxchick stated, in inimitable fashion:
>"It's the unnecessary lying that turns me off."
This is a big, obvious complaint, that Dell is regularly taken to task for and should be.
However, like all large companies, Dell contains segments that will contradict each other, and even connive against each other. Only strong leadership from the top can prevent this inefficiency, and settle these internal disagreements in a consistent fashion.
Sun is another company that has been taken to task in our community for this ambiguity of vision, strategy, and execution. Sometimes I think that the whole personal computer industry needs a Wikipedia disambiguation page.
Oh, one last thing, tuxchick, the proper term is not "towel boy," use "lapdog" instead.
(Disclaimer for anyone who does not already know: I was employed by Dell from 2000-2005, have no relevant inside knowledge, and only speak for myself.)
Which to some folks is just another way of saying cheap. :)...
I not only resemble that remark, I...uh, well I guess I do just resemble that remark. Not going one-up on Jim on this one.
Look, alot of you donate to the buckamonth program and the lions share of the donations for the next two months are going to fill backorders for Komputers4Kids projects. I can, for the sum of around $550.00 US, build a computer equivelent to a machine Dell sells for $2200.00 (of course monitor not included...we purchase the el cheapo Insignia 17 inchers for 99 bucks.)
Not only are Dells WAY overpriced...they have hacked the bios to insure the only chip and power supply you can replace is the one they sell you. AND, if thats not bad enough, they micro-etch many of the snap-in surfaces so memory and other perephrial parts "don't quite fit."
On the other hand...there is just way too much "evidence" that LInux is in demand. I for one don't doubt Mikey will start selling Linux Machines. I do wish I could intercept the emails between him and ballmer/gates when this is being discussed. Dell can now say:
Look at this...these are customer DEMANDS...and you expect me as the CEO of Dell to ignore them because you tell me to? Screw you, I'll see you in court if you push it or raise my OEM per seat charge."
h
I not only resemble that remark, I...uh, well I guess I do just resemble that remark. Not going one-up on Jim on this one.
Look, alot of you donate to the buckamonth program and the lions share of the donations for the next two months are going to fill backorders for Komputers4Kids projects. I can, for the sum of around $550.00 US, build a computer equivelent to a machine Dell sells for $2200.00 (of course monitor not included...we purchase the el cheapo Insignia 17 inchers for 99 bucks.)
Not only are Dells WAY overpriced...they have hacked the bios to insure the only chip and power supply you can replace is the one they sell you. AND, if thats not bad enough, they micro-etch many of the snap-in surfaces so memory and other perephrial parts "don't quite fit."
On the other hand...there is just way too much "evidence" that LInux is in demand. I for one don't doubt Mikey will start selling Linux Machines. I do wish I could intercept the emails between him and ballmer/gates when this is being discussed. Dell can now say:
Look at this...these are customer DEMANDS...and you expect me as the CEO of Dell to ignore them because you tell me to? Screw you, I'll see you in court if you push it or raise my OEM per seat charge."
h
> Dell still won't sell you AMD systems outside of their Alienware branch, which should be a clue if you still need one.
>>
>> Sigh. Please folks, get your facts straight when you're criticizing someone. Otherwise you make yourself and us look like idiots. Dell does indeed offer AMD systems.
Ah, I'd not heard they changed their policy recently and when I checked before posting, the types of systems I buy from them, the XPS line for desktops and 1950/2950 rack servers, still had no AMD options. My bad.
Ah, I'd not heard they changed their policy recently and when I checked before posting, the types of systems I buy from them, the XPS line for desktops and 1950/2950 rack servers, still had no AMD options. My bad.
bought an e521-n for 409 USD w/ free shipping (no monitor). I'd say that's a good price for 1GB RAM w/ AMD X2. Gentoo is currently humming away on it :)
>1950/2950 rack servers, still had no AMD options.
That I know of, AMD systems at Dell will always have different model numbers; since a non-Intel motherboard is required, it is inherently a different system.
Current offerings at dell.com are the PowerEdge SC1435 and the PowerEdge 6950.
While neither system you mentioned compares to the 6950, there are some cases, including cluster nodes, where the SC1435 may compare well to the 1950.
The 2 biggest downsides to SC1435 that I see are 1) Limited storage/no hot swap/no SAS, and 2) IPMI/BMC not implemented or braindead compared to non-SC PowerEdge.
Of course it is not hard to predict other AMD PowerEdge models will be available in the future.
That I know of, AMD systems at Dell will always have different model numbers; since a non-Intel motherboard is required, it is inherently a different system.
Current offerings at dell.com are the PowerEdge SC1435 and the PowerEdge 6950.
While neither system you mentioned compares to the 6950, there are some cases, including cluster nodes, where the SC1435 may compare well to the 1950.
The 2 biggest downsides to SC1435 that I see are 1) Limited storage/no hot swap/no SAS, and 2) IPMI/BMC not implemented or braindead compared to non-SC PowerEdge.
Of course it is not hard to predict other AMD PowerEdge models will be available in the future.
> Ah, I'd not heard they changed their policy recently and when I checked before posting...
Oh, I understand how you made the mistake, swbrown. It's just that we don't want other folks catching the mistake and claiming all Linux users are idiots because of it, which has been known to happen. A simple AFIAK is all that's needed to correct the problem. Speaking of which, AFIAK, the addition of the AMD machines is less than a year old, so until recently you information was accurate.
Oh, I understand how you made the mistake, swbrown. It's just that we don't want other folks catching the mistake and claiming all Linux users are idiots because of it, which has been known to happen. A simple AFIAK is all that's needed to correct the problem. Speaking of which, AFIAK, the addition of the AMD machines is less than a year old, so until recently you information was accurate.
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
Any company the size of Dell that doesn't do basic market research, and that isn't continually measuring demand and exploring potential new markets is too stupid to be in business. I doubt that Dell falls into that category- I think they track this sort of thing closely, and I think if they weren't slaves of Sauron they would not be engaging in this Lucy-Charlie Brown Linux dance. Michael Dell is a big fat poopy-faced fibber who is trying to have it all without actually delivering anything of substance.