Skip to comments.Dell polls PC users on favorite Linux varieties
Posted on 03/13/2007 6:54:28 PM PDT by Halfmanhalfamazing
Dell Inc. began polling customers about their software preferences on Tuesday as part of an effort by the struggling PC vendor to meet a popular request for desktops and notebooks that run on Linux instead of Windows.
Dell posted the survey on a company blog, asking PC users to choose between Linux flavors such as Fedora and Ubuntu, and to pick more general choices such as notebooks versus desktops, high-end models versus value models and telephone-based support versus community-based support.
(Excerpt) Read more at open.itworld.com ...
Looks like Dell fears Mac the mouse more then Gates the great...
Makes sense to me. Dell makes no money off the OS.
My Dell (2004-2006)
Stupid question but is Linux just like Windows in the way it looks and operates?
Dell should hire several hundred first-rate software engineers to transform Linux into a high-quality application platform. If they devote the necessary resources, they could have DellOS ready to ship in three or four years.
"Stupid question but is Linux just like Windows in the way it looks and operates?"
It's close, but not identical-
If you would like to see how well it works, and looks, on a machine you are using, get a "live CD"-- a CD that will boot your machine without changing anything on the hard drive.
You can order a CD, or better, download the ISO file and burn it to your own disc. Set the PC to boot from the CD drive, and see how you like it.
It is NOT a stupid question. It has a few minor differences, but it a quick learning curve. If you want the EASIEST and BEST distro, I would say download and burn a live cd of MEPIS. It can be found HERE. It is a build from UBUNTU, but it is easier, and is a cleaner install (everything "just works"). You can run it off a live cd to see if you like it. I will never go back to windows.
Frankly, I don't give a damn, except for the "competition is good" aspect.
It can be, it can also look and feel like a mac. In terms of what goes on under the hood its far more like a Mac than it is like windows.
its only going to be worth it if Dell ditches the X environment and writes a proprietary GUI thats not exactly the business they are in. Otherwise you will just see people downloading it for themselves.
Apple's product has alot of innovation in it.
It can look like windows.
But it doesn't have to.
KDE is similar to windows in that you have a toolbar and a "start" menu.
Red Hat has done that already.
Actually they do, which is why nobody sells Linux preinstalled on home desktops. Microsoft provides a portion of the O/S dollars back to the OEM vendors who then in turn use that money to help pay for customer support.
Linux is a foreign clone of Unix products, not Windows. Therefore it's natively more like Apple's OSX, although some foreign cloners have built a couple of versions that look exactly like Windows, but probably you won't see those here in the states due to threat of lawsuit.
While I definitely agree with this, they're dressing up Linux with very Apple-like eye candy such as XGL and Beryl (Compiz) that do a good job of covering up the underlying weakness. Some of the foreign clones like "Dream Linux" from Brazil even come with an object dock installed across the bottom as default, giving the user the impression they're running a highly polished Apple-like O/S when of course it's more smoke and mirrors than anything.
How incredibly absurd. You've been pushing free software like Linux since your first post to this site which was an attack against copyright, and followed closely with a vanity title to a thread you created praising Democrats as "ahead of Republicans on open source" when it was learned John Kerry and the DNC ran their operations on Linux. Yes you've taken quite a beating since then, recently admitting to lying on purpose on several threads about the Russian hackers that cracked Apple's OSX to run on cheap PC's, but now I'm supposed to believe you've suddenly reconsidered your devotion to free software and now only support it as competition to our existing products?
It's a shame this thread will probably now deteriorate with more of your BS, but claiming you're only a supporter of free software as competition to closed source was a whopper of infinite proportions already.
Lie. My first post has nothing to do with Linux or free software. And the post wasn't attack against copyright, but clearly against abuses of copyright against legitimate academic researchers. In fact, research into CD DRM has been specifically allowed in cases by the LOC since then.
Come on, for once admit that you lied and take it back. You have too many outstanding lies, might as well go for a fresh start.
Yes you've taken quite a beating since then, recently admitting to lying on purpose
Now I admitted? Before you said that you caught me in my test of you. This one admitted deception of course stands up against your very long list of proven, unadmitted lies.
I'm supposed to believe you've suddenly reconsidered your devotion to free software
From the beginning it is obvious that any "devotion" is due to practical means, not a philosophical software choice like you and Stallman.
It's a shame this thread will probably now deteriorate
It will. You've hijacked and ruined many threads, and have even been suspended for it.
What do you think OS X is? It's a non-graphical UNIX-like kernel, just like Linux. On top of that are graphics libraries that give it the visual polish, just like this Linux distro.
That OS X is better, to me, is a given. It uses a superior hybrid kernel (sorry Linux, BSD is better if you eliminate the superiority of Linux's hardware compatibility) and its graphics stack is much more polished and capable. But in the end it's the same thing, graphic libraries on a UNIX-like kernel.
Or accusing me of calling Stallman a saint without the ability to actually reference anything from me that is at all favorable towards him?
ROFL. It's simply unimaginable you don't realize the extent of your deceit. But, you do make a great example why most people don't buy into the Linux BS we're constantly exposed to..
Read the post.
To your first claim that it's about Linux: no mention of Linux or free software anywhere in that post.
To your second claim: it's about a company suing a legitimate university computer researcher for doing a report on their DRM. That's an abuse of copyright, and due to this abuse the Library of Congress has exempted security research on CD DRM from the DMCA.
I'm against copyright abuse, not against copyright. My posting history is consistent on this.
Now only recently you have lied twice (really three times, but two were in the same sentence) and falsely accused me of deceit. Keep going, you're almost up to your regular lie and libel count.
Not really, I think I said two hundred linux kernel developers which should have been two hundred linux developers. Minor mistake, not the same as knowingly and purposefully lying for months as antiRepublican has actually admitted to doing, but as usual whatever you can come up with to distract from the real issues.
accusing me of calling Stallman a saint
LOL, I know that moonbat Stallman refers to himself literally as a "Saint", and you're constantly defending his Linux software just like you are now, but I really don't know what else you're talking about. Link it if you think it somehow incriminates me, but more likely it is just more of you pushing Linux on everyone and trying to cover up who Mr. Stallman acutally is.
No I didn't, I said quote "you've been pushing free software like Linux since your first post to this site which was an attack against copyright, and followed closely with a vanity title to a thread you created praising Democrats as "ahead of Republicans on open source" when it was learned John Kerry and the DNC ran their operations on Linux."
All true, you came here with an obvious leftist agenda that started with attacks on copyrights, pushing free software, praising Democrats, attacking Christians (oh the horror I brought that up in a tech thread LOL) and ripping practically the entire Bush family. Too bad you don't like being exposed, but if you weren't such a motormouth moonbat pushing leftist philosophy constantly you wouldn't have to deal with it.
For a split second today it looked like you finally made a small step towards rational conservatism by claiming your only interest in Linux is as competition to closed source standards, but by not preceeding that with a mea culpa it was pretty obvious to me it was just more of your typical drivel. As we see now, and as expected, I was precisely correct in my assesment.
ROFL, Linux distributors can't even decide on what desktop engine or disk format they want to use, now there may be a whole new license that fragments things even further. If Red Hat could provide enough dollars to Dell to provide the needed customer support it would start shipping today. Fact is, they can't, there's just not enough interest in paying for desktop Linux to pay Dell costs to support it. Wake up to the actual issues or admit you don't understand them.
It can't be since the first post, since the first post said nothing about Linux or any free software. The post after is only tangentially related to open source, but doesn't even discuss any open source issues
Well, except that my senator didn't even know what it was, and he was a Democrat. That ties into my first thread, where I guessed that the Democrats didn't really know what they're doing, only hired smart tech guys.
All true, you came here with an obvious leftist agenda that started with attacks on copyrights
False. It was clearly about an abuse of copyright, not copyright itself. Even the Library of Congress, which has a pretty limited view of our fair use rights, effectively agreed with me by making this research protected from such suits.
False. Again, read the thread. I was pretty harsh on Democrats, and wondering why the Republicans weren't operating smarter.
(oh the horror I brought that up in a tech thread LOL)
Actually, you brought my personal religious position up in a tech thread as a personal attack. Extremely pedestrian.
and ripping practically the entire Bush family
Look around. Most FReepers aren't sheep and point out his flaws where they exist. Yes, I've gone after his dad, since he abused his power to grant pardons, and claimed that I, a soldier who went to war under him, couldn't be a real patriot because of my religious position.
For a split second today it looked like you finally made a small step towards rational conservatism by claiming your only interest in Linux is as competition to closed source standards
Anything I have for Linux has always been on practical, not philosophical grounds. My posting history solidly confirms this, even from the earliest exchanges between us.
ROFL at this stuff. It's all related, and part of your obvious agenda to push free software and media and support those who make illegal copies of ours. Here you are talking about your apparently strange religion and how you despise Bush for it again too. Whatever dude, you need to be explaining your problems to someone else who actually cares. I'm just making sure no one right minded person falls for your BS, and so far I don't think any have.
^^^^^^^^^^^While I definitely agree with this, they're dressing up Linux with very Apple-like eye candy such as XGL and Beryl (Compiz) that do a good job of covering up the underlying weakness.^^^^^^^^^^
Pure FUD. Plain and simple.
Linux has proven to be both faster and more secure than windows. XP, and especially Vista.
^^^^^^^^^^^Linux distributors can't even decide on what desktop engine or disk format they want to use^^^^^^^^^^^^
They don't have to. Just because there's choice doesn't make any of it hard to use.
Which is why I mentioned Red Hat. They have a well rounded package that's easy to use.
^^^^^^^^^^^If Red Hat could provide enough dollars to Dell to provide the needed customer support it would start shipping today.^^^^^^^^^^^^
Apparently that's not all that's needed seeing how much time Dell's putting into finding out about the clamor for linux that's out there. HP too.
^^^^^^^^^^^^Fact is, they can't, there's just not enough interest in paying for desktop Linux to pay Dell costs to support it.^^^^^^^^^^
You act as if linux requires alot of support and maintenance.
We're not talking about Windows here, Linux lasts alot longer than a week before you run into problems. Anyone who's run a Mac knows how long linux will last before you run into a problem.(even if you've not used linux long term, these systems just don't break often)
Dell doesn't need nearly as much green to support linux as it does to support windows.
^^^^^^^^^^I know that moonbat Stallman refers to himself literally as a "Saint", and you're constantly defending his Linux software just like you are now^^^^^^^^^^^
Linux isn't Stallman's, it's Torvalds's.
Trying to weasel out of one of your better documented lies? I said that Redhat had to do very limited Kernel Design and that was a value add to their business (see we were talking about, specifically, the Linux Kernel). Your reply was
"Red Hat has literally hundreds of kernel devs"
Again Specifically talking about the Kernel
After this you had a chance to take it back when I pointed out for Redhat to have hundreds of kernel developers (thats more than 200) they would need to have more than 20% of their workforce devoted to that, Now *if* you had mistakenly meant linux in general you would have corrected yourself here. but instead you said
"During the past year, more than 4,100 patches from Red Hat employees were integrated into the upstream 2.6 kernel. "
Still addressing *specifically* the kernel, it was not until you had been sufficiently beat up about your lie that you conceded (sort of) by dropping kernel (note you still don't acknowledge you were wrong about the kernel part).
Yes, according to here and elsewhere Red Hat has a few hundred paid developers working on Linux
But finally you admitted you were wrong along "While no one knows for sure how many of their hundreds of programmers work specifically on the kernel"
Well sort of, you tried to claim you never said hundreds
"Another one of your bald faced lies, check the link for yourself, I said "Linux developers", not "Linux kernel developers" as you claimed I said."
LOL, here are the actual facts you obviously know little about.
Secunia has issued a total of 3 Secunia advisories in 2003-2007 for Microsoft Windows Vista.
Secunia has issued a total of 266 Secunia advisories in 2003-2007 for RedHat Enterprise Linux 4
LOL no link of course. Not that it has anything to do with the countless threads on this site falsely claiming Dell was offering pre-installed Linux on home computers, going back over a year now, all of which have turned out to be BS. Now here you are, over a year later still begging them, please please please Mr. Dell ROFL.
Yep, like I already said it was a minor mistake, which a reading of the thread you finally linked shows. I made a simple mistake and said linux kernel developers instead of linux developers, but the underlying point remained true.
It's a perfect example of what happens on these threads, since you can't handle the key points of the discussion, you run off out in left field on some minor detail or some other distraction at your first opportunity to hide from the real facts of the discusion. We're seeing it here again right now, of course.
Back to the point you're hiding from this thread, Dell still isn't shipping Linux on home desktops, despite the countless threads we've seen claiming they were, whether all you can do is bring up some typo I made months ago as an excuse or not. LOL it's not going to cut it, there is no excuse for Dell not loading Linux on home computers except for one reason: nobody really wants them enough to actually pay for them. A simple fact you need to admit but like the other Lunix koolaid guzzlers can't bring yourself to.
FYI Torvalds code is completely dependent on Stallman's code to operate, not the other way around. And Stallman owns the copyright on significantly more code than Torvalds. That's why you're all getting jerked around by Stallman right now LOL.
IF it was a minor mistake you would have corrected yourself quickly not defended, and then changed (without admitting the mistake).. You lied and were busted.
The historical sign that you've lost your position, lost any ability to honestly argue any facts, and will resort to personal attacks only.
Here you are talking about your apparently strange religion and how you despise Bush for it again too.
You've already left a trail of lies and libel on this thread alone. Might as well quit before you get anymore.
LMAO you're stilltrying to hide behind an insignificant typo from back in 2005? That was no lie, lies are like when you kept going from thread to thread claiming all Windows 2000 support was being ended as part of your endless effort to push your leftist software on everyone. Of course all honest people know Windows 2000 will continue to get security patches till 2010, despite your misinformation campaign attempt. Wonder if Dell will be shipping Linux on home computers even by then ROFL.
It is funny watching you flounder around and throw up your wall of BS in defense of leftist causes. You may recall you've even called lying on purpose quote "fun", while I get my entertainment out of busting liars instead.
^^^^^^^^^^^Secunia has issued a total of 3 Secunia advisories in 2003-2007 for Microsoft Windows Vista.^^^^^^^^^^^6
Yeah, because so many people were running Vista in 2003. *sarcasm*
^^^^^^^^^^^^Secunia has issued a total of 266 Secunia advisories in 2003-2007 for RedHat Enterprise Linux 4^^^^^^^^^
You've got a slightly apples/oranges comparison here. RHEL comes with alot more software than windows does.
Comparing XP to RHEL is a better comparison, both have been out longer. And look at Secunia's bottom line for RHEL:
Unpatched 0% (0 of 267 Secunia advisories)
Now look at XP:
Unpatched 19% (33 of 178 Secunia advisories)
Furthermore, to bring Windows to the same level that Red Hat is at, you also have to include IIS, MS Office, MSSQL, photoshop, and several other packages that isn't included with a default install of windows.
You have no argument.
Let me repeat that, you have no argument.
I can guarantee you that you *DO* *NOT* want to also include those products into your argument in order to put both on the same playing field. The amount of exploits..... I have little doubt that the number would be in the thousands, compared with RHEL's 267.
I'd like to see Red Hat release a stripped down version of RHEL that only includes a text editor, a basic paint program, and other OS basics that windows comes with..... Just for comparison purposes re: Secunia. They would easily win.
RHEL would win hands down. I've read those security bulletins before, alot of them are the packages installed.
Sorry to burst your bubble, but I don't know of any freeper who looks up to Stallman.
However, can think of several who'd likely look up to Torvalds.
Nothing wrong with looking up to a pragmatist, I'd think.
You get your entertainment out of being one. I admitted my fun little ruse and stated my reasons (no, you didn't catch me, contrary to your previous lie). I don't remember you ever really admitting one of your many concretely-documented lies to me. I remember you giving a politician's non-admission response once.
LMAO, you're the one who specifically mentioned Windows Vista in post 34. I simply showed the facts - being 3 known vulnerabilities in Vista verses 266 in the Red Hat you've been boasting about LOL. Yet like most confused if not corrupt Lunix pumpers you still try to claim I'm wrong. Thanks for the laughs, and the sinking of your own cause yet again.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.