Posted on 05/26/2007 6:13:46 AM PDT by Halfmanhalfamazing
When Dell put up its IdeaStorm community-feedback site, the company was surprised by the strong response in favor of shipping personal computers with Linux. The PC company then announced that it would offer Ubuntu Linux on select systems, and as of yesterday, they are taking orders.
So it turns out that not including Windows saves the consumer $50 from the regular list price.
(Excerpt) Read more at arstechnica.com ...
1) Would the price go down if there were linux crapware available?(OEMS get money for installing this stuff sometimes)
2) How about the security tax? Linux does not have a requirement for spyware and virus scanner, so what's that, another $50?
So is it safe to assume that the average linux based computer will save you $100 dollars right off the bat?
(and that doesn't include all the headaches down the road that you'll be saved from)
It's a good day for the consumer.
If I purchased a Dell PC with XP Pro on it and another with no OS installed, the price difference would be more than $50, by far.
Upfront savings $100 (??)
Longterm... priceless!
(a happy Fedora user)
While Ubuntu Linux is probably the most user-friendly distribution out there, it still can’t quite match Windows in terms of hardware and software support.
Which is why Dell ships certain systems only, with specific Linux-tested components, at the moment.
ZoneAlarm and Avast anti-spyware are free so the price of Windows is still just $50.
^^^^^^^^^^^I’m wondering why the price of an Ubuntu Dell isn’t the same price as a PC without any OS installed at all.^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
I doubt it.
Microsoft throws money at OEMS for windows support, money that I highly highly doubt is coming from canonical.(though it’s possible)
So Dell would likely have to build in a support cost in wheras it wouldn’t with a windows machine.
Which is to be expected. nothing is support free, but linux is clearly less support hungry than windows is; even taking out all the security issues and blunders.
It can’t match windows XP’s hardware/driver support, but it can very easily when talking about Vista.
Software support, yeah. You’re right. There’s all kinds of third party softwares that don’t exist on linux. Photoshop is usually one of the first that gets mentioned.
Zone alarm is a firewall, unless they’ve expanded their operations.
Does Dell install these upfront? I haven’t seen a brand new dell in a while.
If most people don’t know about these things, then the price of windows for “the average joe” is above $50.
>> Software support... all kinds of third party softwares that don’t exist on linux. Photoshop is usually one of the first that gets mentioned.
Look into “the GIMP”. It’s open-source image processing software. I’ve never used Photoshop so I’m no expert on how they compare. But GIMP does everything I ever wanted to do to an image, and then some. Available for Windows as well as Linux.
>> It’s a good day for the consumer
You mean to tell me you’d give up the intrusive pleasure of the “Windows Genuine Advantage” license nanny for a mere $50 savings?
You’re weird.
( ;-) )
Dell doesn't offer Avast AFAIK, but the average joe's at least as likely to know about fee anti-virus software and be less fearful and challenged with it than Linux, especially considering his circle of Windows friends and colleges, so the price of Windows is still $50.
^^^^^^^^^Look into “the GIMP”. It’s open-source image processing software. I’ve never used Photoshop so I’m no expert on how they compare.^^^^^^^^^^
I’m aware of GIMP, I use it regularly on SuSE.
But GIMP doesn’t compare to photoshop in several different ways, PS is clearly better.
No, no. I truly was wondering why the price of an Ubuntu Dell isn’t the same price as a PC without any OS installed at all.
I've bought identical PCs in the past with and without a Windows OS installed and the price difference has been approximately $200.
But I believe you have given reasonable food for thought in that area.
Oh........... I see. Sorry, use a huge amount of quotes often in my posts to help keep my context. I didn’t grasp where you were coming from.
I think the main reason is support costs, but it’d be nice if we could get a spokesdell in here to sort things out, eh? :-P
GIMP is good enough for regular home use. It doesn't have the workflow and integration that Photoshop does (you can just do things faster in PS). Some of the serious time-saving "gee-whiz" features aren't there. It also doesn't have higher color capabilities often used for documents destined for the printing press, no real prepress abilities, no Pantone, poor color calibration, etc.
But those are pretty much professional features, so don't worry unless you need them. Buy a Mac and Photoshop if you're actually making money off your work and want to stay away from Windows. There's no other option.
I could agree with that.
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.