On Fri, 2004-04-02 at 11:53, Galen wrote: > Bryan, > > I've been doing a bit of thinking about your assertion that linux simply > needs 'the big OEMs behind it' to win the war, and I think that answer > is a bit too simple. Red Hat has had a partnership with Dell for at > least four years. You used to be able to buy a computer from Dell with > linux pre-installed, but Dell has since significantly back away from > that. They do still ship servers with Red Hat pre-installed, but they > don't go out of their way to tell you that. HP's story is practically > identical, so I don't buy the 'it just needs the big OEMs behind it' > argument.
To this I would argue that the big OEMs weren't really "behind it." I'm no expert in all this business and marketing stuff, but it seems Dell and HP sometimes release products with tons of marketing and fanfare, products they've tested thoroughly and that they really get "behind" and sometimes they release products very quietly, that are usually buggy, and there just isn't much backing. Their Linux PC's so fare have been in the latter category. Why they do this I don't know. I just bought an HP Digital Media Receiver for $40 on an internal employees-only website. Nobody outside HP bought them for the $200 they were asking so they are dumping them internally. Did you ever hear about this product? If you did was it anything good? It's an awesome idea, the technology is all there, but it was executed extremely poorly--it only talks to Windows XP computers (why not 2k? who knows), it's slow, it won't read music off of a mapped network drive, just a local drive, the wireless networking was buggy, etc. etc. Why did HP do this? Who knows? > To get linux pre-installed systems into CostCo there is of course going > to need to be demand. So, what would it take to get the non-technical > soccer moms of the world to switch from M$ to linux? I think there is a two pronged approach that needs to be taken in general. I've heard that the big reason MS beat OS/2 is because MS won the hearts of the developers, developers, developers. Everyone else followed them in deciding which OS to use, which makes sense if you think about it. I know I get asked by everyone who knows I'm a geek what computer I recommend. My family all buys on my recommendation. I think Linux is winning the hearts of a lot of developers and we are doing well there. Is that all it takes though? No. Sadly, my parents and two sisters still use windows. Why? Well, they asked what computer to buy and I told them HP, of course. But guess what! No HP's down at Costco had Linux on them. Sure, I could bring my CDs and install Mandrake for them next time I see them, or I could have directed them to the local LUG, heck my sisters are at BYU right now. But let's face it, my sisters or dad don't have time for this. The computer works as it is. Plus I really don't want to support it. I haven't tested the hardware they bought to make sure it all works with Mandrake. And what if their network card stops working and they call HP up and say they put Linux on there, the support dude will freak out. I don't mind dealing with these sorts of hassles at all, but they would totally hate it. They just want to download music and IM their friends. Now, if HP or Dell went through rigorous testing of Linux PCs, and stacked the shelves of all the big stores with them, and supported them, and sold them in designer colors, and had adds showing hip young people using them with catchy background music, AND Aunt Tillie's geeky nephew and Soccer Mom's nerdy brother were always talking about how awesome Linux was, then everyone would buy it. Phew, I need to get some work done. Bryan > > Galen > > > > Bryan Murdock wrote: > > Let me put it too you this way, easiest desktop to use does not win you > > the desktop war, otherwise Apple would have won many times over by now. > > Yes, people have come to expect a certain amount of ease of use, but I > > think, at least with Mandrake, I haven't seriously used a new version of > > Fedora or any other distro, but I think a linux desktop is just as easy > > to use and at least as reliable. There are still some weird oddities, > > but people put up with all kinds of weird oddities with windoze. Think > > of they days when it was the Mac versus DOS. MS won with marketing and > > going with the more open platform. Linux has the openness down, it just > > needs the big OEM's behind it. That is all that is left and the war is > > won. > > > > Bryan > > > > On Fri, 2004-03-26 at 15:27, Bryan Murdock wrote: > > > >>None of what has been suggested so far are going to make my sister or > >>dad use Redhat instead of Windoze. They don't care if KDE is broken by > >>Redhat. They don't care about getting exotic devices that they bought > >>used on ebay to work. They want to go to Costco and buy a computer that > >>works. It's possible they will want to plug in their printer and a > >>digital camera and have that work (and that does work with Mandrake > >>right now, if not Redhat). They want to use office, browse the web, > >>read email, and print pictures that they took with their camera. > >> > >>If Redhat wants to beat MS on the desktop, they will partner with Dell > >>and HP and get computers on the shelf at Costco, Best Buy, and Circuit > >>City. > >> > >>Bryan > >> > >>On Fri, 2004-03-26 at 15:18, Andrew Jorgensen wrote: > >> > >>>On Fri, 2004-03-26 at 16:04, Jacob Albretsen wrote: > >>> > >>>>Can't resist... must fight temptation.... > >>>> > >>>>On Friday 26 March 2004 15:22, Galen wrote: > >>>> > >>>>>Hi, > >>>>> > >>>>>I just landed a summer internship at Red Hat and am really interested to > >>>>>hear from a users perspective what doesn't work. > >>>> > >>>>Tell them that Gnome and KDE are two different GUIs and stop making them look > >>>>the same. Also stop breaking KDE and making it unusable by snubbing its > >>>>native applications in favor of the ones they think you should be using > >>>>instead of giving YOU all the choices available and letting YOU decide what > >>>>is best for YOU. > >>> > >>>I've got a better idea: Drop KDE altogether, that way the KDE project > >>>can package their own RPMs and leave Red Hat alone. KDE can fend for > >>>itself on distros that use it by default. > >>> > >>>Seriously, I'm _not_ just flaming, it's a lot of wasted effort to > >>>support KDE at all when it just makes KDE-lovers mad anyway and everyone > >>>else will just use GNOME because that's what comes up by default. And > >>>again, seriously, those who like it will package it for themselves and > >>>there will be a yum repository in no time (there probably already is). > >>> > >>>Disclaimer: If there are grammatical or spelling errors in this post > >>>please make aware the read engrish.com have happy times conceded. > >>> > >>> > >>>____________________ > >>>BYU Unix Users Group > >>>http://uug.byu.edu/ > >>>___________________________________________________________________ > >>>List Info: http://uug.byu.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/uug-list > >> > >> > >>____________________ > >>BYU Unix Users Group > >>http://uug.byu.edu/ > >>___________________________________________________________________ > >>List Info: http://uug.byu.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/uug-list > > > > > > > > ____________________ > > BYU Unix Users Group > > http://uug.byu.edu/ > > ___________________________________________________________________ > > List Info: http://uug.byu.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/uug-list > > > > > > ____________________ > BYU Unix Users Group > http://uug.byu.edu/ > ___________________________________________________________________ > List Info: http://uug.byu.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/uug-list ____________________ BYU Unix Users Group http://uug.byu.edu/ ___________________________________________________________________ List Info: http://uug.byu.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/uug-list
