If you were an OEM what would you install?

[Adamant1988]

The question is simple. If you were an OEM distributer and you needed to support a single Linux distribution, which would you support and why? I'm actually making a case with several local OEMs with this information, so please be as detailed as possible, this is other people's money and time we're talking about. Without further adieu...

List correction: Please treat fedora core as "Fedora Core/Red Hat Enterprise Linux"


About your info:

Please post why you believe it would be a smart business move for an OEM to pick up X-distribution. There needs to be some rational behind this, simply saying that you enjoy a distribution does not mean that it should be made a standard for an OEM. Please be detailed.

[raublekick]

Personally I would use Ubuntu, but that is only because I know it best. We use FC5 at school but I have nothing to do with maintaining the lab, so I see it from simply a use perspective there. openSUSE LOOKS nice but I have heard bad things about updates, I can't back this up though, as I haven't used SUSE in 3 years. Mandriva might be a good choice, but I have never used it.

The others I would forget about. Debian is great, but the Linux community has been moving to fast and OEMs would probably want the newer software.

[tubasoldier]

That is an interesting list, because OEM's have to deal with people who dont know how to actually use computers. This is really more of a re-education of computer users than that of distribution. As an OEM you would have to use a distribution that you can have a say in. A distribution that you can support and they can support you. OEM's are not in it for the moral value of opensource software. OEM's are in it for the profit.

With all that said, there are only a few viable desktops that an OEM could even consider. Unfortunately Ubuntu does not fit the mold for what a mainstream OEM is looking for. Red Hat Linux or Suse Linux (not the openSuse or Fedora distributions) Linspire, or Mandriva are what they are looking for.

So my vote would go to Suse Linux. Not openSuse but the actual purchased version.

[Adamant1988]

That is an interesting list, because OEM's have to deal with people who dont know how to actually use computers. This is really more of a re-education of computer users than that of distribution. As an OEM you would have to use a distribution that you can have a say in. A distribution that you can support and they can support you. OEM's are not in it for the moral value of opensource software. OEM's are in it for the profit.

With all that said, there are only a few viable desktops that an OEM could even consider. Unfortunately Ubuntu does not fit the mold for what a mainstream OEM is looking for. Red Hat Linux or Suse Linux (not the openSuse or Fedora distributions) Linspire, or Mandriva are what they are looking for.

So my vote would go to Suse Linux. Not openSuse but the actual purchased version.

openSUSE is the payed version now. That's why it's on the list, but I understand what you meant.

[tubasoldier]

openSUSE is the payed version now. That's why it's on the list, but I understand what you meant.

Yeah, thats how much I stay up to date with other distros.

[Adamant1988]

Yeah, thats how much I stay up to date with other distros.

Haha, understood. Actually a lot of people who keep current on Novell didn't know that, so don't feel bad. I just noticed it the other day whilst browsing their web site.

[maxamillion]

I said debian because if I were to sell servers or desktops, at the end of the day the fact is that debian stable would be the easiest to support because of the rigorous development/testing cycle everything goes through and there would be less issues.

Case and point: Ubuntu just released the kernel update for edgy (2.6.17-11) and threads flew all over the place about "ZOMG Update broke <this> and <that>" and many more of similar titles surfaced .... when was the last time you ever heard of a debian stable kernel upgrade fragging systems?

Yes, debian packages are a little out of date but lets be honest ... isn't Dapper out of date at the moment and by the time its LTS is over will it not be just as out of date as debian sarge is now (perspectively speaking)?

.... just my opinion, take it for what its worth.

[Quillz]

I would probably install openSUSE 10.2, as it is the most user friendly distro I've tried yet, not to mention it's plug-and-play hardware detection seems even better than Ubuntu's at the moment.

[steven8]

openSUSE is the payed version now. That's why it's on the list, but I understand what you meant.

You can still get it for free, or pay for a version with tech support.

[rai4shu2]

Fedora Core 6 is the best system for OEMs right now, but that may change when Feisty comes out in April.

[mc2003]

Ppl here in Greece act different...Everyone is trying to byry the other in work issues....
so if u installed the ubuntu with the support issues to play dvds for example the coworker of the client would complain on your boss about that and the fact that he only knows winDose an d ms office...they wouldnt bother just to see how this is.....if it was a person i know about..and started a bussines(i spel it right?)i would pre-intalled the ubuntu 6.06 LTS as is and tell the ppl on his work that if they complain to go to HELP--->>USERS MANUAL....plus that here 6 to 10 ppl had never touched a pc before...Take for example my father ...whe he was forced to learn to work on word an spreadseats he was recording the actions(File-->Save OK)
not the main part of it.....and when i told him read the help or read a book he said "i dont have time "..well he hasnt time indeed but if he liked he could get the book on basics on office i bought him at work and work on it...
Also the fact is that the ppl at the workers union(i dont if its called that way there :D) instead of acting on the workers(lets say) good the want to get more and more money every month with less job..and they start strikes and complain that its the goverments fault(!!!!)
P.S to ppl that i know and trust me i told them"LinuX no firewalls,no viruses,privacy"only that and they diceded just to go and install them a linux partition to get started ...so simple...the other pll they said"What about compability..i cant play a DVD?"and the onser was "no you have to DL 2-3 programs to get it up like your pc " and they said "well ok ...ill seeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee......"and my reply"take a back up before its too late....Have A Nice Day...!!"

[doobit]

If my market was a generic audience I would install Mepis because it has the strengths of the Ubuntu software pools and also has the proprietary software and drivers in it that most people expect when they have a background in Microsoft Windows.

[Adamant1988]

Guys, please post with your votes. A vote with no rationale isn't a vote at all. I need to know *why* you would put X linux distribution on OEM machines.

[nsleiman]

I picked Ubuntu, just because i'm in love :) no really, i like the apt-get utility and what makes ubuntu one of the best distros is ubuntuforums.org! whenever i look for any help i just search for the posts and start reading :) i am preparing a presentation on how cool linux can be for students.

God save ubuntu.

[igknighted]

I voted Suse because it is the most polished distro. Ubuntu is fun, but too much CLI for most new users. Fedora is too bleeding edge, but otherwise is great. I find linspire/freespire not quite linux and dislike them... I think the distro has to feel like linux. Mepis doesn't look polished at all. Sabayon is based on gentoo... impossible to support. Debian is an alright choice, great for linux users, but too hard for new users. What is left is Mandriva/PCLOS and Suse. I find Mandriva obnoxious, unpolished and their package management/update service has caused me nothing but trouble. PCLOS is mandriva with new art... so the looks are better but overall it still isnt that great.

This leaves us with Suse. You get great support from Novell if you need it. You get the most polished distro available. You get the most comprehensive GUI configuration tools in linux. The package management/update service bug is gone as of the remaster in 10.1. Overall, experienced linux users don't need an OEM linux. It is new users who want this. So lets put our best foot forward for new users, and that's Suse.

[jclmusic]

either linux mint or mepis. as much as i love ubuntu, it's just not friendly enough with having to add repositories and then install all the codecs etc.

[jclmusic]

either linux mint or mepis. as much as i love ubuntu, it's just not friendly enough with having to add repositories and then install all the codecs etc.

[smiggs]

I said debian because if I were to sell servers or desktops, at the end of the day the fact is that debian stable would be the easiest to support because of the rigorous development/testing cycle everything goes through and there would be less issues.

Case and point: Ubuntu just released the kernel update for edgy (2.6.17-11) and threads flew all over the place about "ZOMG Update broke <this> and <that>" and many more of similar titles surfaced .... when was the last time you ever heard of a debian stable kernel upgrade fragging systems?

Yes, debian packages are a little out of date but lets be honest ... isn't Dapper out of date at the moment and by the time its LTS is over will it not be just as out of date as debian sarge is now (perspectively speaking)?

.... just my opinion, take it for what its worth.

Well an OEM who was really serious about software support could have their own derivative versions of Ubuntu and then test compatibility before pushing them out but then again when was the last time an OEM really put effort into supporting the operating system of choice?

[kevinlyfellow]

I voted open suse because it seems to be the most polished and you probably could market it under the 'wow' effect (assuming that it is planned to be sold to the average person). Ubuntu is another good choice because it too is very polished (check out system76, they install ubuntu). I think in the end, the best thing to do is to have it be able to show off as much as it can, so that it will catch peoples attention (compiz, beryl??). Another thing to consider is driver support. Ubuntu has very good driver support. In the end though, if the computer it is being installed on has hardware (especially advertised) then it needs to work! People will complain if they were sold a laptop with linux but suspend doesn't work, or they need to use ndiswrapper to get their wireless working. They also need to be able to upgrade their computers and have everything continue to work after the upgrade, so if you need to put an nvidia driver in, you better have a script to reinstall nvidia after a kernel upgrade. I don't think the distribution is as important as the continued support of the distribution. Many linux distributions look very nice as long as it is installed correctly.

[maxamillion]

Well an OEM who was really serious about software support could have their own derivative versions of Ubuntu and then test compatibility before pushing them out but then again when was the last time an OEM really put effort into supporting the operating system of choice?

Who said I would be the average OEM :D

[deanlinkous]

wha.....no gNewSense????

Okay. Debian then because it ROCKS! :)

[rai4shu2]

You should promote Fedora because they have the best variety of packages. Debian has a ton of packages, but nothing like the vast array you'll see in the Fedora repos. Nothing says support like having everything prebuilt (even if it is a little slower to install and/or slightly more likely to break something). Even things that are strictly non-free are generally better (for example, the closed-source nvidia drivers which recompile to whatever kernel you happen to be using rather than force you to upgrade drivers every time you upgrade a kernel).

[Adamant1988]

I'm going to try to add a clarification to the first post:


About your info:

Please post why you believe it would be a smart business move for an OEM to pick up X-distribution. There needs to be some rational behind this, simply saying that you enjoy a distribution does not mean that it should be made a standard for an OEM. Please be detailed.

[kazuya]

voted pclinuxos. - why because it is the easiest to use or manage.

I prefer sabayon, zenwalk, ubuntu, mepis and lastly pclinuxos, but I have to say that it is polished looking and easy to maintain or use for a total newbie than most other distribution.

Elive is also very good.

[3rdalbum]

I would choose Linux Mint, as I live in Australia and nothing it distributes is really illegal in Australia.

The reason why I'd choose Linux Mint is because it's compatible with the large range of Ubuntu packages out there (convenient for end-users), its attractiveness when combined with Beryl could be a great selling-point, and it's easier for newbies to use because some of the command-line functions from Ubuntu have got GUI wrappers in Mint. Plus, it comes with the batteries included, preventing most of the "why won't my MP3s play on my computer?" support calls.

[the_darkside_986]

I would choose Ubuntu because in my own personal experience it seems easier to use than Fedora or openSUSE. For normal users, the command line might not be necessary. Some websites that distribute helpful scripts, like the loki installer website, will tell the user to open up a terminal and type stuff. That might or might not scare new users but that has nothing to do with the distro.

[steven8]

I don't believe an oem should pick any one distro, but allow each customer pick a distro, and install and make it go for them. As an oem, if I only offer one distro, is it any better than just offering windows?

[Adamant1988]

I don't believe an oem should pick any one distro, but allow each customer pick a distro, and install and make it go for them. As an oem, if I only offer one distro, is it any better than just offering windows?

We can't place drastic demands on OEMs. Asking for 1 linux distribution from them is a bit much. Bare in mind that they need to support this distribution, they can't just send us to some forums. Each distribution has to be checked against hardware, etc. Asking for one is enough.

[steven8]

We can't place drastic demands on OEMs. Asking for 1 linux distribution from them is a bit much. Bare in mind that they need to support this distribution, they can't just send us to some forums. Each distribution has to be checked against hardware, etc. Asking for one is enough.

Yes, oh master. Didn't mean to give my opinion. But if they, as an OEM, are using only Linux-friendly hardware, then they could easily offer more than one distro to a customer.

[Adamant1988]

Yes, oh master. Didn't mean to give my opinion. But if they, as an OEM, are using only Linux-friendly hardware, then they could easily offer more than one distro to a customer.

Sorry you took offense so quickly. Was merely offering criticism. Tell me how much do you think it would cost to certify their people to diagnose and repair problems with each distro. Keep in mind that they need to offer support for it.

[deanlinkous]

If you truly know GNU+Linux then a distro is rarely so different that you cannot figure things out.
I dont think GNU/Linux will ever be capable of the same level of support as windows.
Usually a OEM is more about support for the hardware and not so much the software.

[igknighted]

If you truly know GNU+Linux then a distro is rarely so different that you cannot figure things out.
I dont think GNU/Linux will ever be capable of the same level of support as windows.
Usually a OEM is more about support for the hardware and not so much the software.

Thats not really true... When you buy a windows PC, they install an OEM copy of the OS. M$ will not support an OEM copy themselves, you have to go back to the PC maker for support. I don't know if a linux OEM would work the same way, but I think most people would want support. Maybe a paid-for distro (like suse or Xandros) would be good because the licenses are so cheap you could use a paid-for OS that goes back to the software company for the support.

[steven8]

Sorry you took offense so quickly. Was merely offering criticism. Tell me how much do you think it would cost to certify their people to diagnose and repair problems with each distro. Keep in mind that they need to offer support for it.

Sorry, I've a tense couple of days. What if, say, an OEM might pick four distros to offer. That would be a more managable number, and still allow users flexibility. it would be up to the OEM to decide which ones to support, but good Linux people could probably handle more then one each.

[23meg]

I'd install Ubuntu, due to the fixed release cycle, clear separation of Free and non-Free components, and good community support.

isn't Dapper out of date at the moment and by the time its LTS is over will it not be just as out of date as debian sarge is now (perspectively speaking)?
Dapper's long support period isn't a point of concern for single PC buying consumers, and by the time it's over, there will have been nine more Ubuntu releases. If Ubuntu is to be included preinstalled on retail machines, the version to be considered would be the latest stable, since the typical consumer wants and/or needs the latest features and software versions. That's also part of why Debian Stable isn't a good idea.

[Adamant1988]

Sorry, I've a tense couple of days. What if, say, an OEM might pick four distros to offer. That would be a more managable number, and still allow users flexibility. it would be up to the OEM to decide which ones to support, but good Linux people could probably handle more then one each.

This would be more reasonable of course. Perhaps choosing to support the top 3 distributions currently in use, or provide the ones that simply provide better features and style.

[steven8]

This would be more reasonable of course. Perhaps choosing to support the top 3 distributions currently in use, or provide the ones that simply provide better features and style.

Exactly!

[sloggerkhan]

If I were an OEM I'd do an Ubuntu customized to initially have my Company's colors or something such and a slightly different set of applications than typically come with Ubuntu.
I'd also include extra visual bits, such as themes, wallpapers, and icons, including possibly a couple wallpapers for 'my' company.
I'd have in default install (for home users):

If a 'decent' computer:
supertux, chromium, and wesnoth
wings, blender, inkscape, scribus (in addition to GIMP)
gxine and VLC
Beryl

For other intended uses or less powerful machine, I'd do things differently.

I'd also distribute 'my' computers with little booklets on the setup and software installed on them.

[igknighted]

If I were an OEM I'd do an Ubuntu customized to initially have my Company's colors or something such and a slightly different set of applications than typically come with Ubuntu.
I'd also include extra visual bits, such as themes, wallpapers, and icons, including possibly a couple wallpapers for 'my' company.
I'd have in default install (for home users):

If a 'decent' computer:
supertux, chromium, and wesnoth
wings, blender, inkscape, scribus (in addition to GIMP)
gxine and VLC
Beryl

For other intended uses or less powerful machine, I'd do things differently.

I'd also distribute 'my' computers with little booklets on the setup and software installed on them.

I think you would have a hard time finding an OEM vendor that would give any kind of support for a PC that has Beryl... let alone install it themselves. Perhaps when they release their first non-testing release.

EDIT: The booklet is a great idea. I have always thought there should be a tutorial sitting prominantly on the Ubuntu desktop with some basic instruction on why mp3s don't work, how to fix it, and all that other jazz. In a cruel twist of fate, flash is the most logical format for this, except the tutorial would be about how to install flash (among other things)! Either way, I think its a document worth having. In fact, if anybody wants to help, I would love to start writing such a document.

[insane_alien]

i voted for ubuntu but now i think i would change my vote.

i would install ubuntu by default but i would accept requests for other distros if they want it.

[deanlinkous]

Thats not really true... When you buy a windows PC, they install an OEM copy of the OS. M$ will not support an OEM copy themselves, you have to go back to the PC maker for support. I don't know if a linux OEM would work the same way, but I think most people would want support. Maybe a paid-for distro (like suse or Xandros) would be good because the licenses are so cheap you could use a paid-for OS that goes back to the software company for the support.

A pc-maker is a OEM, dell is a OEM and they support their hardware. Why won't microsoft support a OEM install? What do you consider to be support? Did you get SP1 from dell or from microsoft?

But I am not sure any of that was critical to the understanding of my post....:confused:

[deanlinkous]

a bit off topic but somewhat related....check it
http://www.linuxdevices.com/news/NS3018878298.html

[Adamant1988]

Didn't seem really that related...

[deanlinkous]

A professional $500++ router/firewall solution provider using Debian to provide the solution when they could of used any of those "easy" distros. I mentioned Debian earlier - this shows that debian is not ignored in the commercial sector no matter what some believe.

[igknighted]

A pc-maker is a OEM, dell is a OEM and they support their hardware. Why won't microsoft support a OEM install? What do you consider to be support? Did you get SP1 from dell or from microsoft?

But I am not sure any of that was critical to the understanding of my post....:confused:

I mean more tech support than anything. When most people buy a PC, they expect some tech support. Obviously the individual distro would provide the updates. When you buy a dell PC, if you have windows trouble and you need help, you have to call dell, MS won't even talk to you. If you buy a retail version of the OS, you can get tech support straight from microsoft. I imagine linux would work the same way. Either a retail version of a paid-for OS could be used, leaving tech support to the distro and adding the price to the cost of the PC, or you could have a tech staff on hand that could give customer support and then use the free versions. If you have a tech staff on hand, you'd be better to limit your # of distro's supported due to the extra cost of having people on hand who know that particular distro through and through.

[Nils Olav]

I would use a modified version of gobo because it is the easiest to manage.

[slimdog360]

I just installed open suse and my first thought is yuk. Its terrrrrible, slow, cant configure my wide screen monitor and slow. Did I mention slow.

[Adamant1988]

I just installed open suse and my first thought is yuk. Its terrrrrible, slow, cant configure my wide screen monitor and slow. Did I mention slow.

Really? I've had no problems with the speed and I'm on a fairly moderate system, even from LiveDVD the distro was blazing for me.