Can Dell motivate.....

[KingBahamut]

"Michael Dell explains his company's Linux desktop strategy in an interview at DesktopLinux.com. He says that it's not practical for Dell (the company) to support numerous distributions due to their incompatibilities, but that he doesn't want alienate large segements of the Linux community by selecting a favorite Linux distro to standardize on (Ubuntu appears to be his favorite, at the moment, by the way.) What he'd really like to see, is for the popular Linux distros to converge on a common core platform, according to the article."

External Link
http://desktoplinux.com/news/NS3822185143.html

Here is my question, does this mean Michael Dell is calling for a DCCAish (www.dccalliance.org) sort of deal amongst all the Linucies that are out there? Would such a thing be good?

I personally cant see wide spread standardization as a positive thing, but thats just me. It would take the versatility of Linux away from itself.

It is interesting though that Dell likes us , at least as stated in the article.

[Brunellus]

"Michael Dell explains his company's Linux desktop strategy in an interview at DesktopLinux.com. He says that it's not practical for Dell (the company) to support numerous distributions due to their incompatibilities, but that he doesn't want alienate large segements of the Linux community by selecting a favorite Linux distro to standardize on (Ubuntu appears to be his favorite, at the moment, by the way.) What he'd really like to see, is for the popular Linux distros to converge on a common core platform, according to the article."

External Link
http://desktoplinux.com/news/NS3822185143.html

Here is my question, does this mean Michael Dell is calling for a DCCAish (www.dccalliance.org) sort of deal amongst all the Linucies that are out there? Would such a thing be good?

I personally cant see wide spread standardization as a positive thing, but thats just me. It would take the versatility of Linux away from itself.

It is interesting though that Dell likes us , at least as stated in the article.
so does this mean he's trying to badger ubuntu into DCCA?

[towsonu2003]

from what I understand, he plays his cards well. on one hand, he asks for something almost impossible (a monopoly of a linux distro over others) and gets away with it; on the other hand if what he asks is "achieved", he will get great profit from it while Linux will be abandoned by its core developers (who can't tolerate monopolistics plays)...

there is one thing he needs to do: provide the drivers for hardware that he sells with his desktops. The rest will be handled by the community.

[DrFunkenstein]

Here is my question, does this mean Michael Dell is calling for a DCCAish (www.dccalliance.org) sort of deal amongst all the Linucies that are out there? Would such a thing be good?

I think something like improving the LSB would be more obvious.



I personally cant see wide spread standardization as a positive thing, but thats just me. It would take the versatility of Linux away from itself.

I'll have to disagree here. Standards are great and I don't think standards take away versatility, at least not always. Take KDE and Gnome working together for example. I think this is ultimately good for both platforms, so it even benefits versatility and choice. Now wouldn't it be great if it didn't matter from a users perspective if he was running a Gnome, or a KDE application and would lead to more and better choice.

[Brunellus]

I think something like improving the LSB would be more obvious.


I'll have to disagree here. Standards are great and I don't think standards take away versatility, at least not always. Take KDE and Gnome working together for example. I think this is ultimately good for both platforms, so it even benefits versatility and choice. Now wouldn't it be great if it didn't matter from a users perspective if he was running a Gnome, or a KDE application and would lead to more and better choice.
I think KB was referring to the problem of getting universal binary compatibility, which seems to be regarded as a fools' errand.

[KingBahamut]

I dont have an issue with application colab or even UI colab, but a full globalization of all resources standardized into one cohesive effort? Wont happen.

That would have to mean that individuals like Stallman, Morton, Tridgell, Torvalds, Raymond, and everyone else involved would have to be in a room together and not rip each others throats out. Unlikely.

I dont see Ubuntu jumping on the DCCA wagon. With all the hundred distros that are out there , I dont see any of them jumping on an associated effort either.

And yes, Brunellus your right. It is a fools errand.

[DrFunkenstein]

I dont have an issue with application colab or even UI colab, but a full globalization of all resources standardized into one cohesive effort? Wont happen.

But that's not what Dell is talking about, is it?



I dont see Ubuntu jumping on the DCCA wagon. With all the hundred distros that are out there , I dont see any of them jumping on an associated effort either.

Oh, just look how many are already LSB compliant. And look at project portland. This will solve many problems on a non-distribution specific level.




And yes, Brunellus your right. It is a fools errand.
Nope, not if you don't want full binary compatability, but something like the LSB provides.

[Zeroangel]

His reasons for not adopting linux do not sit well with me. You favor one distribution over another because it is superior for the purposes of your target audience (ie: the average user).

If the other distros offer business models that cannot comply with dells need and the needs of its customers the solution is simple. Do not use that distro! It does not matter whether the other distros 'get mad at you' for favoring another because that's the way competition works.

If, for example, Dell decides to preinstall Ubuntu linux on its linux desktops then let it. The goal here is the adoption of the OSS model onto the desktop of the layman; and the introduction of diversity and competition into the model.

Lets say Dell does install ubuntu, and Mandrake says: "We can take over some of the support/update tasks of the user for a period of 3 years, if you give us $40 per desktop sold" and Dell agrees then there is nothing wrong with that.

[KingBahamut]

But that's not what Dell is talking about, is it?

Why would it not be? Everyone wants standardization to a certain extent. Companies like Novell and Redhat strive for it.

[DrFunkenstein]

Why would it not be? Everyone wants standardization to a certain extent.
But isn't there a difference between "standardization to a certain extent" and "a full globalization of all resources standardized into one cohesive effort"?

At least I thought so and that was exactly the point I was trying to make.

[Zeroangel]

The W3C's standardization of HTML is an example of standardization done right.

In light of competition from other 'standards', it is usually the inferior one that will fail. This is not to be equated with competition from commercial products and the anti-trust and marketing tactics used by Microsoft.

[towsonu2003]

Some standardization of OSS does not foist a monopoly
and what would be those standards? gnome for desktop; deb for package format; apt-get for package management etc?
--> imagine you are a non-gnome, non-deb, non-aptget person...

PS. replace gnome, deb, apt-get with any other available choice, replace above mentioned standards with anything else (gcc 3.4 or 4.0 to compile, optimization for server or desktop, etc etc) and you'll end up with the paragraph marked with --> (with corresponding "non-<putstandardhere>"s)...

PSS. I love the choice 500+ distros give me... I very much like the possibility and the opportunity of being able to try whatever I like. Each for my ever-changing "needs". One big distro would eat the available support for all others IMO.

[DrFunkenstein]

PSS. I love the choice 500+ distros give me... I very much like the possibility and the opportunity of being able to try whatever I like. Each for my ever-changing "needs". One big distro would eat the available support for all others IMO.
But standards enable choice, just look at the internet. You wouldn't be able to choose your webbrowser, if there weren't standards. And nobody is talking about one big distro.

Btw., if you want to know about standards for the desktop, nobody is talking about choosing eigter Gnome or Kde.
http://www.linuxbase.org/LSBWiki/DesktopWG
Maybe this will give you an idea.

[towsonu2003]

But standards enable choice, just look at the internet. You wouldn't be able to choose your webbrowser, if there weren't standards.
In your analogy, "internet" corresponds to "kernel" and "different webbrowsers"[1] corresponds to "what a distro wraps around the kernel". The kernel is already standardized in all distros (well, uhm, ok, some combine other kernels like solaris in their distros).

And nobody is talking about one big distro.
Dell is...
http://ubuntuforums.org/showpost.php?p=803844&postcount=6


Btw., if you want to know about standards for the desktop, nobody is talking about choosing eigter Gnome or Kde.
http://www.linuxbase.org/LSBWiki/DesktopWG
Maybe this will give you an idea.
This has nothing to do with the topic of the thread. As I mentioned, Dell is... LSB, on the other hand, IMO, tries to make sure various necessary library versions match accross various Desktop Linux distros... Even that may be problematic, but that's still offtopic.

[1]
Firefox --> Debian (no offense!!) ; Explorer --> Linspire ; Dillo --> DSL
Internet (1, 2, or 3) --> Same in all (2.4 or 2.6)

[DrFunkenstein]

In your analogy, "internet" corresponds to "kernel" and "different webbrowsers"[1] corresponds to "what distro wrap around the kernel". The kernel is already standardized in all distros (well, uhm, ok, some combine other kernels like solaris in their distros).

No.
First off, it's not an analogy, but an example for standards enabling choice. Of course there are different problems for desktop standards, but that doesn't mean that standards wouldn't be a good thing there too. What would be wrong about making sure that a distro that is LSB4.0 compliant does at least ship with a certain version of freetype, so that people who want to target all compliant distros can be sure that at least this version is available?



Dell is...
http://ubuntuforums.org/showpost.php?p=803844&postcount=6

Nope, he's talking about a common core, which doesn't mean one big distro. Again, look at the LSB and project portland.



This has nothing to do with the topic of the thread. As I mentioned, Dell is... LSB, on the other hand, IMO, tries to make sure various necessary library versions match invarious Desktop Linux distros... Even that may be problematic, but that's still offtopic.

No,that's exactly on topic.

[towsonu2003]

Nope, he's talking about a common core, which doesn't mean one big distro. Again, look at the LSB and project portland.

Please read the article. I don't wanna waste space by copy-pasting relevant quotes where he says he wants one distro to support in Dell products and he wants that distro to be the biggest one. As he wants much more than what Ubuntu is[1], that means he wants a monopolistic distro that controls the linux distro "market".

[1]Ubuntu was chosen as this year's favorite distro, only with ~20% of the votes. See http://www.linuxquestions.org/questions/showthread.php?t=409010 . Distros that got over 10% of total vote add up to about 63%. The number would be lower if the thread listed more than 17 distros.

[DrFunkenstein]

Please read the article.

I already did, thank you.


We see lots of opportunity there. If the Linux desktops could converge at their cores, such a common platform would make it easier to support. Or, if there was a leading or highly preferred version that a majority of users would want, we'd preload it."
Did you notice the or?
He's talking about either having a common core or having one leading distro. As I think we all agree that one leading distro won't happen in the short term and KingBahamut was clearly talking about standardization in his original post, that's what I have been talking about.

[Bandit]

I think standardization is good. Cloning would be bad.
If most all the distros used Apt and debian packages that would be great.
That would be all the standardization we would need.
How the distro is put together and the software it is supplied with is irrelavent.
As long as you can get one binary from another distro and ther is a 95% chance it would work on another then adoption of Linux would be a breeze.
Much like Debian packages work on Ubuntu.. Most of the time they work perfectly...
Now I would like to see Ubuntu on a Dell system. They could just charge for any proprietery drivers if they need to and MP3 and DVD codecs.
Many people would go nuts knowing they dont have to deal with any spyware or viruses like they do in windows.. Most people just want to surf the net and watch porn..
Cheers,
Joey

[mstlyevil]

I think standardization is good. Cloning would be bad.
If most all the distros used Apt and debian packages that would be great.
That would be all the standardization we would need.
How the distro is put together and the software it is supplied with is irrelavent.
As long as you can get one binary from another distro and ther is a 95% chance it would work on another then adoption of Linux would be a breeze.
Much like Debian packages work on Ubuntu.. Most of the time they work perfectly...
Now I would like to see Ubuntu on a Dell system. They could just charge for any proprietery drivers if they need to and MP3 and DVD codecs.
Many people would go nuts knowing they dont have to deal with any spyware or viruses like they do in windows.. Most people just want to surf the net and watch porn..
Cheers,
Joey

Standardized Linux prOn! Now that is a new concept for DELL to think about.

[DrFunkenstein]

Standardized Linux prOn! Now that is a new concept for DELL to think about.
I think they should standardize on porn-get (http://www.lesbian.mine.nu/)

[Zeroangel]

As an example of standardization. If RPM were to die out in favor of DEB, would anyone miss it? And if so, why? They both do the same thing, but Debian packages just do it more effectively.

[towsonu2003]

If RPM were to die out in favor of DEB, would anyone miss it?
Keep in mind that you are posting to a Debian based distro forum. Try that in a Suse forum...

Who'll miss it? rpm users will.

[Bandit]

Keep in mind that you are posting to a Debian based distro forum. Try that in a Suse forum...

Who'll miss it? rpm users will.
I am on the two SuSE forums all the time. Being that over half of the SuSE users try to run Apt in place of YaST, I am not sure they would not miss it as long as it worked..

[KingBahamut]

Why must everything go back to pronography?

Stay on target gents.

[Bandit]

Why must everything go back to pronography?

Stay on target gents.
ROTF... :)
Sorry I have a tendency to speak the truth..

[ComplexNumber]

As an example of standardization. If RPM were to die out in favor of DEB, would anyone miss it? And if so, why? They both do the same thing, but Debian packages just do it more effectively. i would miss rpm. i've mainly used rpm distros (mandriva, suse, fedora), so i'm much more used to, and feel more confortable with, rpms. i'm also more familiar with the syntax.
i can't see why debs are any better than rpms from my way of seeing things. perhaps its just that i'm more used to rpm. i remember having a lot of trouble trying to do the same things with deb as i can with rpm, but i failed miserably. i wasn't at all impressed with deb.




back on topic, i think it may be an idea to have single distrubtion for commercial use (ie the type that dell is perhaps wanting) and is used for the purpose alone. i haven't thought it through fully, though.

[Brunellus]

Why must everything go back to pronography?

Stay on target gents.
go pr0nbuntu!

[DigitalDuality]

Why must everything go back to pronography?

Stay on target gents.

Porn..first e-commerce
Porn- 10 billion dollar a year industry just in the US.

Without pr0n, there's no interweb, without the interweb, i doubt many would care about a PC or Ubuntu for that matter.

[majikstreet]

bahhhh... I hate dell!

[mstlyevil]

I have waited awhile to post on this topic to see what people were thinking first. Is it possible this another one of Dell's attempts to get better OEM pricing from Microsoft? Dell has a habbit of doing this by saying that they are considering AMD. They always manage to leave a convient out in the statement like that they are concerned AMD is not capable of generating the volume needed. Intel responds by cutting a special pricing arrangement to keep Dell a Intel only shop. It just seems like to much of a coincidence they leave a out for Linux by putting a requirement on it that almost is surely to never be successful. They have lost market share and revenue in the last few quarters so they may just be clamoring for a better pricing scheme from MSFT to help offset the losses. Just my 2 cents.

Edit: Sorry for going off topic on the prOn thing earlier KingBahamut.

[trorion]

So on the RPM vs DEB question (and this is a question I have in general...): Why not support both? a composite manager that looks at the file and if it RPM it uses RPM syntax but if it's DEB it uses DEB syntax?

I think that a base system would make a lot of sense. Picture dell selling a computer for $150. Requires broadband access. You plug in the computer and it boots the base kernel then says "tell me what you want to do and i'll customize your setup..." then it downloads the necessary packages and installs them based on what you want it to do.

Maybe it customizes to an Ubuntu or Debian or Fedora or whatever.

Back in the late 90's when I first tried linux I tried about 6 distros. They weren't even consistent in where they put the kernel. Things are much better now I believe which is...standardization.

[ComplexNumber]

I have waited awhile to post on this topic to see what people were thinking first. Is it possible this another one of Dell's attempts to get better OEM pricing from Microsoft? Dell has a habbit of doing this by saying that they are considering AMD. They always manage to leave a convient out in the statement like that they are concerned AMD is not capable of generating the volume needed. Intel responds by cutting a special pricing arrangement to keep Dell a Intel only shop. It just seems like to much of a coincidence they leave a out for Linux by putting a requirement on it that almost is surely to never be successful. They have lost market share and revenue in the last few quarters so they may just be clamoring for a better pricing scheme from MSFT to help offset the losses. Just my 2 cents.

Edit: Sorry for going off topic on the prOn thing earlier KingBahamut. you have a point...and it makes sense. i guess we'll just have to wait and see.

[imagine]

Here is my question, does this mean Michael Dell is calling for a DCCAish (www.dccalliance.org) sort of deal amongst all the Linucies that are out there?No.

Would such a thing be good? No.

IMHO he's just searching a friendly/lame (you decide) excuse not to support Linux. It doesn't matter how many Linux distributions are out there, since they all use the same kernel and that's all that matters. Dell neither has to preinstall a Linux distribution, nor provide own drivers nor offer support. All that is necessary is assembling a few desktops computers and notebooks with parts from manufacturers that offer Linux drivers.
Only that obviously Dell doesn't want to do that, since that would limit their choice to pick the cheapest suppliers. But stating this in the interview somehow didn't look like a good idea to Mr. Dell.

[poofyhairguy]

So on the RPM vs DEB question (and this is a question I have in general...): Why not support both? a composite manager that looks at the file and if it RPM it uses RPM syntax but if it's DEB it uses DEB syntax?


Because RPMS and DEBS come from different distros. These distro have different dependancies called different things that dump the libs into different places.

I mean....Ubuntu can't always use debs from Debian without trouble....so RPMs are a whole different story.

Try playing with Alien for a while. I alienize debs all the time. Its the most hit or miss thing I have ever dealt with. Only works like 30% of the time!

[poofyhairguy]

Oh, just look how many are already LSB compliant.

Doesn't LSB support the RPM format? Isn't this why the project seems to be near death, with no major news or commitments for some time?

I mean.....Ubuntu/Debian don't seem to play that game and they are a HUGE part of the market

http://dir.filewatcher.com/d/Ubuntu/powerpc/misc/lsb_2.0-1ubuntu2_powerpc.deb.26562.html


:

Its presence does not imply that we believe that Debian fully complies with the Linux Standard Base, and should not be construed as a statement that Debian is LSB-compliant.

[weasel fierce]

The one thing I found interesting, was hints that Dell and ubuntu folks have been communicating, regarding drivers and whatnot.

[trorion]

Because RPMS and DEBS come from different distros. These distro have different dependancies called different things that dump the libs into different places.

I mean....Ubuntu can't always use debs from Debian without trouble....so RPMs are a whole different story.
Which is part of the reason that I suspect Dell doesn't want to do linux...a user finds a program they want, try to install it, break X and then they get on the phone to Dell customer support saying "my computer crashed, no I didn't do anything wrong."

There are people who call Dell to ask why their computer won't work when they didn't turn on the monitor.

[prizrak]

Dell has a completely BS excuse IMO. They don't even have to make sure to get Linux supported manufacturers with their size they could easily put pressure on them to make the drivers (especially since they do offer Red Hat servers and Workstations). There are also corporate backed Linux distros, RedHat, SuSE, Mandriva, hell even Xandros. While I never had a problem with alienating RPMs an average RedHat user will be able to find just about any program they would ever need in the RPM format since it is a major distro in the business world. So Dell has no call not to support Linux on desktops at all, and their claim that they would alienate some people in the community by supporting one distro is also complete BS, most would be happy that there is a major OEM supplying Linux machines since now if you want Linux on Dell you gonna have to reinstall anyways.

[encompass]

"If the Linux desktops could converge at their cores, such a common platform would make it easier to support. Or, if there was a leading or highly preferred version that a majority of users would want, we'd preload it." --Mike Dell
I think that is his answer... we need to converge on our core system... honestly I feel many linux distros are based on another. For instance Ubuntu/Knoppix/Debian/STD they are all very close at a much higher level then just the Kernel.
I also feel that as driver and hardware support become better, hackers won't have to make such crazy drivers to try to get there hardware to work. It can all "just" work because it has a standard. And I think it is getting there. Slowly. But that takes time. Dell could make that venture to support only linux hardware. Then people would know where to buy a PC for linux. Get it for ubuntu and Dell. I think that is a new market... Ubuntu WILL work with Dell PC's.
You could even think of it the other way, Dell could say, our system has been fully tested and everything works with Ubuntu Dapper. I would actually buy a dell at that point, just beacue I know it would work. And just work.
My point is... don't wait for it Dell, take the lead and make the mark in the Linux world. No you can't support everyone, but you have to support SOMETHING, I think Ubuntu is the way to go.
That way when I see a pc with Windows on it and they are ticked at it problems and want to try linux. They will ask, "Does everything I have in this computer work with Linux?" I can say "Yes as long as it is 2006 or newer."

[ComplexNumber]

I think Ubuntu is the way to go i very much doubt that it is. ubuntu is an attractive desktop, but not for those who have no internet connection. for such people, ubuntu is one of the worst.

[prizrak]

i very much doubt that it is. ubuntu is an attractive desktop, but not for those who have no internet connection. for such people, ubuntu is one of the worst.
I agree with this actually, we are all Ubuntu lovers here (well most of us some hate it), but Ubuntu is not really the easiest for newbies, it's still not completely point and click so something like Xandros or possibly SuSE with its YaST crap (sorry I don't like YaST) would be better.

[encompass]

i very much doubt that it is. ubuntu is an attractive desktop, but not for those who have no internet connection. for such people, ubuntu is one of the worst.
I personally feel the most computers are on the internet now. If you want a computer to not be on the net, ubuntu has that just as much as windows XP. Both want internet all the time. Heck, I can do updates of my solftware without the internet in ubuntu. But it is a pain to do it in Windows XP.
Mike Dell said himself that if he picks on distro he will get complainers. He is right. But you have to pick something and go with it. Otherwise nothing with be done, and no progression.
So my points are...
1. Without internet both OS's are a pain, the world uses internet.
2. Of course Mike Dell is going to get complainers, but how many presidents of the US ever did everything right for everyone. The same thing applies in business. He has to cater to someone, but he will face the anger of others. You just have to pick the one the least will complain about.

[ComplexNumber]

or possibly SuSE with its YaST crap i think yast is very good. IMO suse has the best admin tools of any distro.



If you want a computer to not be on the net, ubuntu has that just as much as windows XP. the big difference here is that windows packages come as self sufficient programs that one can get from the disks on computer mags etc. its jsut a case of installing it from the disks without the dependency hell of ubuntu (heck, i can't beleive that i'm giving a plus point to windows, but windows really is superior in this respect). in ubuntu, this is not the case. i mean, how does one get more programs on ubuntu when there is no internet connection? so you go away and find the programs that you want to downalod from a PC that has an internet connection, burn them onto disk, go back to your own PC that runs ubuntu with no internet connection, only to find that you are missing a few libraries here and there that the programs depend upon. so you have to go back to a PC with an internet connection,........

[Jucato]

Pardon my ignorance on some matters, but I would just like to ask some things.

Before I start, regarding Ubuntu and DCCA and LSB, I'm pretty sure Mark has definitely said "no" to DCCA. However, he is now pushing for LSB certification:

2. Certification
There are a number of ISV's and IHV's who are in the process of
certifying Dapper as part of their solution, and the delay will give us
an opportunity to ensure that those are ready for the release. I am
happy to say that we are working towards LSB 3.0 certification of
Dapper, and the delay greatly reduces any risk of failure to achieve
that certification.
Taken from: https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-art/2006-March/000734.html

Anyway, on to my questions:
1. What makes it so hard for hardware manufacturers to support Linux? What is it in distributions that gives them a hard time to develop drivers and binaries? I thought that having a common kernel would have made it easier. I'm not really knowledgeable of how all these (hardware, drivers, kernel, OS, distros) work together, so I'm kinda baffled what the problem really is.

2. Is it really impossible to develop a sort of standard at a very basic/core level that is common to all distros (if there is a core similarity)? I mean, rather than making RPM or DEB as the standard, is it not possible to develop a package management standard that will let these two work in any distro, yet retain their uniqueness? It's a bit abstract but let me say it in another way. I've read somewhere about the Tango icon project that seeks to make a standard for icons regardless of desktop environment. They're not making a standard icon theme, but an icon-naming standard, so that icon themes using that standard could work in whatever DE you choose. If one of the things that separate RPM and DEB is where they install stuff (libraries, for example), is there no way to make a standard as to where they will install these? Or maybe, just for example, do something like this. If RPM installs in folder A and DEB installs in folder B, why not make a standard folder C which will be present in all distros and links/points to folder A or B, depending on the distro. So that no matter where the files are installed (A or B), the system will just have to look at folder C and it will be directed to the proper place. I'm not a programmer, so I don't know what would be the performance cost of something like this.

Like I said, I'm quite ignorant about matters such as these (hardware-OS interaction and drivers, the differences bewteen RPM and DEB, what makes each distro different, etc), so my questions might be way off. I'd really like to expand my knowledge of Linux so I'd appreciate if I could be educated. (but please, no flames :D )