Mark Shuttleworth's view on preinstalled linux

[ComplexNumber]

read it here (http://www.markshuttleworth.com/archives/100).

[Quillz]

Interesting read. I agree with a lot of his views.

[izmaelis]

Ni-i-ice article.

[prizrak]

Good post by Mr. Shuttleworth. I'm a bit curious why didn't mention that the market that he is talking about is already there. Some people call it corporate, some people call it business, I personally call it organizational. Profit margins in that market are quite a bit thicker, they always pay for support and order in bulk, they would not buy below mid-range, they would KNOW for a FACT what OS they want.

I always said that the way to home desktop dominance is through the business dominance. In the long term an OS that is 100% gratis for the manufacturer (such as Ubuntu or OpenSuSE) would be better for profits than an OS they have to pay for. The problem of course is that Western companies never [rarely] look at the long term and are concerned mostly with the short term.

Aside from what Mark said it would be pretty hard to sell Linux machines to the general public. Those who don't know what it is, won't buy it. Those who do know what it is either had a bad experience and won't buy it or know enough to not depend on preinstalled machines. There is a fairly small number of people who would buy it because one of us [geeks] told them that it would work for them.

[aysiu]

Great read. Not sure what it will lead to, but it shows Mark isn't stupid.

[beercz]

Great read. Not sure what it will lead to, but it shows Mark isn't stupid.
How many stupid multi-millionaires do you know?

[MetalMusicAddict]

Hey look! poptones (http://www.markshuttleworth.com/archives/100#comment-59284) replied there. :) That SOB.

[rsambuca]

In the long term an OS that is 100% gratis for the manufacturer (such as Ubuntu or OpenSuSE) would be better for profits than an OS they have to pay for. The problem of course is that Western companies never [rarely] look at the long term and are concerned mostly with the short term.

I am not sure I follow this statement. Why would a free OS be better for profits? The OEM cost is just built into the consumer price. In fact, most of the companies that have trial software pre-loaded on Windows machines actually kick-back money to the manufacturer.

[FyreBrand]

I liked that article, especially the part about users wants and expectations of Windows users. I also like how he had some potential solutions towards making pre-installation more feasible.

[FyreBrand]

I am not sure I follow this statement. Why would a free OS be better for profits? The OEM cost is just built into the consumer price. In fact, most of the companies that have trial software pre-loaded on Windows machines actually kick-back money to the manufacturer.Because if Microsoft feels neglected, threatened or abandoned in their business deal they could make the profit margin hurt for Dell or any OEM. Remember if Dell pisses MS off and they provide a better deal to Dell's primary competitors then Dell loses sales or profit margin. Either way they will feel a squeeze.

[TheMono]

How many stupid multi-millionaires do you know?

That's a real, real good point.

[prizrak]

I am not sure I follow this statement. Why would a free OS be better for profits? The OEM cost is just built into the consumer price. In fact, most of the companies that have trial software pre-loaded on Windows machines actually kick-back money to the manufacturer.

While it was explained above but just to add. Dell can sell a machine for $1000 with Vista Home Basic on it or it can sell the same machine for $1000 with Ubuntu Feisty Fawn on it. They would make more money obviously. Since you [consumer] have no idea how much it actually costs for them to make the system they can more or less charge any price the market will allow.

Also as was touched on above there is no switching cost with a libre OS. Right now if MS doesn't like Dell or HP they can raise the price of Windows and effectively put those companies out of business since unlike Lenovo their selling point is cheap systems. On the other hand if Dell doesn't like SuSE and decides to put Ubuntu on some machines Novell can't do anything to them since there is nothing really holding Dell back from providing all the same services for Ubuntu.

Essentially with a FOSS OS any OEM can create their own distro and sell it with their systems instead of being at the mercy of the ISV that supplies them. If Dell and HP start selling Linux laptops and they do well, Dell could quite easily create DellBuntu or DellBSD (if they want to keep drivers closed) and just make sure that it can run all the software available under other Linux distro's (not difficult in any way shape or form). Since for the most part all *nix is the same (not really but close enough) there is very little issue with having a customized distro.

[Trebuchet]

How many stupid multi-millionaires do you know?Brittany Spears
Al Gore
Prince Charles
Michael Moore

[Kateikyoushi]

Great article, if the companies could be convinced that community support can be as good theirs could be a big step to put that linux disc into the computers box.

[carlgm]

Brittany Spears
Al Gore
Prince Charles
Michael Moore

You know them personally and can confirm they have both a low IQ and lack any sense or intelligence? No, didn't think so.

[BarfBag]

I agree with pretty much everything he said. Way to go, Mark!

[aktiwers]

How many stupid multi-millionaires do you know?
Paris Hilton?

[igknighted]

Because if Microsoft feels neglected, threatened or abandoned in their business deal they could make the profit margin hurt for Dell or any OEM. Remember if Dell pisses MS off and they provide a better deal to Dell's primary competitors then Dell loses sales or profit margin. Either way they will feel a squeeze.

What would MS gain by that? They would look like they were afraid of linux. Why not give Dell better discounts to make their products compete better with Linux? If people saw Windows and Linux PCs nearly the same price, MS looks good.

[FyreBrand]

What would MS gain by that? They would look like they were afraid of linux. Why not give Dell better discounts to make their products compete better with Linux? If people saw Windows and Linux PCs nearly the same price, MS looks good.
You know reading back I misread the post I replied to. Oops. Anyways they might do exactly what you said, however Microsoft has often used a squeeze tactic.

In this imaginary scenario they would provide a good discount to the OEM not supporting Linux and squeeze the competitor so they lose sales. It's pure conjecture and may not even be realistic. In the way I misread the post I was trying to think how MS could possibly respond.

I think you're right about Microsoft looking good having a system priced even nearly the same as a Linux system. I think the question of extra costs for codecs on Linux would also come up. People take the extra costs of Windows for granted, as a normal thing (security and office software for example). Things like codecs aren't something a Windows user expects to pay for and could make the Linux system look like it has hidden costs. This isn't true, but I think the perception could be there.

I think one of the most important parts to focus on in Mark's post is the end where he brings to the table issues to make Linux a realistic business option for OEM's.

[EdThaSlayer]

Nice article. Good read. It explains quite well why there aren't that many companies that support pre-installed linux distros.

[beercz]

How many stupid multi-millionaires do you know?
Perhaps I should rephrase the question:

How many stupid self-made multi-millionaires do you know?

I personally do not know any.

Anyway this is going off topic.

Going back to Mark's article. I agree with his main points. I think he is right and most linux users would prefer to install, configure and tweak the OS(es) of their choice.

The cost of producing consumer technology (which is what most pcs are these days) is continually being squeezed (stack 'em high and sell 'em cheap), because of competition and the "MS subsidy" Mark refers to, makes the viability of producing such devices installed with various flavours and versions of Linux questionable at best,

A good article.