Home Messages Index
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Author IndexDate IndexThread Index

Re: Dell Buys Binary Blobs for GNU/Linux PCs

On Jul 21, 6:09 am, Ian Hilliard <nos...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Roy Schestowitz wrote:
> > Dell begins rolling out Ubuntu 8.04, adds media codecs
>
> > ,----[ Quote ]
> > | Dell began to address those problems with the 7.10 release by adding
> > | legal support for DVD playback. With the 8.04 release, Dell is going a
> > | step further and will be adding licensed codecs for common audio and
> > | video formats.
> > `----
>
> http://arstechnica.com/journals/linux.ars/2008/07/19/dell-begins-roll...
>
> > Why do they pay Microsoft? They ought to offer PCs with no software at
> > all, at least as a cheaper option that's not tainted.

Dell and the other OEMs look at the big picture.  If even 1/2 the PCs
they sell need to have Windows, and Microsoft is willing to cut the
price by 60% below per unit price of teh 50% then Dell saves money by
ordering Windows for everything.  Of course, Dell also hase some
negotiating leverage these days, as do the other OEMs, and they have
much more flexibility as to what gets installed and in what
configurations.

This also allows Linux users to legally run Windows applications under
WINE and under VMs.
Perhaps Dell will even offer something designed to compete with the
iMac, something that runs a good version of Linux, AND a good version
of Windows, concurrently on the same machine, the way Mac does.  If
Dell doesn't do it, it could be HP, or Acer, or Lenovo, or even Sony.

OEMs buy windows because they believe that it will help them sell more
computers.  If Linux will help them sell more PCs than Apple, or the
other OEMs, and at a higher retail price, then they will start
installing Linux.

If shipping Vista exclusively means that they will be selling fewer
PCs, and dropping out of the "Top 5", they will insist on an
alternative to Vista alone.

> As is often pointed out, most people don't see the big picture. Most people
> just "want it to work". That means that the codecs should be pre-installed.
> Dell cannot put the open codecs onto their computers without having to
> worry about getting sued. From that point of view, what Dell is doing is
> the lesser of two evils. I applaud them for it.

They could license the codecs, but having the MS license covers a
whole package of concerns.  If Linux distributors had a bunch of
exclusive patents and cross-licensed them to each other, but not
Microsoft (such as the virtual desktops) then Dell would probably buy
enough Linux licenses to cover all of those machines.  Note that
Xerox, Kodak, and other companies have a number patents which are not
available to Microsoft, but are available to Linux.  Many of them are
critical elements of X11.

> Linux is a great OS for multimedia. The issue has simply been the licensing
> of the codecs. Without licensed codecs being available for Linux, the OS
> will always be in the legal grey area and as such marginalized.
>
> Ian


[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Author IndexDate IndexThread Index