On 2008-07-23, Ian Hilliard <nospam@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Roy Schestowitz wrote:
>
>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>> Hash: SHA1
>>
>> ____/ Ian Hilliard on Monday 21 July 2008 10:09 : \____
>>
>>> 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-rolling-out-ubuntu-8-04-adds-media-codecs
>>>>
>>>> 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.
>>>>
>>>
>>> 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.
>>>
>>> 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.
>>
>> I think they ought to offer 'undressed PCs' (no, not "naked" like
>> Microsoft calls them) for those who wish to install their own O/S without
>> paying prematurely for something they do not require.
>>
>> There's some good momentum for unbundling at the moment (in France in
>> particular, at least in Europe). In fact, my current PC I bought from
>> Novatech and it came without an operating system. Every distro I through
>> as it worked perfectly (all hardware detected). The installation process
>> was probably trivial enough even for my technophobic parents to handle.
>>
>
> While I certainly agree with the idea that people should have the right to
> decide what OS or No OS should come with a computer. That is however not
> everyone's point of view. Many people want to buy turn-key solutions.
...that's fine.
However then it should be the turnkey solution provider, the people
that will be stuck fielding the support calls, that should be able
to control the solution and brand it.
Microsoft's name shouldn't even come up.
Dell should be able to call it "Dell Windows" or whatever else
they like. This notion that Microsoft is in the "drivers seat"
needs to go.
>
> At the moment, the biggest problem is that consumers don't understand that
> there is no separation between the computer and the OS. If the EU is able
> to push the ability for consumers to decide which OS comes with their
> computer, then the average consumer may better understand the difference.
The EU needs to completely commoditize what is in Windows so that the
Dells of the world have an alternate provider that they can use as a
perfect drop in replacement for their current one.
--
Negligence will never equal intent, no matter how you
attempt to distort reality to do so. This is what separates |||
the real butchers from average Joes (or Fritzes) caught up in / | \
events not in their control.
Posted Via Usenet.com Premium Usenet Newsgroup Services
----------------------------------------------------------
http://www.usenet.com
|
|
