__/ [ Thufir ] on Friday 25 May 2007 10:59 \__
> On Fri, 25 May 2007 05:52:18 +0100, Roy Schestowitz wrote:
>
>> __/ [ flyer ] on Friday 25 May 2007 03:46 \__
>>
>>> In article <1775033.jc4foB7lEZ@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
>>> newsgroups@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx says...
>>>> __/ [ Geico Caveman ] on Friday 25 May 2007 01:25 \__
>>>>
>>>> > John Bailo wrote:
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> >> http://www.dell.com/content/topics/segtopic
>>>> >>
>>>> >> !!!
>>>> >> .aspx
>>>> >> !!!
>>>> >>
>>>> >> /ubuntu?c=us&cs=19&l=en&s=dhs
>>>> >
>>>> > Something tells me that if Dell had shipped Microvell's SuSe desktop
>>>> > today, you would have held that very same fact as a sign of the
>>>> > benefits of "interoperability".
>>>>
>>>> We are yet to see how their little flirt with Microvell affects its
>>>> Linux dealings.
>
> explain this "flirt" please.
Here it is in video:
http://boycottnovell.com/2007/05/13/dell-video-ip/
This /could/ develop in unwanted ways.
>>> Dell is sending uncertain signals all over the place.
>>>
>>> Are they simply keeping an enemy close in order to watch them (useful
>>> at times), or are they eternally compromised.
>>>
>>> I originally thought they would do the right thing, but right now I
>>> have not a clue. I would never support them with purchases unless they
>>> come clean as to who they really are.
>>
>> I worry that Dell could be used to extend Ballmer's statement "the deal
>> with Novell established that open source is not free" to OEMs. As if to
>> say, "any shop that sells Linux will need to pay Microsoft some money on
>> each sale". This would give Microsoft money on /any/ PC sold, no matter
>> if it's a whitebox or a Linux box. Why did Canonical need to /license/
>> Linux with Dell? All these outsiders (e.g. PCLOS devs) might as well
>> shout "Dell shouldn't go with n00buntu because it's commercialised".
>>
>> Maybe I'm thinking too much and too far ahead...
>
>
> Yes and no. I agree that it's silly to have a license with Dell, but
> IMHO *anything* is a step forward. Worst possible end-game: you can't
> get a distro without a microsoft "commission" of one variety or another.
> However, even that has an upside: there'd be alternatives to windows.
>
> If there are alternatives to windows, then there's room for competing
> products, which breaks the monopoly power, which is good. Whether or not
> linux itself succeeds is immaterial in such a scenario where you can buy
> a pc and select an OS, from different suppliers, to go with it. That's
> closer to real competition, which is goooood.
Indeed. I never denied it. :-D
--
~~ Best regards
Roy S. Schestowitz | Download Reversi: http://othellomaster.com
http://Schestowitz.com | RHAT Linux | PGP-Key: 0x74572E8E
12:20pm up 26 days 20:42, 8 users, load average: 1.84, 2.06, 1.66
http://iuron.com - Open Source knowledge engine project
|
|
