Poor excuse, why can't they just pick one?
|
| Author | Content |
|---|---|
| purplewizard Oct 03, 2005 1:52 PM EDT |
I'm fed up of this. I too find there are too many but I just pick one to suit my criteria. It's not about supporting them all from some one likes Dell's position surely. It must be about providing something that does what the customer wants. So if you have an idea what the customer wants you can install the best fit. We Linux users then might grumble why that one not this but they could pre-empt that by putting out notice "we had to pick one we picked this one". We Linux users still gain because any system that can run one distribution fully is more likely to support any other distribution than a totally unknown system built for "Windows". One person with 10 machines available could install all the top ten in a couple of days if there are no hitches. If there are hitches just report them to the vendor and go with the one or two that were hitch free. Or perhaps change a component of your system to one that removes the hitch (WiFi in my experience, every time I have bought a card it has been just after the chip set has changed to a new unsupported one! A big big buyer like Dell can I expect demand the exact things they want this avoiding this problem.) |
| tadelste Oct 03, 2005 2:01 PM EDT |
Who is Dell? Well Michael gave $250,000 to one of Tom DeLay's foundations and considers Bill Gates a friend. I guess there's no accounting for taste. |
| TxtEdMacs Oct 03, 2005 3:15 PM EDT |
But tadelste - the real question is: What was his ROI! |
| tadelste Oct 03, 2005 3:23 PM EDT |
Depends. Since I first met him, he's had major plastic surgery. We're talking about which Michael Dell? |
| helios Oct 03, 2005 7:30 PM EDT |
Alot of you guys (to include myself) have written about this in blogs or other postings and it seems to be agreed upon that there are too many distro's...but from what perspective? If the goal is to compete with MS Windows, then yes; the staggering number of distributions is an obstacle. However, what I see is an astounding evolution taking place. On one hand you have the "safe" distro's like Red Hat and Debian which strive to adhere to the GPL. Then you have PCLinuxOS and others that come with multimedia ready to rock out of the box. On the outside edges, you have projects like elive and SymphonyOS which are incorporating some amazing features within. (elive is worth a look if you get a chance.) Personally, I am a quivering tower of jello on this matter. I want to see Linux compete but then again, I want to see where it is going and who is going to take it there. The growth in the past two years alone has been nothing less than amazing. Would squeezing the best packages and programs from each right now and boxing it as "THE Linux" stabilize it for competition? Some say thats already been done and it's called Debian. Personally, I would like to see what's around the next curve. |
| sharkscott Oct 03, 2005 8:34 PM EDT |
I posted on this just a week or so ago. The whole idea that "one size fits all" or should fit, is a joke. Linux is about having the ability to choose what is right for you, just you. "Choice, Choice, Choice. That is what Open Standards mean. The ability for anyone to choose to work with someone else, or work on their own version of Linux is what it's all about. Are there too many? so what. If there really are too many then some will go away all by themselves. The ones that work for the most people will move on. Just like it has in the past, I for one think that if there is a distro for every Linux user out there, good, it means that people have taken control of their computers and have decided that they should be in charge. That is what having a choice is all about." Besides, who here if given a Dell box with a Linux distro already on it, wouldn't wipe it clean and install what they wanted anyway? The most "dangerous" issue concerning Linux is its ability to enable its users to decide what is best for them, just them. That is what bothers Bill and Micheal the most, the loss of control to tell others what is best for them, even though it isn't. :) |
| salparadise Oct 03, 2005 10:02 PM EDT |
Dell says there are too many Linuxes. Or in other words, "damn, this Linux is taking off but it's completely de-centralised so there's no one company to take over or shut out and it's still growing and we want some but it's de-centralised and we don't know where to throw our money or lawyers and damn it's still growing and we don't understand. Where's the production plant?" |
| mvermeer Oct 04, 2005 12:03 AM EDT |
Actually there are too darned many Windowses too. Not immediately after install; then the number is really limited, half a dozen or so. But just give them half a year of installing and uninstalling stuff and living rough on the Internet, and they are 'personalized' beyond recognition ;-) |
| helios Oct 04, 2005 4:24 AM EDT |
Salparadise... Bingo! That fact alone problably insures the executive lounges are well stocked witih Malox. |
| salparadise Oct 04, 2005 4:37 AM EDT |
Lost me there. What's Malox? |
| PaulFerris Oct 04, 2005 6:19 AM EDT |
There's too much choice of beer too. There needs to only be a couple of brands of beer available when I go to the store -- too confusing for the big store chains to sell so many different varieties. I think they should stick to Fosters -- even here in the US. Easy to remember, easy to stock. It would eliminate a bunch of shelf-space that the store could devote to more important things, like snack-crackers and cheese-spread. Of course, there's too many varieties of those too... --FeriCyde |
| SFN Oct 04, 2005 7:33 AM EDT |
The questions is, too many Linuxes for whom? For Dell? Definitely. Just like Sal said. For me? Not at all. I like having the ability to choose a new one when it does something that I want that my current distro doesn't deliver. For some of you? Sure. For others, no. Should the fact that some people don't want something to exist prevent it from existing? |
| tadelste Oct 04, 2005 8:26 AM EDT |
I'm not exactly T-H-R-I-L-L-E-D by the choices from companies like Fry's (Fries) MicroCenter, etc. that only offer LINSPIRE. I always install over it. For me a computer that I know runs Linux and a choice of some reasonable distributions makes more sense. |
| Koriel Oct 05, 2005 1:14 AM EDT |
I think the only reason their are so many other beers is simply because Fosters is utter kangaroo pi** :) Ali |
| tadelste Oct 05, 2005 5:53 AM EDT |
Hey now. I've been in places when they read of the list of brands, the safest thing to drink is Fosters or Samuel Adams. |
| lordshipmayhem Oct 05, 2005 7:33 PM EDT |
Or if you'd prefer to drink a beer instead, there's always Guinness. |
| helios Oct 06, 2005 7:09 AM EDT |
Malox: An over the counter crappy tasting liquid that relieves heartburn and stress induced indigestion. |
Posting in this forum is limited to members of the group: [ForumMods, SITEADMINS, MEMBERS.]
Becoming a member of LXer is easy and free. Join Us!