No hesitation in Recommending Ubuntu

Vincent Trouilliez vincent.trouilliez at
Tue Jun 14 17:43:04 UTC 2005

> One manufacturer doesn't have an NDA with me, so I'll tell you about
> Gateway. Once they received the product from Microsoft, they had to fix
> it, make enhancements, build drivers, etc. Then they would test it like
> mad men. Then, they would create a download and would load the OS on
> hard drives which could be put in computers.
> I watched people slam things on tables and walk away cursing and angry
> because they thought they were ready to do a run and something went
> wrong in the final test. It cost a fortune to hold up production because
> of some flaky bug.
> If Gateway or any other manufacturer bundled Ubuntu, they would make
> serious fixes to the distribution to get it to work. I think that they
> would have fewer fixes and would have better documentation with Ubuntu
> than Microsoft. They would also add components like a version of
> Cyberlink's PowerDVD, etc. 
> Why don't they? Because they are tied to the financial arrangements -
> marketing rebates.
> Tom

I agree with Tom...

I am no Linux guru, nor a developer, but I have worked 3 years at the
Nec and Packard-Bell factory for Europe (in Angers, France).
I don't have any DNA with them as I was only a simple worker there...
employed to fix all the machines that would fail anywhere in the
production lines, either assembly or stress testing. The point is, like
Gateway, they have whole teams of S/W guys that spent their time
fighting with H/W and S/W suppliers to get drivers or programs that
work, and work hard to make everything work together, before they can
upload the final master image to the network, to be used in production.
For every new machine/configuration, they must do it all over again. So
they are quite busy. But it used to be okay. However over time, they
were given less and less time to get everything working, so this lead to
more and more problem. Every other week, you would have thousands of
machines that show a similar bug/problem, due to insufficent testing
from the engineering dept. Needless to say, everytime this happened, it
was real mess. Not only the affected machines would not be shipped in
time, but more importantly, they would clog the production lines (slots
would not be freed) and slow down the entire factory... costing  lots of

So, to sum it up, I don't believe that putting Linux instead of Windows
XP, would cost them or be any more hassle than what happens with windows
right now. Just not possible !
Also, the biggest complain so far with Ubuntu is the problems with
proprietary format for multimedia files. Well, I don't have the figures,
but considering Ubuntu is 100% free, I very much doubt that it paying a
little fee for Java, mp3, crypted DVD what have, would cost anywhere
near as much as a Windows XP license !

So really, it's hardly neither a S/W nor money problem, but just
marketing/policies. If they had the nuts to at least "test the water" by
offering a small range of Ubuntu machines, I bet they would find it less
costly to get Ubuntu rather than XP, implemented/working on their


More information about the ubuntu-users mailing list