No hesitation in Recommending Ubuntu

Tom Adelstein adelste at
Tue Jun 14 18:39:10 UTC 2005

On Tue, 2005-06-14 at 19:43 +0200, Vincent Trouilliez wrote:
> > 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
> money.......
> 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
> machines.
> --
> Vince

Good points. 

More information about the ubuntu-users mailing list