4 ms·

>it simply means that by installing Ubuntu 12.04 LTS on their current (or future) ProLiant hardware that they won’t nullify any kind of hardware warranty. Woul

>it simply means that by installing Ubuntu 12.04 LTS on their current (or future) ProLiant hardware that they won’t nullify any kind of hardware warranty. Would it have before? Warranty claims being denied because a server runs Ubuntu would cause quite a shit storm. Unlike consumers, people purchasing servers are generally sophisticated (whitepapers nonwithstanding), and Ubuntu is a huge slice of the server market. About 45% of all EC2 images are Ubuntu based. This smells like a non story to me. Edit: Updated the market share; It's actually 45% now: http://thecloudmarket.com/stats#/totals http://thecloudmarket.com/stats#/totals

freehunter 15y ago
Doing so would possibly violate consumer laws in the US as well. To nullify a warranty, you have to be able to prove that whatever modification the user made could be directly tied back to the failure. Very unlikely HP would be able to prove that installing Ubuntu caused a hardware failure. Then again, ExtremeTech isn't known for well-though-out journalism. The "turmoil" in HP has never been around their server division, in fact HP's previous claim was that they could drop the PC division to focus on servers. Proliant buyers would not be concerned about the future of HP's infrastructure department.
nuje 15y ago
The title on http://thecloudmarket.com/stats#/totals http://thecloudmarket.com/stats#/totals refers to available images. Sounds like it might be just counting preconfigured vm images made available (on thecloudmarket.com?). Canonical's huge share would speak for this interpretation as well.
- reitzensteinm 15y ago
  You're right, but that's why I said images, not running instances. The former might not correlate exactly with the latter, but it's a pretty good indication that Ubuntu has a very large slice of the total market for servers.
Aozaki_Touko 15y ago
Well I don't think they ever had the gall to do it to their pro market but they did void the warranty for some of their consumers when they installed linux. http://linux.slashdot.org/story/07/03/27/1753218/hp-dishonors-warranty-if-you-load-linux http://linux.slashdot.org/story/07/03/27/1753218/hp-dishonor... As did other companies : http://linux.slashdot.org/story/07/09/12/0011209/retailer-refuses-hardware-repair-due-to-linux http://linux.slashdot.org/story/07/09/12/0011209/retailer-re...
- guard-of-terra 15y ago
  That's not the reason. The reason is that they can bullshit you and get away with it. I sometimes wonder why isn't there a huge fine specifically for corporations trying to avoid their responsibilities by bullshiting customers. It should be in hundreds of thousands per incident. Because they do that and they feel free to do that and you can't punish them much for doing that. The worst case for them, they actually do their job.
  - freehunter 15y ago
    In the US, if you know the law, there are penalties for a company disregarding consumer protection laws. I forget the name of the law, but I actually ended up filing a suit against Alltel before us Alltel customers were moved to AT&T following the buyout. Alltel settled as soon as my lawyer sent the papers. It's colloquially known as the "lemon law" (though that's a term generally reserved for used car sales). If they can't fix a defective, in-warranty product in a reasonable time, the contract you have with them is void and they have to refund the price. In my case, Alltel kept sending me broken phones for my warranty claims, then the third time I sent the phone back they said the warranty was void because I had installed a registry browser on Windows Mobile (and that was apparently the cause of them sending me a phone that was missing a loudspeaker). At any rate, I don't remember the name of the law or the exact words anymore, but look into it so you know what you can expect when this happens to you. The FTC doesn't take kindly to it, and in some cases will actually pay a lawyer to fight it for you.

freehunter 15y ago

Doing so would possibly violate consumer laws in the US as well. To nullify a warranty, you have to be able to prove that whatever modification the user made could be directly tied back to the failure. Very unlikely HP would be able to prove that installing Ubuntu caused a hardware failure. Then again, ExtremeTech isn't known for well-though-out journalism. The "turmoil" in HP has never been around their server division, in fact HP's previous claim was that they could drop the PC division to focus on servers. Proliant buyers would not be concerned about the future of HP's infrastructure department.

nuje 15y ago

The title on http://thecloudmarket.com/stats#/totals http://thecloudmarket.com/stats#/totals refers to available images. Sounds like it might be just counting preconfigured vm images made available (on thecloudmarket.com?). Canonical's huge share would speak for this interpretation as well.

reitzensteinm 15y ago
You're right, but that's why I said images, not running instances. The former might not correlate exactly with the latter, but it's a pretty good indication that Ubuntu has a very large slice of the total market for servers.

Aozaki_Touko 15y ago

Well I don't think they ever had the gall to do it to their pro market but they did void the warranty for some of their consumers when they installed linux. http://linux.slashdot.org/story/07/03/27/1753218/hp-dishonors-warranty-if-you-load-linux http://linux.slashdot.org/story/07/03/27/1753218/hp-dishonor... As did other companies : http://linux.slashdot.org/story/07/09/12/0011209/retailer-refuses-hardware-repair-due-to-linux http://linux.slashdot.org/story/07/09/12/0011209/retailer-re...

guard-of-terra 15y ago
That's not the reason. The reason is that they can bullshit you and get away with it. I sometimes wonder why isn't there a huge fine specifically for corporations trying to avoid their responsibilities by bullshiting customers. It should be in hundreds of thousands per incident. Because they do that and they feel free to do that and you can't punish them much for doing that. The worst case for them, they actually do their job.
- freehunter 15y ago
  In the US, if you know the law, there are penalties for a company disregarding consumer protection laws. I forget the name of the law, but I actually ended up filing a suit against Alltel before us Alltel customers were moved to AT&T following the buyout. Alltel settled as soon as my lawyer sent the papers. It's colloquially known as the "lemon law" (though that's a term generally reserved for used car sales). If they can't fix a defective, in-warranty product in a reasonable time, the contract you have with them is void and they have to refund the price. In my case, Alltel kept sending me broken phones for my warranty claims, then the third time I sent the phone back they said the warranty was void because I had installed a registry browser on Windows Mobile (and that was apparently the cause of them sending me a phone that was missing a loudspeaker). At any rate, I don't remember the name of the law or the exact words anymore, but look into it so you know what you can expect when this happens to you. The FTC doesn't take kindly to it, and in some cases will actually pay a lawyer to fight it for you.