3 ms·

> Order them, unpack them, ruin the paper and cardboards, and send them back with a note: Can not install Linux. What a stupid idea. What happens next, you th

> Order them, unpack them, ruin the paper and cardboards, and send them back with a note: Can not install Linux. What a stupid idea. What happens next, you think? OEMs will hug you and other Linux users and kiss you? No, they won't issue driver updates. And your graphic card is useless. If you (Linux users) cost them too much, they'll dump you. It's business, nothing personal. But, of course, it's open source. You can always write the drivers yourself. ----- By the way, it's very funny that a "forward-thinking, open source-loving" guy who (supposedly) wants to make computing world better, doesn't think it's absolutely immoral to do such a stupid thing. You ruin the cables, and the company has to pay for it. The CEO doesn't pay the money from his pocket you know, they increase the price for "all" customers a little bit, so it's Dell (or other OEM) customers pays who are paying money for your stupid "cause".

comex 14y ago
OEMs do not, as a rule, provide drivers for Linux desktops. Graphics card manufacturers are not OEMs, and the rest is mostly open source...
- pooriaazimi 14y ago
  You're right. They don't provide graphics card drivers, but they "do" provide some (less important) drivers. I can't find a link (slow internet connection right now), but see here for example: http://www.canonical.com/engineering-services/oem-services/why-ubuntu/drivers http://www.canonical.com/engineering-services/oem-services/w... Anyway, my point was that if Linux guys prove to be costly, they'll be dumped or neglected. It's bad for open source guys, it's bad for OEMs (they get worse deals with Microsoft), and it's bad for everyone other than Microsoft. So, if you think SecureBoot is bad, make your case like civil citizens without inducing cost to others.
  - comex 14y ago
    That page is about "drivers" in the sense of "reasons that drive the decision to ship Linux", not hardware drivers :) I don't actually support the kind of crude protest measure suggested by the article (although I doubt a non-negligible number of people will actually carry it out in any case), but drivers really aren't the issue here.

comex 14y ago

OEMs do not, as a rule, provide drivers for Linux desktops. Graphics card manufacturers are not OEMs, and the rest is mostly open source...

pooriaazimi 14y ago
You're right. They don't provide graphics card drivers, but they "do" provide some (less important) drivers. I can't find a link (slow internet connection right now), but see here for example: http://www.canonical.com/engineering-services/oem-services/why-ubuntu/drivers http://www.canonical.com/engineering-services/oem-services/w... Anyway, my point was that if Linux guys prove to be costly, they'll be dumped or neglected. It's bad for open source guys, it's bad for OEMs (they get worse deals with Microsoft), and it's bad for everyone other than Microsoft. So, if you think SecureBoot is bad, make your case like civil citizens without inducing cost to others.
- comex 14y ago
  That page is about "drivers" in the sense of "reasons that drive the decision to ship Linux", not hardware drivers :) I don't actually support the kind of crude protest measure suggested by the article (although I doubt a non-negligible number of people will actually carry it out in any case), but drivers really aren't the issue here.