5 ms·

What is the problem? Someone has to be paid for the time they spend on the installation. Bearing in mind it takes a minute or so max. for this job, hourly rate

by vixen99 13y ago

What is the problem? Someone has to be paid for the time they spend on the installation. Bearing in mind it takes a minute or so max. for this job, hourly rates (or profits) at Dell must be mouth-watering.

thejosh 13y ago
Or you know, they just have an image and are trying to screw people over further.
hartror 13y ago
> Someone has to be paid for the time they spend on the installation. "Someone" being a script.
- stinos 13y ago
  Not entirely. It's more likely some human intervention is needed somewhere in the process to select the image/install containing Firefox. Although it's likely something like a checkbox, or maybe fysically selecting another disk - 16.25 seems a bit steep for that, yes.
  - friendzis 13y ago
    It actually does require a chackbox - customer checks it when ordering ;) Booting computer and manually installing OS/updates requires quite a bunch of [man] hours (given that they ship a bit more than few PCs a day when distributing a batch) so it is safe to assume they do not do that, but instead clone disks. it is most likely that master is kept up to date by a script.
- pizza234 13y ago
  And a script is not written (and not necessarily executed) by itself. It could be argued that the price is not fair, but it's still an option; it's common practice to add such options, in this price range, when purchasing computers online.
- Xylakant 13y ago
  somebody needs to write the script, maintain and debug it, handle customer questions related to the option, ... The fact that we can automate stuff doesn't make it free. Also, as any good consultant will tell you, the price you can charge your customer is not dependent on how much work something is for you but rather how much value the customer gains. Installing FF on a computer takes me like 15 minutes if I include everything - from asking the password, installing, migrating any bookmarks, cleaning the download etc. That amounts to an hourly rate of about 60 GBP, a reasonable price if you ask me.
eCa 13y ago
The problem is Mozilla's trademark policy [1]: "If you are using the Mozilla Mark(s) for the unaltered binaries you are distributing, you may not charge for that product. By not charging, we mean the Mozilla product must be without cost and its distribution [...] may not be [...] tied to purchasing a service" IANAL, but Dell is free to charge for the installation, but then they need to call it the Arctic Bear Browser. [1]: http://www.mozilla.org/en-US/foundation/trademarks/policy/ http://www.mozilla.org/en-US/foundation/trademarks/policy/
- jiggy2011 13y ago
  They're not charging to "distribute" firefox as a product in this instance, they are simply charging for the service/time to install it so I don't think this applies, it wouldn't be any different from geek squad etc charging to install firefox on a PC (IANAL).
  - markild 13y ago
    That sounds like semantics. Couldn't you say the same for any service where you _actually_ distribute it as well? "I'm not distributing it, I'm simple charging for the service of easy installation". (I'm also not AL, though...)
    - peterpostle 13y ago
      I've never understood the complaint that something is "just semantics", or "you're arguing semantics". If someone can't argue based on the meaning of the words in a piece of text, what else can they argue about? The grammar? The spelling? Surely we _only_ want arguments based on semantics!
      - MatthewWilkes 13y ago
        The meaning of the sentence as a whole. "Just semantics" is used when you hinge your argument on the subtleties of meaning of one word.
      - 13y ago
cbtacy 13y ago
The problem is the law. It's worth learning about.

by vixen99 13y ago

thejosh 13y ago

Or you know, they just have an image and are trying to screw people over further.

hartror 13y ago

> Someone has to be paid for the time they spend on the installation. "Someone" being a script.

stinos 13y ago
Not entirely. It's more likely some human intervention is needed somewhere in the process to select the image/install containing Firefox. Although it's likely something like a checkbox, or maybe fysically selecting another disk - 16.25 seems a bit steep for that, yes.
- friendzis 13y ago
  It actually does require a chackbox - customer checks it when ordering ;) Booting computer and manually installing OS/updates requires quite a bunch of [man] hours (given that they ship a bit more than few PCs a day when distributing a batch) so it is safe to assume they do not do that, but instead clone disks. it is most likely that master is kept up to date by a script.
pizza234 13y ago
And a script is not written (and not necessarily executed) by itself. It could be argued that the price is not fair, but it's still an option; it's common practice to add such options, in this price range, when purchasing computers online.
Xylakant 13y ago
somebody needs to write the script, maintain and debug it, handle customer questions related to the option, ... The fact that we can automate stuff doesn't make it free. Also, as any good consultant will tell you, the price you can charge your customer is not dependent on how much work something is for you but rather how much value the customer gains. Installing FF on a computer takes me like 15 minutes if I include everything - from asking the password, installing, migrating any bookmarks, cleaning the download etc. That amounts to an hourly rate of about 60 GBP, a reasonable price if you ask me.

eCa 13y ago

The problem is Mozilla's trademark policy [1]: "If you are using the Mozilla Mark(s) for the unaltered binaries you are distributing, you may not charge for that product. By not charging, we mean the Mozilla product must be without cost and its distribution [...] may not be [...] tied to purchasing a service" IANAL, but Dell is free to charge for the installation, but then they need to call it the Arctic Bear Browser. [1]: http://www.mozilla.org/en-US/foundation/trademarks/policy/ http://www.mozilla.org/en-US/foundation/trademarks/policy/

jiggy2011 13y ago
They're not charging to "distribute" firefox as a product in this instance, they are simply charging for the service/time to install it so I don't think this applies, it wouldn't be any different from geek squad etc charging to install firefox on a PC (IANAL).
- markild 13y ago
  That sounds like semantics. Couldn't you say the same for any service where you _actually_ distribute it as well? "I'm not distributing it, I'm simple charging for the service of easy installation". (I'm also not AL, though...)
  - peterpostle 13y ago
    I've never understood the complaint that something is "just semantics", or "you're arguing semantics". If someone can't argue based on the meaning of the words in a piece of text, what else can they argue about? The grammar? The spelling? Surely we _only_ want arguments based on semantics!
    - MatthewWilkes 13y ago
      The meaning of the sentence as a whole. "Just semantics" is used when you hinge your argument on the subtleties of meaning of one word.
    - 13y ago

cbtacy 13y ago

The problem is the law. It's worth learning about.