Re: David Faber Report : Putting 2 and 2 together

Mike wrote:
On Wed, 18 Feb 2009 23:44:37 -0600, John Galt wrote:

now back to my original point, the fact of
the matter is almost all corporate desktop computers sold include the
cost of a windows license. you cannot order a PC from any of the
major computer companies and get the cost reduced by $100 by telling
them you don't want to pay for a windows license because you're going
to put linux on it.
Sorry. My company does. From Lenovo. This laptop is still Windows, but
we support our entire corporate application suite on Red Hat, and as
our laptops get refreshed on a four year cycle, we'll be off MSFT. The
company no longer approves purchase orders for Windows or Office, nor
purchases machines with licences for those products resident.

well that's just dandy,
Yea, it is. I guess you were wrong.

if i'm wrong, you've not shown it.

If I can buy it, you can buy it. They like you. They told me. "Operators are standing by....."

the issue i brought up long before
we got to this point was that vendors put out a couple models and claim them as an alternative to windows but closer examination shows that a similarly configured windows model costs the same. i specifically said "don't even try to refute" unless you address that issue. (ie. prove that the no-os computer is really $100 less than the same model with windows by showing on their website where you can order the exact same computer with or without the o.s. and that the price is actually reduced by $100). i also specifically said that until a person can buy any PC model/configuration combination from any of the major vendors that the msft "tax" issue still exists.

I understand what you said. Essentially, this is a "I won't agree that you're right unless you meet my standard of proof." That doesn't mean your standard of proof is agreed upon.

i've never said that it's not possible to
find "a" vendor selling "a" model without windows.

Good.

JG



here's an article on the topic from 2007, the date's obviously not current but the content is, imo, a good description of how it has always been and i've seen little evidence that it has changed much since.

http://news.zdnet.co.uk/hardware/0,1000000091,39286228-1,00.htm

"Top five PC manufacturers fail naked PC test ...
IT professionals are being forced to adopt Microsoft's operating systems — even if they tell their PC supplier they want a system free of Microsoft software, ZDNet UK's research has revealed.
...
The reasons — or excuses — were varied.
...
Acer said it would give our reporter a refund of £30 for not using Windows, but would only make a refund if we drove to its Plymouth "repair" centre. In contrast to other reports, Dell refused to refund the Windows software if it went unused. Instead it offered to cancel the shipping charge of £50 as a compromise.

We backed up our undercover enquiries with official calls to every one of the five vendors. Two of the five — Acer and Toshiba — would not discuss the matter with us. Dell, HP and Lenovo claimed it was possible to buy naked PCs from their company — but our attempts to follow their guidance to buy one proved impossible.

Dell and HP both claimed it was possible to buy a naked PC from them, but we were unable to buy one from either vendor. Lenovo told us it sells PCs with pre-installed Linux, but it could not tell us how we could buy such a system.

Microsoft has placed considerable pressure on a number of PC vendors not to sell systems without Windows. Critics have suggested that vendors have yielded to such pressure because they are afraid of losing their bulk purchasing discount with Microsoft. Others have suggested that it would cost PC vendors considerably more in unit costs to produce naked PCs"


.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: David Faber Report : Putting 2 and 2 together
    ... cost of a windows license. ... we got to this point was that vendors put out a couple models and claim ... cost PC vendors considerably more in unit costs to produce naked PCs" ...
    (misc.invest.stocks)
  • Re: More on Auto Warewhousing
    ... >>>> switching from Windows he's still going to be using Windows until ... "I'm skeptical about the ROI and how much it will cost in the end," says Silver." ... Doesn't matter if it needs less support than Windows or not BECAUSE HE IS ... This has nothing to do with the long term cost savings. ...
    (comp.sys.mac.advocacy)
  • Re: What is the process to backup your hard drive and clean your existing hard?
    ... > What is the process to backup your hard drive and clean your existing hard ... Install Windows XP. ... This is not the same as what it would cost you to do. ... For you, you need to do the above 1)-5), or try a simply clean first by ...
    (microsoft.public.windowsxp.general)
  • Re: Installed XP SP2 last night 52 patches. Oh right, it is Micro$oft
    ... of theirs from Office & Windows Licensing, Apple makes it off ... Those aren't 'Minor Upgrades'. ... it cost $300 to go from Windows XP to ...
    (comp.sys.mac.advocacy)
  • Re: [ANN] RealThinClient components > preparing the Roadmap for the Year 2006
    ... Cost is only part of the total picture and not often the most important ... Java and Freepascal, ... I know a lot of companies have moved from Windows to ... software developer and particularly if I were writing server applications ...
    (borland.public.delphi.thirdpartytools.general)