Re: Dell Linux blog -- People weren't buying them because the

["Bryan J. Smith" <b.j.smith@ieee.org>]

On Sun, 2004-02-08 at 10:24, Robert G. (Doc) Savage wrote:
> Bryan,
> I enjoy reading SFK as much as anyone, but I wouldn't buy or sell stock
> based solely on his gossip column. Nor would I put much faith on what
> one third party (Intel) claims about another (Microsoft).

Agreed, but it _does_ mean that _other_ people were running into the
same issues, and the gossip _did_ exist.

> A "Good Explaintion"? If you really want the unvarnished truth, read
> Dell's annual reports and SEC filings. They dropped Linux PCs because
> not enough people were buying them.

Exactomundo!  Machiavelism at its finest!

Why?  Because _no_one_ in their right mind would buy them!
You couldn't get a configuration that was acceptable, PERIOD!

Dell sold Linux configurations that were *GUARANTEED*NOT*TO*SELL*!

Even our Dell sales reps agreed.  They said that everyone was
complaining, that he had lots of interest, but people need more memory
so they just bought the pre-installed Windows version of the model.

Remember, *WHY* Dell started selling Linux as a standard install. 
Because Intel and the semiconductor industry _needed_ a tier-1 OEM with
Linux as a standard offering.  There *WAS* "critical mass" of people who
wanted them.  But engineers want Max Memory, Max Speed.

128MB was not even what we bought 3 years earlier!

So, my question is *STILL* -- Why oh Why did Dell sell such a
configuration???  A configuration that was *GUARANTEED* not to sell.

I worked with several engineers at a small semiconductor start-up who
came over from Intel.  They confided that it was Intel that wanted Dell
to start selling Linux, and since they were the bigger provider of R&D
than Microsoft to Dell (the only OEM that they are), _they_ got Dell to
do it.

And then that's when Microsoft came up with the "OS certification
requirements" on models.  And that's _why_ they were available with a
*MINIMAL* configuration and *NO* higher memory/CPU options.  That is
what I was told.  Before then, it didn't make sense.

So yes, Dell stopped selling a product that did not sell.  And why did
it not sell?  Because the configurations were ultra-low-end, on models
that *CLEARLY* supported far more CPU and memory, were sold *EXACTLY*
that way but only for Windows, and the _primary_consumer_ of these
products were engineers who wanted high-end systems!

Now, will somebody at Dell *PLEASE* explain this non-sense other than
what I have heard?



-- 
Bryan J. Smith, E.I. -- Engineer, Technologist, School Teacher
b.j.smith@ieee.org



-
To unsubscribe, send email to majordomo@silug.org with
"unsubscribe silug-discuss" in the body.