Shock Dell REFUNDS M$ Licence cost

[#1]

Check here http://www.theregister.co.uk/2009/10/19/windows_dell_linux_refund/

Quote

Rather than accept the Windows 7 upgrade, though, Graeme installed Ubuntu-based Linux Mint instead.

Well done that man!

[#2]

well done indeed.  as he says, the more people willing to run this gauntlet, the sooner the computer makers will start re-negotiating better deals with microsoft, who are slowly but surely dying.
linux has now become so easy to use that most of my non-techie friends can handle it.  they're even willing to enter the dreaded black box and type a few commands now and again.  mostly they're glad to be rid of all the intrusive popups.

[#3]

The licence agreement has always said if you don't agree then cancel and return the software for a refund. I've never known anyone do it but its interesting to see that even though it took 4 months someone has successfully done it!
It now paves the way to buy a PC without a OS installed (EG laptops!).

[#4]

Some companies offer that already. I recently bought a new PC from CCL Online without an OS. All their own build PCs seem to have the option not to include one.

[#5]

I don't really understand why its such a big issue not to include and OS to be honest. It must surely be less agro for PC makers to shove units out the door without and OS than it is to pre-install and OS onto it. Ok, I'll admit the chances are they've got some very sophisticated automatic process for copying the OS onto many HDDs before they're slotted into machines but even that must cost a fortune to setup!
Frankly I can't see why more companies don't just sell blank machines. That way the company gets to avoid the hassle of MS and technical support and the customer can literally do what they want without voiding the warranty or tech support agreement. I really do wish there were more laptops available like this (or netbooks for that matter).
I suppose at the end of the day though its about MS forcing people to buy the product if its pre-installed. That way they can try to make life hard for pirates and still get their slice of the cake.

[#6]

Quote from: artificer

well done indeed.  as he says, the more people willing to run this gauntlet, the sooner the computer makers will start re-negotiating better deals with microsoft, who are slowly but surely dying.

Not really sure how Windows can be "dying", MS expects to sell 16 million copies in the UK alone, and over 15 million people played with the beta (lots of them were naughty and not supposed to).  Windows 7 is the best OS from MS ever, it runs rings around OSX and for ease of use still runs rings out Linux.  Whilst Linux is technically great, it is *still* not ready for the average users desktop, and especially not for gamers, around 10 years ago people were saying Linux is better than MS and is ready for the desktop, it still isn't and will take a major shift in thinking for that to happen.

[#7]

I beg to differ. Sure, some Linux distros are designed for techies and are not easy to use, but take something like Linux Mint. Installation is easy, media playback is enabled by default, a load of software comes with it to keep most users happy, and it is really quite easy to use. I have recently set up two new PCs - one at work with Vista, and one at home with Linux Mint, and the one with Mint was far easier and quicker to get going.
Put it this way, it is at least as ready for the desktop as Windows is, although I have to say I have no experience of W7.
Gamers may be something of an exception, granted. Although Linux is getting better (so I gather - I am not a gamer myself) there is certainly more choice for Windows.

[#8]

Most just use Ubuntu.
Does everything you want and much simpler and easier than fighting with Windoze.

[#9]

Quote from: Denzil

I beg to differ. Sure, some Linux distros are designed for techies and are not easy to use, but take something like Linux Mint. Installation is easy, media playback is enabled by default, a load of software comes with it to keep most users happy, and it is really quite easy to use. I have recently set up two new PCs - one at work with Vista, and one at home with Linux Mint, and the one with Mint was far easier and quicker to get going. Put it this way, it is at least as ready for the desktop as Windows is, although I have to say I have no experience of W7.

Ok, can it run without a mouse, keyboard and monitor attached? - Allowing a user to login remotely like Remote Desktop? Oh hang on, I forgot with linux you have to login first locally and setup a VNC server to accept outside connections. Or, SSH in, use command line or put up with virtual desktops which are not your own REAL desktop.
Linux... yes technically its far superior, stable and safe from virus's etc but it simply isn't as usable for the average user like me. You have any idea at all how many hours I've lost on google trying to setup headless linux boxes? We're not talking just hours, its more like days.
Linux has grown up mainly in the server environments. Windows has been used in many industries for many purposes. The difference here is that windows has been forced to adapt and have many capabilities which linux has still not developed. There are also so many variations of linux that its still very hard to get definitive support which gets the job done. With windows there are many ways to solve problems; ask friends, go on forums, ring tech support etc.
I do admire linux but as dgwebb says:

Quote from: dgwebb

Linux is technically great, it is *still* not ready for the average users desktop, and especially not for gamers, around 10 years ago people were saying Linux is better than MS and is ready for the desktop, it still isn't and will take a major shift in thinking for that to happen.

[#10]

How many users bother with remote logins, headless PC's - doesn't sound very user friendly?
Most people want a screen and a keyboard and a mouse so that they know what is going on.
Just because I can do all these clever things with Linux, doesn't mean I should do it.

[#11]

But thats the whole point - it's extra processor power in a enviroment where space, money etc for extra mice, keyboards and monitors is limited.
I personally do not have either the space or money for the extra head gear needed. I prefer to access every other machine on my 2nd monitor using Remote Desktop. Now being a bit aware of security I don't like those machines to log straight in to a desktop so I set a password on the user accounts. Therefore to use the machines I need to login which the last time I tried VNC could not offer along with other options.
The extra machines are needed for things like programming (IE some IDEs can use in excess of 300MB of memory). Additionally though they can be used as sandboxes (with VMs) video editing, dvd burning etc. All things which would slow a main PC down a bit.
I can't do any of this using linux at present. Sure, it can do individual things like video editing, dvd/cd burning etc BUT I can't do remote logins to a desktop and the few options that can will only give you a virtual desktop and not your real one. I don't know about you but to me that seems pointless!
Windows OS's in that respect are far more configurable. On top of that you can run linux in a VM so it's still a win-win situation however much you dislike MS products!
I guess what I'm really getting at is that headless boxes ARE user friendly. You can stash them in a cupboard so they don't clutter up the living room (and make it noisy) and have the processor power of multiple machines at one main machine. By doing this I don't need the latest multi threading or multi cored processors, huge amounts of ram etc. I can use older machines most of which are built from free parts which are otherwise destined for the tip!

[#12]

Provided the remote machine is running an appropriate server, there are lots of secure programs which will connect to a pre-started server and login - including the sluggish VNC.
Personally, something like VNC would be laughable over a wireless network though - such as I have.
Actually there are numerous better products that could be used...

[#13]

Well on Ubuntu etc all, you can use autologon which will give you named user an desktop. then you can use Vnc with the :0 option to control that desktop if you really need to.
I have done it on several of my *nix boxes before now, but usually now I either use remote daemons or my kvc to switch to that machine.
I moved over 2.5 years ago and the only pc I now have running M$ is my old IBM lt, and I only use to it install/upgrade something that needs a M$ OS, it is only booted about twice a year.
I have XP in a VM for doing CD priniting as my ip4000 driver doesn't support this. (And that I can boot/shutdown in a few seconds as needed)
Personally I haven't bought a new pc for many years, I have bought a couple of ex-lease Dells though that come with "XP" installed (dodgy!) which have been wiped and one of my *nix's put on.

[#14]

Quote

Whilst Linux is technically great, it is *still* not ready for the average users desktop,

Just to put my two penn'orth in, I have to disagree to some extent. As some of you will know, I installed Ubuntu on my friend jmdlp's Sony laptop about three weeks ago.
This was onto a new hard drive/4 year old laptop and was to be primarily for backup/storage and spare PC while she was waiting for a new Dell running Vista HP.
She now has the Dell and guess what - she is quite content with the old computer, and not at all keen on Vista (she was running XP before).  Now she is wondering why she bothered buying a new machine as the Sony is running so well and doing all that she needs within reason. Both she and I are certainly not techie - just two 'older' ladies who like their computers and who have been able (with a bit of 'playing') to manage Linux quite well.
The problem with Linux (IMO) is not running it but learning about installing it and also about getting a little help when things don't go according to plan. Once you know how it is a refreshingly quick install and a simple OS.

[#15]

It's fear of the unknown.