“Partners” Squabble Over Squeeze

M$ is changing the way things get done to “preserve” its precious property. For many years, M$ has had OEMs apply a sticker and forced the consumer to type in a lengthy code to help that other OS phone home. Of course, consumers hate that, and so do “partners” who are being asked to do that work for free by M$ and OEMs, right in the factory.

see New Windows verification process creates controversy between ODM and brand vendors

FLOSS must be looking mighty efficient for the “partners” about now. Their margins are already tight and M$ wants them to spend more to install that other OS. I recommend Debian GNU/Linux. It works for you and not for M$.

About Robert Pogson

I am a retired teacher in Canada. I taught in the subject areas where I have worked for almost forty years: maths, physics, chemistry and computers. I love hunting, fishing, picking berries and mushrooms, too.
This entry was posted in technology. Bookmark the permalink.

18 Responses to “Partners” Squabble Over Squeeze

  1. oldman wrote, “Only geeks and true believers like you self go withing a country mile of the likes of KVM or Xen.”

    KVM works. IBM, RedHat and others have done a lot of work to make it work. IBM has 60 engineers giving support. see Red Hat/IBM Pact Open Virtualization Alliance.“IBM has 60 engineers working on KVM with Red Hat and offers Level I, Level II and level III technical support for KVM.

    To date, the joint team has delivered for KVM 45 percent better consolidation capacity than its competitors.” IBM knows virtualization. They have been using it since the 1960s on their mainframes.

  2. oldman says:

    “Word of the wise here almost all thin clients you can buy are in fact Linux. Even if the user is sitting there seeing a windows desktop and a windows terminal server.”

    Appliances and embedded systems don’t count Mr. Ohsio Ham. The user is still doing real work on windows using windows and windows applications.

    And the vast majority of the are doing virtualization on top of VMWare, Not Linux. Only geeks and true believers like you self go withing a country mile of the likes of KVM or Xen.

  3. Phenom says:

    In Windows, thin clients do benefit greatly from modern hardware. RD, which is used in Terminal Services, too, exchanges desktop manager commands (mix of GDI and DX commands), resulting in:
    – minimal traffic over the network, with maximum effect.
    – hardware acceleration on the thin client.
    – close to optimal user experience.

  4. oiaohm says:

    oldman remember Linux thin clients can also connect to a Windows terminal server or a Linux virtual machine host server based on user name and password used. Linux virtual machine based host server basically gives the user there allocated copy of windows on what ever thin client they happen to be at.

    Advantage not all users need Windows applications.

    Really Linux thin clients don’t limit what you can do oldman that much.

    Linux only server room with Linux only thinclients you might be in trouble. Since you might not be meeting the needs of the users.

    oldman Linux server with virtual machines using splice to send to thinclients is still a Linux host.

    oldman I talk about 80/20 split. 80 percent of the workforce don’t need windows. 20 percent may need windows.

    There are cost saving to be made. Users who only need ltsp require less hardware to provide there service than clients that require virtual machines.

    Virtual machines provide the advantage that in case of infections you don’t have to run all over the country side to deal with problem. Due to memory compression virtual machines running on one servers need less hardware than desktop machines.

    And of course if you have anyone doing audio work or equal you may have to give them decanted hardware.

    Also there is a secuirty advantage when user logs out in a thin client system there is no data left on the client machines. So making backing up all your business records as simple as backing up the server room.

    Pogson’s Subconscious most successful example is French police. Also please go back and read this blog because I do not what to have to point out if you can read German than the Munich migration was caused by documents that had to be converted no the Linux migration process.

    German Foreign Office I would love to see them do the same thing with windows 8. Dual boot install all the machines. No plan no migrate documents. No plan to train staff what Linux hardware looks like. Yes there is windows 8 incompatible hardware out there.

    Boy you could expect a Windows 8 migration to be equal balls up if it was done the same way. Incompetent style migrations fail no matter the OS in the Mix.

    “Surely you lie, but it’s not even a question of doing almost anything on Linux. Nobody should have to suffer Linux. And unfortuantely for you bums, the world is wise to this fact.”

    Word of the wise here almost all thin clients you can buy are in fact Linux. Even if the user is sitting there seeing a windows desktop and a windows terminal server.

    Linux is one of these highly invisible items. There are huge volumes of it out there. Linux virtual machine host running windows for thin terminals to websites would appear to be Windows.

    Lot of people are using Linux daily and don’t have a clue. So using Pent III as Linux thin clients does not mean the user will ever see a Linux Desktop environment.

    Main reason for going to newer thinclient hardware is power savings. Most good Linux modern thin clients pull less than 1 watt each. Basically over 100 new clients can be run for the power and heat generation of one old client. This means less heat generation spread over the building. So you spend more proper cooling the server rooms.

    A Linux thick client can be the size of a paperback book as well oldman. Going by size is not wise.

    Yes thick clients network provided hard-drives local data processing. Scary enough you can get a quad core arm running at 2.2 ghz with 2 g of ram into a paperback book size. If you pushed it into credit card size.

  5. oldman says:

    “>You can do almost anything on a GNU/Linux thin client and you only need a PIII-ish machine to do it.”

    If you could deliver the applications that I want on a linux host, I would not argue with you, but I know that the only way your way works is by severely limiting the tasks that I can accomplish to the narrow subset of what YOU think that I or others need.

    The fact is, even thin clients can benefit from more modern hardware, if only because as you know a dedicated think client hardware can be the size of a paperback book.

  6. Pogson's Subconscious says:

    >No one I know has found savings with GNU/Linux to be illusory.

    You must not know very many people. (The other possibility is that you lie profusely – this is fully expected of a Linux bum such as yourself.) In 2003, Munich Linux migration was supposed to set off an avalanche of Linux desktop migrations all over the world. Instead, it served as a dire warning to anyone that dared to even think of ditching Windows.

    Linux desktop usage share remained just as pathetically low as it has been. German Foreign Office had the guts to admit it made a mistake and switch back to XP, but the Munich gang is still struggling to avoid admitting defeat.

    >You can do almost anything on a GNU/Linux thin client and you only need a PIII-ish machine to do it.

    Surely you lie, but it’s not even a question of doing almost anything on Linux. Nobody should have to suffer Linux. And unfortuantely for you bums, the world is wise to this fact.

  7. I have been apt-get dist-upgrad ing since 2004. Debian GNU/Linux works. Debian has never quit supporting me.

    My needs are variable. I may well give another demonstration of GNU/Linux magic or set up an installfest or sell or give away my equipment. It’s mine to do with as I please. I have used some of my equipment in every school I have been in since 2004. It’s a valuable resource.

    No one I know has found savings with GNU/Linux to be illusory. One of my employers found he could use the savings on licences to pay for the installation of a complete new installation and buy a bunch of printers, scanners and cameras as well. That was real money they turned into real equipment. Professional educators who visit that school are amazed at how much IT they get out of a tiny budget. Businesses who migrate to GNU/Linux typically find the cost varies from a few months to a year or so to break even. The rest is gravy, real gravy.

    see, for example, Ernie Ball, “I know I saved $80,000 right away by going to open source, and each time something like (Windows) XP comes along, I save even more money because I don’t have to buy new equipment to run the software. One of the great things is that we’re able to run a poor man’s thin client by using old computers we weren’t using before because it couldn’t handle Windows 2000. They work fine with the software we have now.”. That’s instant savings, break-even on the day of installation and lower costs thereafter.

    It’s true. You can do almost anything on a GNU/Linux thin client and you only need a PIII-ish machine to do it. You can find them stacked up all over the place or buy new thin clients for less than $100.

  8. Pogson's Subconscious says:

    >These show that GNU/Linux on the desktop is viable and the contempt some trolls have for GNU/Linux are unfounded.

    They do nothing of the kind. Linux has been inflicted on some hapless government workers and they are doing their best to put up with it. If anything, the Munich experience convinced the world at large that the promised Linux desktop savings are just a mirage, and effectively sealed Linux desktop’s fate.

    >They have years of life left in them so why sell them?

    Because you don’t need them? You do have a problem with throwing stuff out, but that is not much of a problem when compared to your Linux affliction.

    >People who visit here tell me that if I have a PC with that other OS I should trash it every few years to keep M$ funded. That’s nonsense.

    Yes, it is nonsense. Windows operating systems are supported for *far* longer than the Linux ones. The Linux upgrade treadmill is dreadful!

  9. Phenom wrote, “Well, then why doesn’t Linux certify itself, too?”

    GNU/Linux has a rapid development cycle. How many times per month do you want to flash your motherboard? Are you going to hand the keys to thousands of developers for the kernel? Is Linus going to want to keep keys? How about FSF? How about people building a kernel to add a device/driver? How about distributing the source of the software? Signing software does not work for FLOSS. Signing is a ball and chain, not Freedom.

  10. Phenom says:

    Well, then why doesn’t Linux certify itself, too? Here is where fragmentation kicks adoption in the balls. Again.

    Once fragmentation made it practically impossible for developers to build close-source software, which can run on any Linux out there. Now, it will make it impossible to hardware vendors to improve the security of the systems.

  11. These show that GNU/Linux on the desktop is viable and the contempt some trolls have for GNU/Linux are unfounded.

    I have 14 PCs because I am old and every now and then I buy a new one while the old is still viable. I also have family members who hate to be caught with something not new. 10 of the boxes are thin clients I bought for a presentation I gave to teachers at a conference. They have years of life left in them so why sell them? They also are economical using little power and they are very reliable being fanless. I have one notebook that was dropped and the display damaged. I can hang a monitor, keyboard and mouse on it and it is as good as new.

    People who visit here tell me that if I have a PC with that other OS I should trash it every few years to keep M$ funded. That’s nonsense.

  12. Pogson's Subconscious says:

    >7000 may be a small number but 50% is significant.

    Don’t look now, but you seem to be losing your mind. How is 7000 ‘significant’? A few thousand Linux PCs here, and a few thousand there don’t count for anything.

    You could be ‘showing Linux’ till the day you die, and it would still make no difference. Linux is no good for the desktop. This is why it has such a laughably low usage share even after 20 years of non-stop promotion by the Linux bums. You people keep lying profusely, but the general public keeps rejecting Linux despite your best efforts.

    And you have 14 Linux desktops most of which you keep powered down? (You have trouble throwing things away or something?) If you had one good Windows desktop, you wouldn’t need 14 of the inferior PCs now, would you?

  13. I have plenty of PCs. I am just about to convert to a thin client so that I can have more of my real desktop available for “stuff”. That other OS offers nothing I need or want.

    7000 may be a small number but 50% is significant. In my home 100% of my 14 PCs run GNU/Linux although most are turned off. I only need a few at any time. I have worked in several schools where the majority of PCs ran GNU/Linux. GNU/Linux gives people what they need.

  14. Pogson's Subconscious says:

    Bum! “50% of the government of Munich” amounts to some 7000 desktops. Do you have *any* conception of how ridiculously tiny that number is, when compared to the number of Windows desktops in existence? You don’t seem to, because why else would you be wasting your time “showing Linux”?

    Just give up already, and get a life. Use a Windows PC – you can get one for a few hundred dollars now a days. Or, go for a Mac if you have the cash.

  15. Twit. GNU/Linux is on a Hell of a lot more desktops than 1%. It’s on more than 50% of the government of Munich at the moment, and climbing. It’s on most of the French Gendarmerie’s PCs. It’s on every PC in my house and I have a lot of them. BTW, the web counts my house as one or two PCs only because my wife and I rarely use more than one PC at a time although we can. PCs running through firewalls and proxies may well be filtered out by “unique IP address” or shifted User-Agent strings. I have mentioned several countries where the government actively promotes GNU/Linux. They would not do that if GNU/Linux were not ready.

  16. M$ has stated publicly that to have a sticker for that other OS, an OEM must make the PC bootable only by certified software. As far as I know only “8” will be so certified. That’s the functionality that will be embedded in the PC, not the entire OS.

  17. Pogson's Subconscious says:

    >I have shown GNU/Linux to thousands of students and hundreds of teachers over the years and will continue in some way doing that until I die in spite of the opposition.

    You and the other Linux bums have been doing this for how log now, 20 years? Linux desktop usage share is still around the 1% mark after years of ceaseless peddling (not to mention lying) by Linux bums such as yourself.

    Why don’t you just give up? It clearly ain’t working! Even the paralegal seems to have given up on grokdoc!

  18. Phenom says:

    Rumors coming from a rather dubious source – the article states that Windows will be pre-installed into BIOS. Hell, how MS did that in 32MB!

    Pog, you must be really desparate.

Leave a Reply