"Dustin Harper" <dharper@vistarip.com> wrote in message
news
322D10F-F0FD-4D5C-96DB-F86A1483118E@microsoft.com...
>A lot of reasons why they won't let it happen is because of the piracy.
>With a lot of the software piracy, it'd be easy to save a couple hundred
>bucks, use a copy of Vista or XP that you already have on one PC and
>install it on the two new ones you just ordered with Linux. Or all out
>hacked copy. It's been done before.
Who is "they?" Microsoft or Dell?
If MS, you're saying the Microsoft "won't let it happen" because they feel
that their OS will wind up in the hard drive eventually anyway?
And the point of that is? That we should all pay a MS licensing fee for
all PC's regardless of whether or not any MS OS is actually on it?
After having sat in a dark basement, handcuffed to a chair under a single
dim light bulb, and having been horsewhipped with a rubber hose for the last
19 hours by Bill G's henchmen, I can honestly say....
Yea, I'll go along with that...
Yea, that's the ticket...
> That's the main reason. The other is because they can't support Linux. It
> would take a lot more resources and too much money. People would want to
> save a buck and get Linux, yet have -zero- knowledge about it and spend
> hours on the phone with Dell, or some other tech support.
Anyone who has EVER attempted to acquire ANY kind of technical or customer
support from Dell (and probably many others) already knows that they are not
very concerned with either.... Why not throw another OS into the mix?
They're just route all THOSE calls to some other non-English speaking script
reader in India. If you ever actually do muster enough patience and sheer
willpower to hold out hoping to speak to a human being, it won't matter
anyway - How can you tell if the person on the other end is talking about
Windows, Linux or blueberry muffin recipes?