Community: War Installing GNU/Linux or The Any Box: Do We Share The Hardware or Raise a Bridge?
Feb 07, 2006, 23:30 (9 Talkback[s])
(Other stories by Zeek Greko)
How to Help Your Business Become an AI Early Adopter
[ Thanks to Zeek
Greko for this article. ]
The eWeek headline read "Linux Desktop
Needs Major Vendor Support." A hopeful Steven J.
Vaughn-Nichols' (SJVN) opinion piece that someday, somewhere, some
company will have the guts to face down Microsoft and make it
possible for anyone and everyone to easily buy a GNU/Linux desktop.
The "some company" he was referring to was obviously the tier one
vendors: IBM, HP, and Dell.
While we're waiting for these tier ones to become so inclined,
perhaps the GNU/Linux community's appropriate course of action
should be to do what we should have done long ago. That is, to
create a Linux-specific hardware vendor (or vendors) of our own. Or
did we somehow miss a memo somewhere that the PC hardware business
had reached its quota of billionaires? Why are we, as a community,
so quick to hand off the marketing of GNU/Linux to the current tier
one PC builders who are in fact heavily dependent on, and
umbilically tied to Microsoft? Even if they do start selling Linux
boxes in some earnest fashion, the "We Recommend Microsoft Windows"
banners aren't likely to disappear any time soon. And, moving their
GNU/Linux offerings from ten pages deep on their web sites, to nine
or even eight pages deep, is hardly what we can call making
progress. Lets stop begging, shall we?
Sharing The Hardware
The fact that anyone and everyone can't easily buy a desktop PC
or laptop with the GNU/Linux distribution (distro) of their choice
pre-installed has nothing to do with hardware availability. The
problem is lack of cooperation. Stemming from the various
commercial Linux distributions' unwillingness to share, in common,
generic PC hardware builders. Each separately seeing themselves as
fledgling operating system (OS) empires in their own right. Wanting
to become the Pepsi to Microsoft's Coke, on the desktop. They each
want to have their own hardware vendors. This fact was made quite
evident to me when I had a communication with the principal of one
of the top free/commercial Linux distributions. His response to the
idea of the various distributions sharing common Linux specific
hardware vendors was this: "We're gearing up to provide a (Distro
Name) Certification service. Also we plan to solicit community
members to submit professional quality compatibility reports. This
will be announced after we finish expanding our web sites.This may
sound like the kind of thing that has been done before, but we plan
to leverage the heck out of it."
"No hint of community spirit or a willingness to share anything
are evident in that response. A certification service?
Compatibility reports? Ostensibly for all the hardware vendors that
are eagerly waiting in line.
While it is hard not to admire his hopeful, confident, can-do
attitude, what immediately comes to mind is "Raise The Bridge!" For
those unfamiliar, "Raise The Bridge" is the punch line to a
favorite joke of Doc
Searls from Linux
It's about a tiny flea, back floating down a river, while naked
and aroused. As he approaches a bridge that crosses over the river,
he urgently starts screaming at the top of his squeaky little flea
lungs "Raise The Bridge!, Raise The Bridge!" Ostensibly to avoid
damaging the bridge's structure with his mast-like maleness.
Obviously, that flea has a grandiose and irrational self image.
Insufficient Market Volume Presently To Go It Alone
No one desktop GNU/Linux distro, at this point in time, has
sufficient market penetration to warrant its own hardware vendor.
If they all shared a vendor or vendors however, their combined
market share might be large enough, even now, to carry some sway
with regard to Linux specific hardware, device drivers, and DRM
issues. Also, some meaningful promotion and mainstream advertising
might even be possible, now.
The problem SJVN points out regarding brand recognition (or lack
thereof) can be worked around. By using quality brand-name
components inside their high-end offerings, and prominently
featuring them (ASUS Inside, for example) the generic PC vendors,
being simply assemblers of these top-quality components, would be
very credible and likely do quite well in this regard. Then there's
the Mac-Tel factor for high-end hardware. Undoubtedly, few Linux
distros will miss the opportunity to come up to speed on that
platform. Ironically, they will be sharing common hardware, will
The "War Install" and The "Any Box"
The "War Install," so dubbed by a friend after reading a
previous Linux Today article I wrote, "Should
Hardware OEMs Be Picking Linux Distribution Winners?" It
explains both concepts in fairly fine detail and remains relevant
To summarize: When War Installing, the various Linux
distributions would acquire any currently available Linux-capable
PC being offered for sale anywhere on the market. They would each
then build a custom installation recovery disk image specifically
for that hardware (everything just works out of the box) for either
dual booting or as a replacement for whatever OS the computer
originally shipped with. The downside to this method is the
"Microsoft or Unwanted GNU/Linux distro tax" that must be paid.
The Any Box concept starts at the OEM generic PC Vendor, who
would assemble Linux capable PCs and Laptops. Any GNU/Linux
distribution would then be invited to create a custom recovery disk
images for installation on that specific hardware (again everything
just works out of the box). The purchaser/end user would then
choose their favorite Linux Distribution or any dual boot
combination of Windows/Linux or Linux/Linux, with no unwanted
software taxes paid.
I can't image a better way to truly give the customer/end user a
choice of GNU/Linux Distributions than when all of the various
distros are sharing the exact same hardware. Nor can I imagine any
more totally supported platforms than by way of the "Any Box"
concept. Together as a community we can create our own tier one
hardware vendors and reap the benefits and cost savings of
collectively promoting the GNU/Linux OS platform. Alternatively,
each of the various desktop Linux distributions can continue going
it alone with their flea-sized market shares screaming "Raise The
Bridge! Raise The Bridge!"
Copyright 2004-2006 Zeek Greko
We generally support the goals and initiatives of these
organizations. Please check them out.
Electronic Frontier Foundation http://www.eff.org/
Free Software Foundation http://www.gnu.org/
Royalty free verbatim copying and distribution of this entire
article are permitted in any medium provided the copyright notice
and this notice section are preserved.