Re: Linux in a binary world... a doomsday scenario

Felix Oxley
2005-12-13T10:19:06Z

On 13 Dec 2005, at 09:07, Rob Landley wrote:

> On Tuesday 13 December 2005 01:56, Arjan van de Ven wrote:
>>> t best.
>>>
>>>> And you don't have to be Linux user to refuse closed hardware.
>>>> Having
>>>> option in future is always good.x
>>>
>>> If Linux desktop users are less than 5% of the laptop buying
>>> population,
>>> a more effective technique would be to focus purchases on small
>>> companies
>>> that _do_ provide things we can use.
>>
>> however, in areas where margins are really thin, like consumer PC
>> hardware, 5% of revenue is the difference between a loss and a
>> profit.
>
> With thin margins, 5% of volume isn't the same thing as 5%
> revenue. It may be
> 5% of _profit_, but unless fixed costs being amortized are a
> dominant factor
> the whole point of thin margins is that it costs you almost as much to
> produce as you sell it for.
>
> More importantly, if they can't trace the loss back to what made the
> difference, then it doesn't matter. And very few things at this
> level have
> only one cause. When less than 1% of the planet's population ever
> bought the
> product in the first place, a few more not buying it really doesn't
> register
> easily. Making a change may net you $5 million and cost you $10
> million
> elsewhere. (Hence boycotts either not being noticed or being
> attributed to
> tidal forces and brownian motion. And most of them simply _aren't_
> big
> enough to make a difference. There are groups out that regularly
> claim
> responsibility for the sun coming up. Decision makers learn to
> filter this
> stuff out.)
>
> Now large customers that purchase lots of stuff in blocks can
> easily get their
> needs noticed at the negotiating table. "Not supporting X will
> cost your
> company this $$$ million contract". They don't have to find this
> out via
> data mining or surveys, there's a big check with explicit strings
> attached.
>
>> And if we can have official 'works well' and 'don't buy' lists,
>> the PR
>> around that can help make that impact, especially if people who don't
>> run linux yet but might in the future also start to pay attention to
>> this list.
>
> Bad publicity, and good publicity for competitors, is something
> that can get
> noticed, yes. But being able to translate it into actual dollar
> values is
> noticeably more effective. Showing an $x dollar market that
> wouldn't exist
> without Linux-motivated purchases is one way to do that.

Hence the justification for a Linux logo. As I said in another thread
"Linux Hardware Quality Labs":

"The primary motivation for this is that it leverages the individual
power of each purchaser (of a system or individual piece of hardware)
be they a consumer, SME, system builder, tier 1 or 2 PC manufacturer,
government dept., or Linux distro company, into a single point of
pressure that can be applied to OEMs to ensure that they provide open
source drivers."

regards,
Felix