Messages in this thread | | | From | Felix Oxley <> | Subject | Re: Linux in a binary world... a doomsday scenario | Date | Tue, 13 Dec 2005 10:18:50 +0000 |
| |
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
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |