Re: xxd -i vs DIY Was: C23 thoughts and opinions

On 30/05/2024 13:13, bart wrote:

On 30/05/2024 09:33, Michael S wrote:

On Thu, 30 May 2024 10:01:42 +0200
David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> wrote:
>

>
And no, companies like Intel or ASUS don't pay anything close to 75%
of the retail price for the Windows license they install.

>
I don't know how much Intel or ASUS pays. I don't care about it.
What I do know and care about that for me, as a buyer, Intel or ASUS (I
actually like Gigabyte Brix better, but recently they become too
expensive) mini-PC with Win11 Home will cost $140 more than exactly the
same box without Windows.

That runs contrary to everything I have ever seen.
Most retailers here (in Norway, and I believe most of Europe) don't offer a choice of systems without an OS, unless it is a custom build. Since the majority of purchasers want Windows, and big manufacturers pay peanuts for it, no-OS versions are an extra inventory cost.
If you are getting a custom-built machine, or from a small manufacturer, then getting one with an OS will cost you more - but that is primarily for the service of installing and configuring it, or at least putting together the driver packages, not the license cost for Windows.  And smaller houses will pay more per license each license than big ones. For big manufacturers, that cost is amortized over a very large number of systems and "installation" is done by massive disk duplication systems before the drives are installed.

That's if bought it in big or medium store.
In little 1-2-men shop I can get legal Windows license on similar box
for, may be, $50. But I don't know if it will be a round 11 months
later if something breaks.
Pay attention that even in little shop mini-PC with Windows on it will
cost me more than the same box without OS. I didn't try it, but would
guess that [in a little shop] box with Linux preinstalled would cost me
~$25 above box without OS, i.e. still cheaper than with Windows.

  40 years ago, my company made 8-bit business computers (my job was designing the boards that went into them).
 Adjusted for inflation, a floppy-based machine cost £4000, and one with a 10MB HDD cost £9400.
 They came with our own clone of CP/M, to avoid paying licence fees for it.
 Compared to that, the cost of hardware now with a 4-6 magnitude higher spec is peanuts, even with a premium for a pre-installed OS.
 But suppose a high-spec machine now cost £1000; for someone using it daily in their job, who might be paid a salary of £50-£100K or more, it is again peanuts by comparison. Just their car to drive to work could cost 20 times as much.
 One tankful of fuel might cost the same as one Windows licence!
 I'm astonished that professionals here are quibbling over the minor extra margins needed to cover the cost of an important piece of software.
 

For my part, I am not complaining about it - I am just discussing it. However, I am against paying for a Windows license that I don't use as a matter of principle, the cost involved is irrelevant.  (And I'm fine with paying for a Windows license that I /do/ use.)

I guess the demand for a machine+Windows is high enough to get lower volume pricing, while machine-only or machine+Linux is more niche?
 

Standard PC's and laptops are very low-margin products.  Neither the manufacturer nor the shop makes a significant profit from selling you the machine itself.  They make the profit from selling extras - a new cable for your monitor, a carry-case for the laptop, or an "extended warranty".  And the main goal is to persuade you to buy software.  The profit margin on a PC is a few percent at most, while the profit margin for a license of MS Office or Norton Security is perhaps 90%.  No one wants to sell computers with Linux unless they are doing so as part of a service agreement to a company - there's no scope for profit for a shop selling a Linux machine with no extra software, and where you won't even come back and pay them to clear out malware.
(This is also not a complaint or condemnation - you can't really expect people to make or sell things that have low expected profit returns.)