Slashdot Mirror
Review of Corel Linux 1.1.2
With all of the recent hoopla over Corel Linux, it's going to be interesting to see the reviews of the download and retail versions of Corel Linux. And while we're on the subject of distributions, it should also be mentioned that Stormix has released Stormix Linux 2000. Note that both are based on Debian - what do people think about the new distros?
The one thing I really like about the Corel distro is the Corel Explorer. Since I often live in a network of Window machines that do SMB sharing, it would be really nice to be able to do SMB browsing with it, and what not. In short: I like it.
IIRC, it's supposed to be open source but I have not been able to find the source or a package for it or anything else. I do remember finding a package of source that was supposed to contain it, but it wouldn't compile at ALL on a RedHat 6.1 box.
Does anyone know where to get it for other distros?
Agreed. I've been almost exclusively a RedHat user since they came out with 4.2, I really like their distributions, but their initscripts are poorly designed, inflexible, and hard to maintain. I haven't seen how Debian does it, but I can easily imagine someone doing much better on this regard.
----
----
Open mind, insert foot.
See this Usenet article if interested: http://x41.deja.com/[ST_rn=ap]/getdoc.xp?AN=560111 606&CONTEXT=947028952.400556062& hitnum=2
If Corel couldn't "win" against MSFT in providing word processing software to the Federal government, despite having their offices thousands of miles nearer to the Ottawan decision-makers than Bill Gates in Seattle, it's going to be tough to dominate in places other than "home territory..."
They have the "bulk" of corporate resources to perhaps outdo RHAT and SuSE; we'll see what happens!
If you're not part of the solution, you're part of the precipitate.
Corel is a b-grade company, that buys failed product lines from other b-grade companies.
An interesting point. I don't see them that way -- Wordperfect wasn't b-grade, merely late to support Windows. Corel Draw was excellent.
However, I certainly see your point -- whatever Corel's past products may have been, they certainly look like a bottomfeeder now. Perhaps that's because of their immense OEM distribution contracts, though.
Linux needs to fend these sorts of companies off vigorously.
I really have to disagree with that STRONGLY. Linux doesn't have to fend ANYONE off; Linux can't fend anyone off; and Linux shouldn't fend anyone off.
Linux doesn't have to fend them off because our reputation is in our coders and users.
Linux can't fend them off because Linux is free. They can use it if they want, and we'll even welcome them if they give back.
Linux shouldn't fend them off because they _are_ giving back.
-Billy
The distro is OK. My personal preference is Gnome, so right off the bat i'm non-plussed with 'look and feel'. But what was disappointing to me was that the X configure tool was not groking my video ram and wouldn't display above 800x600.. and this is on a pretty vanilla compaq proliant box with an ATI mach64 card that I use to test out different distros/OS's. I was able to manually edit my settings, but this is contrary to the much trumpeted user friendly-ness of it's install and configuration. Also, network configuration didn't happen during the installation which seems silly.
Other than that, though, a nice install, and a distro that shows promise.
Anyone else have any weird experiences with getting X how you like it?
I was ok with the fact that it did not find all of the linux supported hardware on the computer I used. I found corel's contribution to the linux community was rather superficial. It was just a typical Linux distribution with the system logs hidden from the users view. I believe when you hide information does more harm than good. I was hoping the corel bootup screen would have viewable bootup log.
When I had to configure options by hand I had to deal with alot of crap to recompile the kernel and getting things to work my way. The command line was also lacking in comparison to other major distributions. Just because some new users do not want to deal with command line options doesn't mean you should not put them in your distro. Pico was missing for heavens stake! Maybe this is good for newbie users but linux users who want to see how linux works and gain real experience linux should use something else like SuSE, debian, slack, etc.
I believe that new distributions should contribute to linux as a whole. Sure Corel is quick to install but there are many others that are quick to install. The lack of network install is also a large problem I notice. If you want to get linux workstations setup you need a CDROM to install. I would rather be able to download or install linux via ftp. Given Corel's background as a graphics company I expected more multimedia apps and a prettier presentation. If your a seasoned Linux user avoid this like the plague, and if you are a newbie who wants to learn linux avoid this because it will not help you learn it. If you are a user that needs a quick workstation and don't care about how your system works or the open source movement use Win NT if you have the money. I recommend SuSE instead which is easy to install, has tons of apps, and is more organised.
Note this is only my review for the FREE edition you can download as an ISO image.
I downloaded the ISO image for Corel's distribution and installed it on my laptop. Overall, things went very well and I didn't have any problems getting the system up and running.
I love the way Corel has configured SAMBA to allow their distro to immediately take part in Microsoft Networks. I work in an all NT shop, and I was happy to see that I was able to logon to our NT domain using my MS user id and password.
The only real problem I had with the distribution is my unfamiliarity with Debian. I am a Red Hat user, so most of my downloaded software is in the form of RPMs and of an incompatible GLIBC library. I had to go back to using Red Hat.
I would recommend Corel's distribution to Windows users looking at trying Linux. With it's streamlined installation, splash screen to "protect" users from all of those "unsightly" boot messages (I really missed them while running Corel) and the default KDE window manager (they did a great job customizing KDE for thier needs) it will make a good stepping stone into the world of Linux.
Brought to you by Frobozz Magic Penguin Fodder.
I'm wondering how Corel Linux will affect the sale and marketing of commercial applications for Linux. So far, I believe several commercial applications (Metrowerks Codewarrior is the only one I can think of right now) have come out as "Red Hat" releases rather than "Linux" releases. I'm hoping that if other commercial distros are successful, distribution-agnostic commercial software will displace distribution-specific.
Of course, as a Debian user, I also hope that if Corel is successful, more non-commercial software will be released in .DEB format in addition to .RPM's. From the little I've used each, I like the Debian package format better.
Weblogging Considered Harmful:
I'm missing something....
/etc/rc filesystem (debian) or a smart, logical /etc/rc.d/init.d (sysv, I think it's called?) redhat-style boot system.
Every new distro, for the last LONG while, and for the next fairly long while, has had the SAME set of servers, the SAME set of clients, and either KDE or Gnome. Most have had both.
Until X4 and KDE2, any "new" distro is a bullshit rehash.
The only real difference is either i386 or i5/686 optimization (and as far as I can see, Mandrake's the only one with those optimizations... which is why I choose it religiously) and either Corel's mods to KDE (which royally suck and make it more frustrating than hell), and either a stupid illogical
Other than those two things, what's the big difference between these distros? They're all hard to use at best, unless you've become a linux geek by struggling through them.
So far, only mandrake meets the needs of a combination of power and usability as far as I'm concerned.
(don't bother to flamespam me, I don't read it anyways)
mindslip.
Personally, I was rather disappointed with Corel linux. It seems to be pretty well put together, it's based on a good solid distribution, and there is quite a bit of value-add there. However, it's locked into a GUI install which bombs out if it encounters anything (such as a video card) that it doesn't know how to support.
I beta'd this thing for 'em, and enjoyed the experience... they've obviously put a lot of work into it and are trying to add value to the base distro. However, I don't run it on any of my machines because I can't get it to install. They did throw in a copy of the Loki port of Civ:CTP in the shipping version that they sent me, though, so it wasn't a total waste. Too bad it's just a limited (no multiplayer) edition though.
I think Corel could be a great distro, provided they iron out their support issues. It seems to be targeted towards more newbie users (with the nice pretty installer and all) and it's not going to win over any friends when it gets to the "probing hardware" part of the install, dies, spits the CD out and reboots the machine.
-- Gary F.
--snip--
Please remember, where I am is -not- "tech-land". This is the middle of nowhere,
I saw this at a CompUSA, too. The Natick, MA CompUSA location has a fairly large display of Corel Linux for sale located prominently right by the entrance. I was pleasantly surprised to see it there. Unlike the area where you are, I would describe Natick (Eastern MA about 1/2 way between 495 and 128 along I-90) as being in the middle of a technically competent area.
What was bad about it was the price: $80?! It's great it's easy enough to install that the average user can reasonably take it on, but at that price, I wonder how many casually interested people will bite? Still, I hope it catches on, and this exposure can't hurt.
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Much like a newborn puppy...
I am a Debian old timer and yesterday I have tried stormix just for the heck of it (and also to test the new CD-R) I was impressed. The distribution seems not to have changed the Debian packages much, it is basically Debian. The good difference are that Storm Linux ships with kernel 2.2.13, _very_ cool X11 based and text based installation, GNOME, KDE. Also has a sysadmin utility which isn't bad (though does not configure printer afaik, only network nad users. I didn't like their packagemanager thingy, I prefer dselect. Just use plain apt, dselect. or dpkg. Basically it is a nice distro. Easy to get started with and has all the power of Debian underneath. I perefer plain Debian though...
I happen to think Suse is flakier set up than RedHat, but I realise that this is just an opinion. The more the merrier I say.
But you can browse through windows disks on other boxes. I do this every day at work
-- Oh Well
I was horrified by the original Corel Linux - broken installer in extremum.
Increasing the user base is not a good thing unless they're at least happy and competent users of it, and preferably are prepared to go out and fix things and write new toys for everyone.
"Business respect" is not something in which I'm interested at all.
It's viable for the desktop when it's viable for the desktop, not when Microsoft say it is.
I'm already on Debian - what do I go to next?
~Tim
--
Rushing on down to the circle of the turn
Actually, I'd be worried if you're seeing large piles of boxes of Corel Linux. That likely means they aren't selling *any*. Given the nature of computer retail sales, most stores or chains are paid a stocking fee to actually put product on the shelves. A large endcap or standup ('pyramid') display could likely cost Corel several thousand dollars.
The fact that you are not in a tech -heavy centre may be even worse news. Comp USA may have been paid to place X number of displays, and so have shunted those displays to stores that are off the beaten path so that Corel Linux doesn't interfere with their regular volume business. If Corel was silly enough to not specify where those displays should go, this may well be the case.
Frankly, your report has me a little worried for the future state of Corel Linux.
--sugarman--
Little things are what have driven people away from Linux in the past. They don't care how great Linux is if they can't install it, so installation has often been a key topic, complete with screenshots, when discussing or reviewing a new distribution. It's not because you or I have a problem with the current installations of various distributions, but because we should recognize that this is an area which could stand some improvement to attract more users.
Sure, you and I may know that all installers do basically the same thing, but we should also know that there's a wide variety of features you can include, leave out, add, modify, to make the user more comfortable with the installation.
What about partitioning? We should also know that there are loads of people out there who haven't installed Linux because they didn't want to screw around with partitioning their disk. Something that can be launched from Windows and take care of all that for you is a big plus to many potential users.
You're probably right that, one installed, this Linux is extremely similar to vanilla Debian. Not entirely of course... there are likely many changes that Corel has made to their distribution that they would like to see incorporated into Debian, and some of it might just make it. Heck, they might even end up rolling some stuff into the kernel one of these days.
And lo, before you've even noticed, the hour hand has moved ahead as you were staring at the minute hand.
Behold... macro-evolution.
RP
I hate to say it, but RH seems to be blowing it on what's supposed to be their forte: service & support. I was having some problems with a clean install from a Cheapbytes CD and didn't want to mess around, so I bought a boxed copy of 6.1. That barfed on three different machines -- fatal crash of the install reporting file corruption. I went back to the Cheapbytes CD, found out what the problem with it was, and continued.
So maybe anyone can have a bad CD sneak out. I tried to report the problem to RH (more as a courtesy than anything) and found out I needed to register to do that. (You'd think that they'd accept bug reports from anyone, but no.) Then, despite having a paid-for boxed copy I couldn't register. The web submission barfs.
Looks like Young needs to do a reality check if he wants to keep those billions.
Lacking <sarcasm> tags,
Rage128:
I wouldn't suggest using the Rage128 in VGA mode. It's EXTREMELY prone to lockups with ncurses or console switching. Using the framebuffer driver (2.3.23+) works quite well although acceleration is not finished, yet.
I have a huge patch that should be merged with 2.3.36. Email brad@neruo.com if you want it early.
I'm surprised no one has mentioned the integration of samba browsing in the file manager yet. To me, that's one of the most important things Corel did in their distro. I don't know for sure if it's open source, but it's definitely a good thing.
In my office, we constantly use network neighborhood for file sharing. It's the easiest way to visualize the network, and actually have people remember where to go if they need a file again. I keep it secure, and they keep working.
Up till now, one drawback of Linux was the time I would have to put into setting up samba for people so they could get to certain files. I've never *really* understood why smbmount is so hard to use, but it is anyway. To me, Corel did something here that should've been done a *long* time ago. Being disconnected from the windows computers in the office just makes it harder for anyone to see the point. Now if it were only installable on other distros...
We bought a copy of the Deluxe edition here at work to play around with. It comes in a surprisingly heavy box. Printed manuals are a good thing, I was very glad to see the dead trees in the box. It also comes with a rubber toy Tux. Kinda cute.
We installed it on a Dell PIII 550. The installer went flawlessly and found all the hardware. It has been running nicely for a couple of days now.
Reading through the comments, I see something that worries me about the distro, though. Most of the people who have reported problems have been using the downloaded version. The retail box comes with the install CD, the source CD, and a freely distributable CD. It seems like some of the goodies are only included in the retail version. If they are crippling the free/downloadable version, that would be a Bad Thing. I have not read the license carefully, but the inclusion of the freely distributable CD makes me wonder if the retail version is licensed per machine?
This is mostly just aimless speculation on my part, has anyone looked into this to provide more factual information?
Redhat does not seem that concerned about the quality of their shipping product because they seem to think that is what errata is for. RH's new priority upgrade service seems to support the upgrade idea. In Redhat defense, they could never ship a product if they waited for the newest and greatest of all the software.
The remarks about GNOME in RH 6.0 are very valid. It is a well known fact that GNOME reached a stable 1.0 release a few months too early such a version resides on RH 6.0. The GNOME team realized that there stable version was not that stable and spent a great deal of effort debugging all aspects of GNOME. Those efforts resulted in a very stable release known as OCTOBER GNOME. It is unfortanate to report but RH 6.1 did not shp with OCTOBER GNOME. This new version of GNOME has never crashed on me.
I've never gotten the darn - its probably the downloaded version - of Corel Linux to install (got the 1 CD from my lug). The install proceeds through the first few screens and then the video goes all barfy. Seems to me that Corel is attempting to bring Linux to the Lame (er, Windows user). Which is NOT A Bad Thing At All. I prefer SuSE. Includes the kitchen sink and everything else, but their new YaST2 installer sucks the big one. Yeah, I realize that the trend to graphical installers is probably irreversible, but, for the time being, I hope the distributions maintain a text-based mode for installing distros when the graphical one might hang for a series of reasons in the install process. I prefer more control over my installs anyway, but how can I fairly evaluate a new distro if the darn thing won't install? Scott A. Carson
Scott A. Carson
Like all of Linux, you takes what you like and you leaves what you don't. Even though I bought the Deluxe version, I didn't bother to load it over the freely distributed version because I didn't want the non-free OSS junk. I like the WP and bitstream fonts which I loaded from the Deluxe version.. haven't tried the Civ game yet though.
The only probs I have had with CLOS have been very easy to fix and so I am very happy with the install. The installer works great for me and in fact I was shocked that it actually installed X perfectly. LOVE the Update tool because it is a good crutch for apt-get when you are trying to find stuff. I ditched KWM and use Window Maker, and I must say it rocks when you have all of this stuff arranged just right.
This brings me to a prediction (wish list).. I bet that in the future (this year) the Linux desktop stuff will get so organized that ready-made themed (a.k.a. themes.org) desktops could be options on the install. I don't just mean the wallpaper, colors, icons -- but rather the arrangement and collection of little helper applications. Sorta like GNOME/KDE but with all of the cooler stuff with custom skins. All of the stuff that you and I take all day to add once you do a fresh install. But don't limit it to just the install stage of course, make them Debian packages or better yet just a list of the required packages and a GNUstep tree or something. Basically I just want a way to make my machine look and act like one of the ones on themes.org, but without the hours of configuration -- see what I mean. That would be a nifty desktop.
Before Corel there was no distribution (as far as I know - I haven't tried all of them) that focused on desktop users. Narrowing the scope allowed them to serve this market better.
Since Corel software is aimed at the desktop, Corel would find it critically important that the desktop market is well served.
I think this is a great thing - especially since it's based on Debian. I'd like to see more virtical market distributions for specific applications. Perhaps aimed at the music industry, graphics, point-of-sale, whatever. Basing your specialized distro. on Debian gives the user ultimate flexibility. Limiting your scope allows you to serve a specific market really well. I don't see any down side.
It is tempting, if the only tool you have is a hammer, to treat everything as if it were a nail. - Abraham Maslow
- "Naive" home users that aren't quite sure what a distribution is are the group that people tend to think of first.
- "Corporate" users that are trying to build centralized systems are probably the second group people think of.
- Developers/experienced Linux folk are usually not the ones thought of, except from the perspective of being curmudgeons that say, ``Here's a nickel - buy yourself a real OS.''
Everyone else will probably take the "Naive home user" perspective; I'll take the "experienced developer" perspective just to provide more perspective.I find it greatly interesting that these Debian-based distributions are now attaining wide-spread acceptance. And I suggest that the perspective I'm taking is relevant to this.
Debian has had the merit, over the RPM-based systems, of providing a full-fledged tool set directed at integrating together a distribution. It's not just the dpkg package manager; Debian's tool set sweeps much wider, including:
Yes, it's pretty klunky, and something newer and prettier would be nice. That's part of what Stormix provides...
These are the components that are even more important than the previous ones.
The many RPM-based distributions suffer, and suffer badly, from the fact that RPM itself can only go so far in validating that packages are well-constructed.
Distribution makers like RHAT, SUSE, Caldera, and TurboLinux should have some significant automated tools to help them maintain correctness, although that is not known for sure, and I am skeptical that this is actually the case.
The Debian Maintainer Tools provides considerable assistance to the developer doing package maintenance work. As do the Debian Developers Manuals.
And that is of critical value when you're trying to avoid the "Oh, it's a .0 release from Red Hat, so watch out for big problems! " situation. That has been a significant problem for Red Hat; I'm quite sure that the presence of things like lintian, debhelper, and others has helped Corel and Stormix substantially, much as it helps maintainers of "plain Debian" packages.
If you're not part of the solution, you're part of the precipitate.
This tells me a lot. It tells me that sales of Linux are doing well, or CompUSA wouldn't be bothering. There's plenty of money in other products. To be worth that kind of dramatic showing, Corel Linux, and Linux in general, must be making a significant impression.
Please remember, where I am is -not- "tech-land". This is the middle of nowhere, where the most advanced tech gurus use Access as the corporate intranet database, and the AS/400 is the only high-power machine ever seen. For Linux to be selling like hot-cakes around here is about equivalent to aliens giving the entire population a brain transplant in the night.
It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)
Over all, I think that Corel did a wonderful job.
On any modern machine, the install is quick, easy on the eyes, and any idiot can install it.
And since, its still Debian underneath, nothing is sacrificed to make things pretty. dpkg and apt are still there. I ditched kde and went back to using the Debian mirrors for upgrades, which worked fine.
I am going to start suggesting Corel for newbies in the local LUG. Its a nice gently way to introduce them to Linux. As they become more experienced, they can still enjoy the full power of Debian. Its about as close as anyone has gotten to the best of both worlds.
It does give them a reference distribution, which they control, on which to base their porting efforts. There's nothing wrong with that; in fact, it's quite shrewd of them. They'll probably lose buckets of money on the distribution proper, but they're probably planning to make it back and more on applications software.
As for basing it on Debian, that the core of Debian is 100% free software means that they won't have to worry about licensing issues looming overhead in the future. Dpkg/apt is arguably the best package management tool presently avaliable and Debian has an excellent QA process to boot. They could put together their own distribution and their own package management format, but there's no advantage in doing that.
Consider it as a business case and it becomes quite clear. There's no advantage in reinventing the wheel merely to get into the linux market, but you still have to have some control over where the wheel goes.
--
--
There is no premature anti-fascism. -Ernest Hemingway