Slashdot Mirror
Red Flag Linux: Real, and Reviewed
Over at NewsForge (NewsForge is part of OSDN, as is Slashdot), Roblimo has posted his impressions of the long-awaited, much-ridiculed Red Flag Linux (English version). It may not be a big seller outside of the Chinese-speaking world (despite the available English-language install), but it's not a hoax, and it's available as an ISO for download. Update from Roblimo: I did not write the NewsForge Red Flag review. Matt Michie deserves all credit for this excellent work.
For reasons I couldn't determine, Red Flag was installing slower than Tux on a Sunday evening after gorging himself with fish.
We need better jokes.
--------
Bleah! Heh heh heh... BLEAH BLEAH!!! Ha ha ha ha...
I don't mean to become flamebait here but shouldn't all the *nix people be dancing around a fire singing the praises of Red Flag and the chinese govt's decisions to use it?
I mean, it says something that the world's largest gov't decided to pick Linux instead of any other operating system (Cough Cough; The Beast of Redmond). Sure their Distro isn't going to be the best - it's their first try after all. But eventually they could really but something together that is a nice, good, stable distro. Consider if any of the other Distros had the resources of an entire gov't behind them.
Allright, the chinese gov't isn't anything close to being perfect, or even tolerable, but you have to give them credit for making the right choice here by using a customizable, and free, product. Far from isolating themselves on the Tech Front i'd say they where doing a pretty good job of jumping in.
One last statement: Since Red Flag is GPL that means that the entire source code has to be realesed etc, etc. Quite neat isn't it? That a totalitarian, communist country is being 'forced' (yeah I'd like to see em prosecute them for a violation of the GPL) to release it's precious code to it's next-gen op system. Quite an accomplishment.
(oh wait...)
Red Flag Linux is made by Chinese Communists. Open Source software is not communist. The intriguing thing about Red Flag Linux is that it has been packaged specifically to suit the IT needs of the People's Republic of China. I know a little Kanji (which is called Hanzi in Chinese, but I don't know that) because I watch anime, but I'm going to install the English language version, because it seems like the least appropriate but most expedient way to review a Chinese distribution of Linux.
The installer is slow. Incidentally, I'm running it in a VMware window. I wish I knew why the installer is so slow! Now the installer has crashed! I bet I could bring my system back up without rebooting if I knew how.
This looks like Red Hat! I'll poke around in the menus. This looks like Red Hat! I'll use it for another five minutes, and then finalize my opinion. This looks like Red Hat!
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Disclaimer: I do not work at, nor own, Wal-Mart stock. I just find this fascinating.
A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
The internet ready microwave oven is well on it's way to going in my shopping cart.
... the NEW icon.
I also like the way the "NEW" icon on their homepage is a hyperlink to
Slashdot? Oh, I just read it for the articles.
When setting up our office in China last year, we decided to give Red Flag a try, as oppossed to using Mandrake (our new Sysadmin thought it might be easier for staff to learn). The idea appealed to us, because Mandrake requires a lot of tweaking to get Chinese input and display to work correctly. As all new employees had never used anything but Windows, we decided to install four distros on four different boxen and see which one they took to better:
1. Turbo Linux (has good Chinese support out of the box)
2. RedHat linux tweaked to support Chinese input, etc.
3. Mandrake linux tweaked to support Chinese input, etc.
4. RedFlag linux
To cut matters short, all workstations are now running Mandrake 8.1. For applications we are using the latest Chinese build of OpenOffice. Staff seemed to like Mandrake best, and it seemed to be most stable on the desktop. We share printers, disks, scanners, cameras accross the network, and once configured we have a very stable and FREE OS on every single desktop.
RedFlag was just a little too buggy (all gnome and kde config bugs, we did not play with it too long, as Mandrake was stable from install). We have not tried the latest version of Redflag, BUT, I have told our in house IT guys to keep looking at it.
One of our IT guys has been to the RedFlag main development center. It is government funded, but penetration in the Chinese market is low, because one can pick up a pirated copy of Win98 just about on any other street corner for just over 1$. The government is hoping that RedFlag will be a suitable option once they really crack down on piracy, and MS starts to bleed the country for OS and productivity software license fees.
The key for linux on the desktop in China is the same as the rest of the world--productivity applications. C'mon Open Office, we are all cheering for you!
Real men don't need signitures!!!
Anarchists and Communists, confused again. It has played over and over again.
Whenever there is a revolution, there are usually two principle revolutionary sides, Anarchists and Communists.
Both have similarities, and both have sharp differences. Generally, they both have socialist ends. But they differ on the nature of government: The Communists want strong central control. The Anarchists want deeply diffused democratic control.
The Free Software / Open Source movement is a case example of working Anarchy. Free Software developers are generally anti-authoritarian, and believe that the people doing the work call the shots. It's generally socialist, in the sense of sharing (but not in the Marx dictatorship sense). Work is done by a series of agreements and shared interest. Many are motivated to get particular things done, or out of a sense of solidarity. There is no ruler that can tell you what to do. Decisions are generally based on a consensus, but there are a few Linus Torvalds, and consessions made for expediency. The work has no chain of command, rather, it works by confederation. For example, there is the overall Open Source/Free Software movement. (We can draw humerous/interesting comparisons with the CNT/FAIR, respectively; One is more practically based, the other more ideologically based.) Above the OS/FS organization (in a certain sense), there is the KDE project. Above that platform lives the KOffice project. Above that lives the KWord, KSpread, and Kivio projects. I imagine that within those projects, there are other projects. And there are documentation projects, and usability projects, and they interact between projects, and they all work together. This is an Anarchist society, with minimal rulers and ruled. It is almost unthinkable that a member of the KDE organizing team would command a member of the KSpread team to do some particular thing, and that thing be done because of "orders from above". This is not to say that people don't argue and strategise and haggle; They do. But overall, the whole thing works. The operating system is a little "poor", and has a sort of "poor man's operating system" feel to it, but this is more than made up in the fun of it.
A communist vision of OS/FS would be state control. Flip the pyramid. OpenSource/FreeSoftware as command structure.
When you hear people saying, "I don't understand, why doesn't the OpenSource community devote most of it's effort to XYZ", where XYZ is something like better graphics, or device support, or something that they see as critical (and could quite likely use a lot more work), they are assuming that the OpenSource/FreeSoftware world works according to a command structure, and that we are working on it because we feel like suplicating ourselves to some "great cause." The reality is that we are not supplicating ourselves to some "great cause". Rather, we are doing it because we want to. This is Libertarian (the 1890's version of the word, which was anarcho-socialist, rather than the modern, anarco-capitalist meaning of the word) beliefs incarnate and applied: By acting on our natural impulses, we can do good. Note that RMS and the GNU foundation has focused on the same. When people assume that we are command structured (authoritarian), but also working for the good of our fellows (socialist), they assume that we are Communist (state socialism). Rather, we are socialist libertarians. Or at least, speaking for what I see of the OS/FS movement, it is based and functions within socialist libertarian parameters. (Much has been written about the anarcho-capitalist ideas that many geeks like.)
This is not the first time that Anarchists have been confused with Communists. If you read the history of the Spanish Civil War, it's usually described as "The Facists vs. The Communists". But there was a third side, and a very powerful side at that. Several towns belonged to the Anarchists, and the Anarchists helped fight (but ultimately, defeated by the German & I believe Italy as well Fascists, commanded by Franco). The Anarchist revolution was very real, and quite extraordinary. But because the Anarchists were socialists, the war is usually just "simplified" into "The Facists vs. The Communists".
Now you know, and... {:)}=
While the Chinese government could readily be labeled authoritarian, it hardly qualifies as totalitarian.
To begin with, like the United States, the Chinese government is a constitutional government -- something which is antithetical to a truly totalitarian regime. Like its American counterpart, the Chinese constitution proscribes and limits the powers and reach of the government. Conversely, a totalitarian government has no limits (hence the name 'totalitarian'). Americans may take issue with some of the particulars of socialist rule in China, but in fact the Chinese system has more in common with American- (or British-) style government than it does with truly totalitarian regimes, from a parliamentarian law-making body, to an independent justice system, to democratic elections (yes, the Chinese DO freely elect their local officials).
The Chinese enjoy nearly every individual right the American does: freedom of speech, of worship, of belief, of assembly, to own property, privacy, to engage in business. Yes, China limits most of these rights, but neither are they unlimited in Western countries (as every American knows, for example, freedom of speech does not include the right to cry 'Fire!' in a crowded movie house, nor does freedom of the press include the right to slander). The difference is not that Americans possess individual rights and the Chinese don't, but merely that Americans object to some of the ways in which China limits and circumscribes those rights. (The converse is also true. For example, most of the world objects to the fact that America still puts people to death, something considered outside of America to be a violation of the most basic human liberty, the right to life.)
Neither does the Chinese government seek to control all ideology, or every aspect of its citizens' lives, as a truly totalitarian state is wont to do. It is only those who make themselves an enemy of the state (admittedly, as measured by the state itself) who are the subject of "oppressive" measures. In fact, the vast majority of China's 1.3 billion people are left in peace to lead lives which are, on balance, quite free of government control or meddling. I have freely discussed democracy over tea in the tea houses of Shandong Province. I can attend church regularly. My in-laws have a thriving franchise business in Jiangsu Province which is, on the whole, subject to less governmental interference than it would be in, say, San Francisco. To list but three examples.
I am not a Chinese citizen. As a resident of Taiwan I have no love for Beijing, nor any desire to live under the Chinese government's rule. But given the choice between living in China and, say, Iraq, a Talibanesque state, or even fascist Italy, I'd choose China in a heartbeat.
Now, to keep this post on-topic, many people in this forum are confused about Red Flag Linux. Red Flag is NOT the Chinese government. The company which produces Red Flag Linux is a private entity, neither owned nor controlled by the government. The only associations Red Flag Linux has with the government in China is that A) it is partially funded by a venture capital firm which itself is partially funded by the government, and B) has been selected as the "official" operating system of the government -- a rather hollow honour at best, considering that the vast majority of the government still conducts its business on Windows-based machines.
The article to which I am responding is written by a pro-China Chinese
1. Read my post before replying to it. If you had, you'd have noticed that I specifically denied both your assertions: that I am pro-China, and that I am Chinese. I am, in fact, neither.
2. Don't post AC. Do you have the courage to stick by your opinions when your name's attached to them?
3. I especially invite you to spend a year with the Taiwanese.
* The Chinese from "poor, little, scared" Taiwan have invested more than $50 billion into more than 50,000 businesses in mainland China.
You might want to take a closer look at home before pointing fingers. China is one of America's largest trading partners, and the fastest growing American export market. 60% of all American shoe imports, for example, come from China. Kodak owns more than half the film market in China. The largest soft drink company in China is Coca-Cola (15 times larger than its nearest competitor). KFC and McDonald's dominate the Chinese fast food industry. The US Department of Commerce estimated that in 1999 U.S. corporate assets in China and Hong Kong were worth $81 billion (compared to $30 billion for all of Eastern Europe), with sales of $66 billion and profits of $3 billion. Of the 500 largest American corporations, more than half have investments in China.
Taiwan ... investments continue to grow at double-digit rates.
As do American. Through the 1990s, US-to-China exports increased by over 16% on average annually. The first five months of 2001 alone were up 20.9% over the year previous.
According to Amnesty International, China is a society that does not honor human rights.
And have you taken a look at what AI says about America? Didn't think so. You could start with its website at www.amnesty.org.
As I have already stated, I'm am neither Chinese, nor a supporter of the Chinese government. I am, however, an opponent of bigotry where I see it, including anonymous Slashdot posts.
Most Chinese in Taiwan support mainland China.
Your knowledge of the Taiwanese is almost laughably ignorant. It was, I suppose, all these "pro-China" Chinese in Taiwan who voted out the pro-reunification Kuomingdong merely on suspicion of its having ties with Beijing. It was these "pro-China" Taiwanese who in the last three Taiwanese elections elected the most independence-minded candidates (just ask Beijing what it thinks of Chen Shui-bian, or the DPP, or Annette Wu). The reason Beijing refuses to negotiate with Taipei is precisely because Taipei refuses to accept "one China" as a precondition for talks.
I'll give you credit for an active imagination, if little else.