Slashdot Mirror


Lycoris - Linux for the Masses?

Dejected @Work writes "MSNBC.com, a definitely sketchy source of Linux information, just came out with an article "Linux for the Masses" about the ease of installing Lycoris(formerly Redmond Linux) on the desktop. The author even concluded you can 'fall in love with an ever-easier-to-use operating system.' It sounds like great news but am I missing something?" Several favorable reviews of this distro recently. It looks like all you have to do to get the reviewers on your side is to let them play solitaire during the install. :) Update: 04/13 14:53 GMT by T : Eric Krout also suggests the two-part review (part one and part two) over on monolinux.

13 of 439 comments (clear)

  1. Reviewing the review... by evilpenguin · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Based on what I see in the review, it does indeed look like they've done a good job producing the "anti-geek" Linux distro. I never thought there was any reason not to use Linux as a desktop OS, but I have always throught that the best qualities of Linux (no central control and ownership) were also the reasons it would not succeed on the desktop: No marketing, no power to challenge the Microsoft OEM stranglehold.

    The most interesting aspect to me was that they sell cheapish desktops and laptops preinstalled with their distro. There are other Linux preinstallers, but most of them seem to aim at the geek mainstream or the server business.

    There is no reason Linux can't be a major desktop player technically or practically, but the marketing muscle has always been absent. Lycoris may be a great product, but I don't see where it changes anything on that marketing power front.

    Still, I may just buy their cheap desktop for my technophobe mother-in-law who doesn't know Windows or Linux. I will bet she will have no problems using the machine and will never ever wish she had Windows, or even really know that she isn't using Windows.

    1. Re:Reviewing the review... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      The real reason linux will never be a good desktop OS is all the CLI geeks who really enjoy lording over those who just want to get what they need done as easily as possible are a too busy in their own lives to sit down to learn obnoxiously obtuse grep commands. Basically KDE and Gnome both don't sweat the details that make a good desktop OS from a medicore one. RedHat was easy enough to install but try to install the Gimp-Print drivers to use with ghostscript and cups and you end up in dependency hell.

      Also the attachment to the past continually hinders Linux. Why hasn't the speed and multithreading capabilities of BeOS been implemented in Linux? Why not the ease of use of the Classic Mac OS? People don't need 6 web browsers to choose from, they need one that is better.

      I think Linux would do better to adopt a far more competitive coding model where, let us say, annually a contest is held to develop the faster leaner rendering engine and that is incorporated into the next release. In theory this is what should happen but does not.

      I use Linux for basic server purposes, but use on the desktop? Not in this lifetime. If the open source model is better than the corporate model, how did OS X get built on Unix and end up being better than KDE or Gnome despite a shorter gestation time?

    2. Re:Reviewing the review... by Daemonik · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I've used Lycoris before myself. It's pretty solidly built and should be familiar to anyone coming from a MS Windows background, in fact it seems geered for the consumate Linux newbie.

      Considering that, however, I found it disappointing that they only included a more or less stock kernel that didn't support a SCSI card that SuSE has included support for since 6.0. Considering their target market is newbiest of newbies, these people aren't likely to patch and compile their own kernels.

    3. Re:Reviewing the review... by Symbiosis · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Odds are, the newest of newbies probably don't have a SCSI setup.

      --

      -------------------------------------------
      I like nonsense, it wakes up the brain cells.
      -- Dr. Seuss
  2. Redhat is not desktop linux by HanzoSan · · Score: 1, Interesting

    Redhat is Corperate Linux.

    Redhat is good though.

    For the Desktop the battle is between Lindows, Mandrake and Lycoris.

    I believe Lindows will win because

    A they have the most funding

    B they have a business plan that makes sense

    The software warehouse can easily bring in cash.
    Mandrake has no stability even if they have cash
    Lycoris seems to have no business plan at all but are getting OEM deals?

    --
    If you use Linux, please help development of Autopac
  3. Linux for the masses? Why? by gad_zuki! · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I think some people really need to come down to earth about linux when it comes to the home market. The power of linux is not the GUI or any arguably "easy to use" features its the fact that its a great and free server. Many home and business users are still fighting their way throught the desktop model of PC use. As easy as Windows is, its still "high tech geek stuff" to, in my experience, 90+% of its users.

    The reviwerer already had WindowsXP installed and working, so why does he need this? For the pure geez-whiz factor of I'm running this linux stuff? Probably. Even as an intro to linux the easy to use distros are really just training wheels that you won't take off until you meet, greet, and spend a lot of time learning the command line, services/daemons, etc.

    Now for the pro's. A company that doesn't want to drop money on MS or Apple desktops that doesn't need certain commercial software that isn't and probably will never be available for Linux might just fall in love with this. Handing this to a teenager, adult, or grandma and telling them that they can't run their favorite apps anymore or even use AOL is simply self-defeating and neing starry-eyed about open source.

  4. Re:Solitaire during install?! by Kircle · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I've read a couple reviews of Lycoris since they changed their name, and I remember every one of them had mentioned playing Solitaire during install. Could they be on to something here?

    I think this is a really good example of an "innovation." It's something that anyone, including Microsoft with all their human interface research facilities, could have done, but no one thought of it before Lycoris came around (that I know of).

    --

    -- Kircle

  5. Just to be truly nerdy (Re:Does it rhyme...) by SocialWorm · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I did a bit of searching, apparently it's named after some kind of plant, hence the "Flower Power" thing on their site. http://dmoz.org/Science/Biology/Flora_and_Fauna/Pl antae/Magnoliophyta/Liliopsida/Amaryllidaceae/Lyco ris/

    --
    My Blog: http://nic.dreamhost.com/
  6. What color is your USB hub? by Graymalkin · · Score: 5, Interesting

    What Lycoris does that none of the other Linux distros really do is limit your options (maybe some do but why nitpick). Contrary to the belief of Linux users in basements around the globe, this is not a bad thing. Lycoris does right where others have done wrong. Instead of giving the option of a billion different file managers and command line ftp clients they simplified the software package down to something manageable. One serious hurdle in a Linux installation is knowing what programs you want and which you don't want.

    RedHat, SuSE, and Debian cater to the everything comes in a single box paradigm. This is great for the people who've used Linux before and have a feel for certain apps and thus choose to install them. Others have a feel for different apps and thus install those, this continues until there's a dozen dozen various installations of the same distribution. For people new to Linux this is wholly confusing, I've been using Linux for years and I still get confused when I've got six CDs full of stuff. I think Lycoris fits into a very nice niche of Linux users, ones who want to just turn something on and get work done. Like the tag line it seems like it could be very nice for general consumers as they'd be hard pressed to tell you what operating system was on their computer anyhow.

    Hopefully the companies building beige box PCs bundling Linux will take note of Lycoris and give it a bit of a bigger install base and popularize it. RedHat is a good company but it seems like they're definitely going in a more corporate user direction which is of course fine, more power to them.

    --
    I'm a loner Dottie, a Rebel.
  7. I love it, sorta by coupland · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Based on the web site I've gotta say: I love it, but I'll never run it.

    Seems they've done a great job replicating the Windows XP look-and-feel in Linux which should reduce the learning curve for new users. I was a "techie" in the Microsoft world and heaven knows Linux was a complete change for me. I couldn't figure out how to move a directory for weeks after switching! :)

    However, for those who have donw some climbing on the learning curve it's probably a bad idea to run this distro. After all, why make Linux identical to Windows? I applaud their effort but for the geeks among us it's probably a step backwards. Good news is, I doubt we're their primary target market. :)

  8. Re:I think chess would be better by Bald+Wookie · · Score: 5, Interesting

    hell add IM program like gaim or kopete in there and they may not even remember to exit the install

    Now that isnt a bad idea. If you had some corporate backing, or some dedicated volunteers, you could have an install-im with a live person at the other end. That way, if you needed any help you could chat with a helpful install buddy. Tell me that wouldnt impress reviewers.

    Of course, most of my early problems were getting a damn PPP connection up...

  9. Re:Solitaire during install?! Caldera did this! by xtremex · · Score: 3, Interesting

    This is NOT new. Lycoris's installer is RLIZARD, which means Redmond Linux Wizard. LIZARD was created by Caldera in 1997 I think. I got their distro at the Linux trade show in NYC. Blew AWAY anythng Redhat could have done. The installer is nothing new. It's a carbon copy of caldera. DOwn to the icons! Where Lycoris shines is the desktop! Screw their installer!

    --
    If you're not a Liberal in your 20's, then you have no heart.If you're still a Liberal in your 30's you have no brain.
  10. Re:Sounds good to me by Spoing · · Score: 3, Interesting
    I like the idea of linux for the masses, and I am all for the teaching of others to use linux- but that being said; there are so many people that don't even understand Windows 98 (let alone 2000) that I would be afraid of them using linux because they would be constantly coming to me. The people that can't find their 'run' command in windows- you know who I mean.

    You've just described my little sister. She's used Red Hat's Linux with heavy customizations from me for over 3 years. Questions I have had this month include;

    1. How do I install the software from the CD that came with this new printer? (I walked her through CUPS and mentioned the new fancy features of her printer.)
    2. Do I have to format diskettes under Linux when I take them from a Windows machine? (Yes, she did get confused and formatted a diskette that had data on it before she clicked on the floppy icon.)
    3. Why don't I have any scanner programs? (She has four different ones, under the Graphics menu. Half of them have names with the word "scan" in them.)
    4. What's a cookie? (I forgot to disable the warning message for Konqueror and she used it for the first time last week -- first time in 3 years.)

    That she uses Linux vs. Windows means nothing, except that she knows I don't support Windows. If she wants Windows, she can get help from someone else.

    Linux for the masses is great, but lets not let the masses over-simplify it or take it to the lowest commom demononator. And let's not bloat it either (i know redhat is a hog, but it works pretty well)

    You're making a mistake with this reasoning;

    1. Mac users get a standard set of programs; good and bad.
    2. Windows users get a standard set of programs; remove seemingly unneeded programs and your system will not work properly.

      Except for the kernel sources, there is no standard "Linux". There are only distributions. Remove or add anything you want -- if something stops working, it's probably because something you removed was logically necessary.

    Lycoris is a distribution, though so are Tomsrbt, Lindows, and the one bundled with a TIVO. These four aren't similar, and they shouldn't have to be.

    In most situations, if a distribution is bloated or too lean, it only means you haven't changed it beyond the defaults. You're not alone in this, though.

    Example: A friend reciently went on a rant about Red Hat not having a GUI. I asked what he did during the install, and he answered "I don't know, I asked for a Linux server and they gave me Red Hat". Red Hat's default server configuration is to not install X; servers don't need a GUI and having X around by default introduces problems in a server environment.

    --
    A firewall can not protect you from yourself. Turn off what you do not need. Do not use the firewall to do your work.