Microsoft Loses Appeal To Shut Down LindowsOS

alphabet26 writes "LindowsOS announced yesterday that a Seattle Judge has denied Microsoft's appeal to shut them down, citing that Microsoft's own use of evidence helped determined "Windows" is a generic word. Lindows.com has posted the judge's seven page ruling on their website." Microsoft is trying get an injunction to prevent Lindows from using the name while the trial proceeds, and the judge has denied them, twice. Lindows could still lose the case in the end, though.

Comments

Maybe M$ should just retaliate. . .

[Limburgher]

And name an OS Winux. . .

Re:Maybe M$ should just retaliate. . .

[Bob McCown]

Be vewwy vewwy kwiet, Im pwogwamming in Winux....heheheheheheeh

Re:Maybe M$ should just retaliate. . .

[hdparm]

In which case they would be required to change the name, after Linus, as the owner of a registered TM for Linux, decides to bring them to court.

Winux will mean too much of a resemblance wit Linux, which, contrary to windows, is not a generic term.

Re:Maybe M$ should just retaliate. . .

[metacell]

I can see the headlines...

"Microsoft announces it's new operating system, 'WinLinux', which will combine the security and reliability of Linux with the ease of use and application base of Windows."

Not likely, huh?

The biggest threat against the Windows monopoly is not the presence of a technically superior operating system. The biggest threat to the Windows monopoly, is widespread awareness that an alternative *exists* at all.

Microsoft is better off ignoring Linux than starting campaigns against it, which is largely what it has done. But they are losing anyway.

Which is why they are trying to dominate and control other markets instead, like the handheld computer market (with their PocketPC), the game console market (with their XBox), or the market for platform-independent network-transparent applications (with their .NET framework).

Re:Maybe M$ should just retaliate. . .

[AnalogDiehard]

Windows (win-doe's) n. : a 32 bit GUI shell written on top of a 16 bit operating system that was originally developed for an 8 bit personal computer with a 4 bit interrupt buss by a two bit company that can't stand one bit of competition.

Re:Maybe M$ should just retaliate. . .

[bluGill]

I don't know, I suspect the linux trademark would be easy to break. Linux himself has intentionally done nothing to defend the trademark. (IIRC someone else registers Linux in their own name, and lawsuit was brought which proved the Linus is the rightful owner. Linux said thanks, but I'm not enforcing it because trademrk protection is not something that linux needs.

Re:Maybe M$ should just retaliate. . .

[joshki]

Oh well... I went looking for the link but can't find it right now. It was on slashdot a few months back -- Linus does enforce the trademark, but not in such a way as to keep people from using it. IIRC, he basically says as long as you're using it to promote linux he's not going to sue you. But I believe there have been a couple of instances where his lawyer or someone has actually filed suit against companies that use it incorrectly. I think if MS used it in a name like that they'd find themselves on the losing end of a lawsuit very quickly.
Somebody post that link if you know where it is -- I spent the last 10 minutes on google looking for it.

"Shut Down LindowsOS"

[Erasmus Darwin]

Microsoft isn't trying to shutdown the LindowsOS, as the article headline erroneously states. They're merely trying to stop them from using the Lindows name. The error seems to be a mistranscription of the Lindows press release, which refers to Microsoft attempting to "shut down Lindows.com" (presumably due to the name rather than the content). Even if Microsoft were to have won, there'd be nothing preventing the Lindows people from changing the name to JdsfhkjashdfkjOS.

Re:"Shut Down LindowsOS"

[56ker]

I don't think they'll suceed as Lindows is sufficiently different from the word Windows - however much they're trying to cash in on Microsoft's trademark.

Re:"Shut Down LindowsOS"

[killmenow]

I think Microsoft IS trying to shut down the Lindows OS (or perhaps I should say they are trying to KEEP it vaporware).

Jobs mimicked Xerox. Gates mimicked Jobs. Robertson mimicked Gates. Only Gates knows how well mimicking works as a business model.

I think Microsoft wants Lindows to never be done...or at least they never want Windows to be done until Lindows won't run(tm).

The silly trademark thing was the only thing they could attack until there's an actual product.

You can bet [if|once] a final, shipping product comes out of lindows.com Microsoft will sue for reasons other than just the Windows trademark.

Re:"Shut Down LindowsOS"

[halftrack]

MS is in fact trying to stop Lindows. MS's lawyers aren't dumb so they've chosen to go forth with the lawsuit that's most likely to stick.

Lindows is a small company and should they be struck (hard) by a MS lawsuit it would efficiently be the end of business for them.

Re:"Shut Down LindowsOS"

[jedidiah]

Windows simply isn't a proper trademark and Microsoft shouldn't expect to exclude others from benefiting it. They likely knew that it was a weak mark to begin with. If they have to 'suffer leeches", they had it coming.

They put a big "kick me" sign around their neck and thought that they could bully others into not actually taking them up on their generous offer.

Re:"Shut Down LindowsOS"

[ch-chuck]

Gates mimicked Jobs.

There's a funny story about Apple with their project code named Sagan - when the Carl Sagan people complained and threatened legal action (over an internal code name, not a product) they changed the name to "Butt Headed Astronomer". Being a product name, of course, they wouldn't solve anything by calling it "Asshole Software Architect OS". Hmm, maybe ASAOS would work, with only rumors about what it means ;)

Re:"Shut Down LindowsOS"

[gad_zuki!]

Actually I would say this is an unfair attack. There are hundreds (thousands?) of pieces of software that start with the word 'Win' that MS has no problems with because they run on their software. They've already diluted their trademark if you ask me.

It looks like an unfair challenge, but then I know what Linux is. Does the average consumer know? If Lindows wins (oh look a pun) it'll be because the lindows people will be able to demonstrate that 'lin' are the first few letters of linux and that the average consumer will not be fooled into buying the wrong software.

Considering that MS's marketing machine is so huge, who would really buy a copy of Lindows and expect it to be windows? Not to mention who buys non-OEM copies of MS's OS unless they're pretty informed on where that $200 bucks is going.

I'm expecting Lindows to win this one, possibly with stipulations that they can't use a lot of 'microsoft blue' or anything shaped like the windows logo on their packaging and ads.

All things considered though, MS made a big mistake by not creating a new non-sense word that's easy to defend in trademark cases like the tradename Kleenex. Not to mention they're named Micro-soft. Not exactly unique there either. There's a MS training center called Microhard in Chicago. I wonder if they would be the victims of this kind of lawsuit if they only trained people in Novell?

Microsoft Trademark in Question?

[zoombat]

Wow! From the reference to Page 28 of the court's finding:

• Microsoft has raised serious questions about the validity of its trademark...

Wouldn't that be FUNNY if Microsoft lost its "Windows" trademark name because it tries to bully a small company into obeying its will. Ha! This made my day...

Its time for Redhat Windows, Mandrake Windows etc

[HanzoSan]

Its time to give Microsoft some real competition, if Windows is deemed a generic word its ALL OVER for the microsoft monopoly.

Re:Boys, boys

[zbuffered]

obviously

This is the word of a troll. Lindows is not obviously in the wrong. Lindows may be in the wrong. You think Lindows is in the wrong.
And if you want to wave your college degree around, do it at one of your hoity-toity extended-pinky tea parties. Don't think that it makes you intelligent, or original.

Re:Lindows is a dumb name

[HanzoSan]

But if you wanted to use Windows and Linux software at the same time, What would you use?

I guess you are too ignorant to understand that some people like linux better than Windows and want to use ONE OS not dualboot all day.

Put down the crack pipe

[Dark Paladin]

Now, I want you to think about this very hard.

Lindows is Linux with some Wine updates to run Microsoft software on Linux.

Linux was created by Linus Torvalds to be a replacement for Minux.

Minux was based off of Unix.

Unix was not a spin-off of Microsoft's technology.

Please, either redraft your statement so it makes sense, or research before talking.

Re:Its time for Redhat Windows, Mandrake Windows e

[goldspider]

An excellent point, perhaps people would be less hesitant to try Linux if it had a more familiar-sounding name.

However, name recognition is one thing... having money, lawyers, thugs is something else entirely...

I think it will take a little more than name recognition to get Linux mainstream, but it's certainly a good start.

PS: Imagine all the "FreeBSD Is Dying" posts there would be if Linux distributions started this :)

Target on toe

[Mr_Perl]

From the bottom of the page:
Lindows.com is not endorsed by or affiliated with Microsoft Corporation in any way.

IANAL (*cough*) but if I were, I would read this as an admission that there is a potential for confusion in the mind of the consumer requiring clarification by the disclaimer.

Aren't they shooting themselves in the foot with that?

Re:Target on toe

[bricriu]

I think they need that becaise they claim that LindowsOS runs MS programs, not because they are themselves "like unto MicroSoft." IANALE (I am not a laywer either), but I think that while MS could claim that as an admission, there are plenty of counter-arguments.

I Never liked "Lindows" as a name

[FearUncertaintyDoubt]

It always sounded like some cheap Chinese knock-off to me. I think you want to sound like your quality is better than Windows...

Homer:[gasps] Look at these low, low prices on famous brand-name electronics!
Bart: Don't be a sap, Dad. These are just crappy knock-offs.
Homer: Pfft. I know a genuine Panaphonics when I see it. And look, there's Magnetbox and Sorny.

Re:I Never liked "Lindows" as a name

[Amazing Quantum Man]

And Banyan could have taken a page from Mr. Chekov, and created "Vindows", for Vines users!

What beautiful music....

[rhadamanthus]

I think the truly important part of this article has nothing to do with M$ (readies flame-retardant suit...).

The truly important bit is regarding "trademarking of common phrases". I think it absolutely ridiculous that companies can trademark any common word or phrase. Reference a similar suit to this one, Mastercard suing Nader over "priceless" to see this kind of silliness in action. (feel free to find a better article, I just pulled the first item off google)

Basically, I do not condone the use of language "exclusivism". Language, as a whole, does not lend itself well to patentability. Satire, documentaries etc. are protected speech regardless of trademark, although occasionally (as usual) the courts can get confused. In this case it is even more bizarre. Suing over a name sounding the same? Poets beware!

-------------rhad

Re:What beautiful music....

[Beryllium Sphere(tm)]

What's ridiculous is the misuse of trademark law. Suing over a name sounding the same might make perfect sense, for example if somone started selling "Zerox" photocopiers. Suing Nader over "priceless" is silly, as you say.

Like any other algorithm, laws don't work very well outside the area they're designed for.

What I wonder about are the implications for "Word", "Chart", and all the other common words Microsoft has chosen to use as trade names.

Re:What beautiful music....

[Stonehand]

It wasn't just the use of the word "priceless" -- the entire Nader ad in question was clearly a derived work that mimicked the world-recognized Mastercard ad campaign. That fact was never in dispute.

The issue of contention was, basically, whether it fell under parody protection as a sarcastic use of the theme.

Re:What beautiful music....

[Bourbonium]

Whatever their level of altruism, Lindows is definitely going to be released. Their Sneak Peak releases of beta versions have demonstrated that they're serious about this mission and their product. They're very up front about their plans for the product. It remains to be seen if they can successfully compete with not just M$, but also the other Linux distributors out there who have armies of fiercely loyal users. Then again, they're not marketing their distribution to diehard Linux users, but to frustrated Microsoft customers and newbies who can still be persuaded not to succumb to the Dark Side.

choosing a name

[salmo]

I don't know why the company would pick a name like Lindows, though. Thats like those movies that are hyped up as "If you liked X you're gonna love Y." Or "The best ___ since X." Everyone I know who reads something like that immediately moves on. Rather than selling themselves as a cheap immitation product they should try and sell themselves as a better alternative that happens to also be much cheaper.

This seems especially silly when they have to fight legal battles for the right to use a bad name. Even if they win it's going to cost them a fortune.

I'd just move on and make a big anti-Microsoft PR stunt out of Microsoft trying to pressure my compnay legally. You'd be getting articles in all the ZDnet type news sites, where it seems Lindows target audience hangs out. They'd talk first about the big MS v. Lindows and Linux in general thing plus they'd mention your new snazzy name. Then the reviews start rolling in when the reporters have nothing to talk about because they get a review and a chance to drag up old MS v. Linux garbage. I guess they get all this now, but I think the costs would be a lot less the other way.

Plus, you have to admit the only reason they are using the name is to trick people into using their product. The name basicly says "Like Windows? Try Lindows." Without MS, they'd have no reason to name their product that.

Re:choosing a name

[mickeyreznor]

"Without MS, they'd have no reason to name their product that."

Without MS, this product wouldn't exist in the first place, so what's your point?

Re:choosing a name

[spudnic]

I'd have to say that this Lindows thing is just too stupid to be true. It's a dumb name and no company would invest the time and money involved here just to be able to market a Linux distro.

Sun and/or IBM are privately bankrolling this to contest the legality of the trademark Windows. They don't want their companies to seem petty or look bad if they lose, but they also want to put a slight hurt on Microsoft. They form this shell of a company, stick up some bad screenshots, draw out Microsoft for a court case, win it, and quietly let Lindows die after meeting their goals.

.

Re:choosing a name

[spudnic]

Actually I had enclosed that last paragraph in (consiracy) (/conspiracy), but forgot that it would be stripped out when displayed.

Smile.

.

The Ruling

[Joe Jordan]

I found the most interesting part of the Judge's ruling to be the following:

Microsoft maintains that "Windows" cannot be generic because it is not the name for a class of products. Microsoft's reasoning is flawed because it ignores the Seventh Circuit's case law holding that when a composite term is generic and is made up of an adjective that classifies a noun, the adjective itself can also be a generic form. Microsoft's argument also ignores its own analysis of the Defendant's evidence, which shows repeated references to the composite terms "windows manager", "windowing environment", "windows programs" and several others. Microsoft's outline of the evidence in the Declaration of Timothy L. Boller even characterizes each of these composite terms as the genus for a type of product.

Apparently Microsoft used the very same terms to describe Lindows that they were trying to defend as unique. How's that for shooting yourself in the foot. :)

Re:The Ruling

[darkonc]

The second paragraph really deserves to be included:

Through it's own use of the evidence, Microsoft essentially admits that these terms refer to the genus of computer software products that have windowing capability. Just as with "light beer", and "matchbox toys", it logically follows that the use of "windows", "window" and "windowing" is also generic when used to refer to the same class of products.

I think that they pretty much shot themselves in the foot on this one...

Bwa ha ha ha ha ha!

-1 flamebiat

[rutledjw]

Does it seems to anyone else that MS should try to spend less time in the courts and more in QA and product development?

Sorry, had to say it. ;)

Re:Its time for Redhat Windows, Mandrake Windows e

[Erasmus Darwin]

"if Windows is deemed a generic word its ALL OVER for the microsoft monopoly."

No, it isn't. Microsoft has the benefit of having strong public recognition of both their product name and their company name. Furthermore, it wouldn't kill their trademark on the distinctive Windows flag logo that many people have seen at boot-up for the past 7 years.

I also think that retail stores would be less likely to carry a Linux-based operating system labelled "RedHat Windows". Why? Because anyone confused enough to buy "RedHat Windows" only because of the "Windows" in the name is going to return it the very next day when it fails to "work" (where "work" equates to running all his/her existing MS Windows-based programs; wine or other emulation packages aren't going to be enough to appease a novice end-user who was expecting actual MS Windows).

Finally, I think breaking up a monopoly via trademark is inherently lame. The whole point of trademarks are to allow consumers to be able to differentiate the different products in a given market. I know I'd feel dirty if Linux had to start tricking people into using it.

strange relationship between Windows and Linux

[Gizzmonic]

The more I read about "Lindows" and other wannabe Windows retrofittings for Linux, the more I wonder about the psychological health of the (wannabe Windows) Linux community.

Think about it this way: it's like the people who bashed the hell out of Star Wars Episode I, but still showed up at midnight in full Jedi drag for Attack of the Clones. There's constant whining and putting-down of Microsoft, yet everything that goes into KDE and Lindows tries to make Linux more Windows-like.

Why must Linux define itself through Windows? It's good enough to stand on its own, last I heard...

Re:strange relationship between Windows and Linux

[Phosphor3k]

That because there is nothing wrong with Windows. The software does what it does good. i.e, plays games, runs productivity software and is generally easy to use.

The problem is Microsoft and their pricing scheme, EULAs and general nastiness. If the software portion of their business was run like their hardware portion (keyboards, mice joysticks), they would be much better company.

Re:strange relationship between Windows and Linux

[Idimmu Xul]

The more I read about "Lindows" and other wannabe Windows retrofittings for Linux, the more I wonder about the psychological health of the (wannabe Windows) Linux community.

Why must Linux define itself through Windows? It's good enough to stand on its own, last I heard...

That's a rediculous idea! Windows has an awful lot of features that I and many other people deem usefull. I don't want to have an arguement on 'timelines' here, but just because Windows has a GUI interface should we abandon it? The same with the CLI.. should that go too? Just because its similar to Windows?

Or should Linux 'embrace and extend', 'borrowing' things from Windows and making them better (it's imperitive that it should be better, as if it's the same or worse, we should just use Windows in the first place..)!

I personally hate having to switch between Windows and Linux, I only ever hit Windows because despite what everyone seems to thing, DVD playing with Linux is completly shit, plus games run faster :/

Tagging the word Windows on the end of RedHat is just plain stupid though imho, it's like those low budget 'rip-off' items of merchandise etc that are similar to the original but just cant cut it.. and we know Linux is better than that!

Re:strange relationship between Windows and Linux

[prisoner-of-enigma]

People are trying to make Linux more "Windows-like" with increasing amounts of window dressing (pun intended) simply because they realize the reality of the world: 95% of the users on this little globe use Windows in some variation or another. They don't care that it's slow (I.T.'s problem), they don't care that it's big (ditto), or expensive (the company paid for it), or proprietary (gee, what's that mean?). They just know that it works well enough for them, and they're used to it. NEVER underestimate the power of familiarity.

Also don't underestimate Microsoft. Regardless of their many faults, they have as of late started spending lots of cash on usability enhancements and studies to see how people like things to be. When I say "people", I don't mean geekheads who tweak kernels and make their own Cat5 cables, I mean the AVERAGE user out there who never, ever wonders where the command line prompt is. Believe it or not, dumbass technophobes outnumber tech-heads by about 50-to-1 if the average company I.T. to user ratio is to be considered. These people can't even program their VCR, what makes you think they can appreciate Linux's CLI?

KDE, Gnome, and all the rest are chasing Microsoft because (deep breath here, folks)...Microsoft is where all the other folks WANT to be! They don't want to be buggy, huge, and expensive, but they do want to take advantage of the huge Windows penetration into the average Joe's computing experience. Linux folk consistently underestimate this factor, and then are puzzled why Linux is not gaining widespread acceptance on the desktop.

Cardinal rule: a product does NOT have to be the BEST at anything, it just has to be GOOD ENOUGH, and CONVENIENT ENOUGH, to get the job done MOST OF THE TIME. OS/2, Novell, Macintosh, UltraSPARC...I could name a thousand technologies that are (or were) the best in their respective classes but failed to achieve market dominance. Intel's processors are not the fastest, they do not have the most elegant design, and they sure as hell aren't the cheapest, but they rule the PC world completely while Alpha and PowerPC occupy niches. Macintosh arguably has one of the better GUI's out there, yet they languish with only about 4% of the market. OS/2 was 32-bits long before WindowsNT was even a glimmer in the eye, but does anybody really run Warp anymore?

Being the BEST at one thing frequently means you've neglected something else somewhere. Linux is a technological marvel in its configurability and flexibility, but has neglected usability with respect to contemporary products from Microsoft and Apple. Don't try to deny it, it's true. When your grandmother can successfully get a PC and load RedHat on it unassisted, and then actually troubleshoot it if something goes wrong (can she understand cronjobs? fsck?), THEN Linux will have risen to the top. Unfortunately, I have a funny feeling that in order to become that user friendly, Linux will have to become bigger, slower, more expensive, and more proprietary. Perhaps it isn't true, but I'd be willing to bet that it is.

Re:strange relationship between Windows and Linux

[rutledjw]

Whoa, whoa, WHOA! Hold there, cowboy. Don't confuse the "Linux community" with companies who are trying to make some $$$ from Linux. Big difference.

Linux IS (in my mind) good enough to stand on its own. Have you READ any of the debates on here when versions of KDE &| Gnome are released? The Linux community is fickle and tends to hold developers very accountable.

There's constant whining and putting-down of Microsoft, yet everything that goes into KDE and Lindows tries to make Linux more Windows-like.

Whatever, I find the business practices of MS to be reprehensible. That's not whinning. If you want to be a sheep, by all means, but don't complain when others don't.

KDE and Lindows are 2 efforts to make Linux more palatable to the average user. Lindows may be Windows-like, but I think KDE is quite different. Finally, let's not forget that Windows pulled most of its ideas from Mac and (early on) OS/2.

Re:strange relationship between Windows and Linux

[asv108]

The problem is whether you like it or not, windows is a standard so in order to appeal to the great majority of windows users, a linux interface needs to be windows-like. Think about keyboards for a second, the DVORAK layout has be proven to be a more efficient keyboard layout but the problem is QWERTY became a standard before DVORAK was introduced. The introduction of new features or methods in a UI must be incremental or it will never become popular.

Re:strange relationship between Windows and Linux

[FreeUser]

The more I read about "Lindows" and other wannabe Windows retrofittings for Linux, the more I wonder about the psychological health of the (wannabe Windows) Linux community.

Nonsense. It is merely a migration tool, nothing more. Many large enterprises would like to migrate away from Windows, particularly with Microsoft's new, extortionate licensing scheme, but they can't do so overnight in a "cold turkey" fashion because they depend on too many custom or niche applications that do not run on GNU/Linux, or at least didn't until Wine, Codeweavers, Transgaming, and Lindows came along.

Others want to migrate, but don't want to retrain their workers for a new OS. The Lindows folks saw an opportunity and jumped. I won't ever run their distribution, but many very well may, and they'll be getting something the other distros those of us more savvy prefer doesn't offer them ... seemless and (as) painless (as possible for any) migration from a legacy, monopoly OS to a more sustainable, open and free(dom) alternative.

Someone saw an opportunity and decided to package up and market a GNU/Linux distribution to take advantage of that opportunity and make a few bucks. No deep or sinister freudian psychology involved, just simple, free market economics.

Re:strange relationship between Windows and Linux

[TheTomcat]

When your grandmother can successfully get a PC and load RedHat on it unassisted, and then actually troubleshoot it if something goes wrong (can she understand cronjobs? fsck?), THEN Linux will have risen to the top.

BS.

Most users wouldn't have a clue how to install Windows, let alone use Scheduled Tasks, or scandisk/defrag.

Your post was good up to that point.

S

Re:strange relationship between Windows and Linux

[jgerman]

Uggh, don't forget those of us who sort of likes EP1, but thought Ep2 was a cheese fest. ;)

Re:strange relationship between Windows and Linux

[jgerman]

And from the support front, I'd say that *nix's are much easier to understand than Windows. Cronjob's easy, I could explain to my mother how they work in less than five minutes. Trying to explain NT's at, no thanks. The pretty little pictures that get put on the screen for users just get in the way of efficient administration (for the most part).

Re:strange relationship between Windows and Linux

[IamTheRealMike]

KDE, Gnome, and all the rest are chasing Microsoft because (deep breath here, folks)...Microsoft is where all the other folks WANT to be! They don't want to be buggy, huge, and expensive, but they do want to take advantage of the huge Windows penetration into the average Joe's computing experience. Linux folk consistently underestimate this factor, and then are puzzled why Linux is not gaining widespread acceptance on the desktop.

Ah, no, I don't agree with this bit. You're saying the reason desktop Linux hasn't taken off yet is because people think Windows is good enough. I disagree - people in my opinion don't think Windows is good enough. In fact, I often here even fairly techno-phobic people bitching about it: they've heard a techie swear at Microsoft when Windows crashed and they think: ah, I just lost all my work, this is the fault of Windows. And often they are right.

I'd say there are lots of good reasons why desktop Linux hasn't taken off yet. It's not because of any overarching problem with open source development, or any fundamental problem with Linux, it's just not there yet. People consistantly seem to underestimate how much work is required to make a truly easy to use computer, especially when the underlying OS was designed to be powerful first, simple second.

For instance: software management, fonts, printing/hardware setup, I could go on and on. There are currently several problems that mean that Linux is just too much hard work to use on the desktop right now. I can do it, and don't mind putting in the extra work because I like the "Free" aspect to it. But most don't care. Combine this with small mindshare and the difficulty in getting preinstalls, and I think it's self evident why Linux hasn't got there yet. But it will.

Cardinal rule: a product does NOT have to be the BEST at anything, it just has to be GOOD ENOUGH, and CONVENIENT ENOUGH, to get the job done MOST OF THE TIME. ........ Intel's processors are not the fastest, they do not have the most elegant design, and they sure as hell aren't the cheapest, but they rule the PC world completely while Alpha and PowerPC occupy niches. Macintosh arguably has one of the better GUI's out there, yet they languish with only about 4% of the market. OS/2 was 32-bits long before WindowsNT was even a glimmer in the eye, but does anybody really run Warp anymore?

Intel - this was mainly the case because Intel were in the right place at the right time, and because they did the famous Wintel deal.

Macintosh - yeah, for years they had the best GUIs, but let's face it, up until recently Macs sucked at everything else. OS 9 made Windows 98 look like a magical technological feat of engineering. There was a reason their market share dropped so rapidly.

OS/2 - the reasons for the lack of dominance here are well documented, and they aren't to do with technology.

My point is, none of these things are gone today because Windows did what they did better: there were almost other (usually business related) reasons involved.

Being the BEST at one thing frequently means you've neglected something else somewhere. Linux is a technological marvel in its configurability and flexibility, but has neglected usability with respect to contemporary products from Microsoft and Apple. Don't try to deny it, it's true.

It is true. However, that's because the Linux developers first concentrated on power, then flexibility, then features, and are just now turning their focus onto usability and looks. For instance, in the last 2 weeks the KDE Panel configuration dialog was patched to make it far more usable, with a cleaner, simpler design. Now Linux on the desktop has caught up with Windows in terms of raw features, it's busy taming them and making them easier to use. Meanwhile, MS and Apple worked on ease of use above all else, and are now focussing on power and features. Take for example the pushes they are making into the server arenas etc. Linux and the commerical OSes have just approached things from a different angle.

When your grandmother can successfully get a PC and load RedHat on it unassisted, and then actually troubleshoot it if something goes wrong (can she understand cronjobs? fsck?)

She doesn't have to? If anything right now Linux is more granny friendly than Windows (98) because they rarely set things up themselves, rather they just read email, write letters etc. With Linux once it's setup it's hard to screw up (you need root access). And more to the point, I don't need to know about fsck or cronjobs, they are dealt with automatically by SuSE. Linux still isn't user friendly enough for widespread adoption, but it's getting closer.

Unfortunately, I have a funny feeling that in order to become that user friendly, Linux will have to become bigger, slower, more expensive, and more proprietary. Perhaps it isn't true, but I'd be willing to bet that it is.

I'd bet against that. So far Linux has come on in leaps and bounds, and it's remained cheap, free and ... well okay I give it to you on speed grounds.

Re:strange relationship between Windows and Linux

[IamTheRealMike]

I agree, I don't think it's reasonable to ask the programmers to do anything any differently if they're already doing it for free. You do, however, always get what you pay for. Some software is free because people love the software, some is free because you couldn't GET anyone to buy it ;-)

Hell, I've seen people try and charge for commercial software that looked like it was knocked together by a 15 year old in Visual Basic. Probably was in fact. Free software doesn't affect the quality at all, you can get high quality and low quality free software, just like commercial stuff.

I will, however, lay a good bit of blame on the "zealots" and the "community"

Please don't confuse the zealots with the community. Like any community made up on minorities, Linux has its share on zealots. They don't reflect the thinking of most Linux users or even developers. Criticism is allowed, even encouraged - Slashdot isn't where most development gets done. Go look at the KDE development lists for instance.

I wouldn't say it's spreading, far from it. It used to be the case that Linux could not be intelligently debated on Slashdot at all, now it can. Look at any recent topic on Linux, and you'll see plenty of measured, informed opinions. Nowadays the problem is with highly modded Mac zealots! There's no winning ;)

About the extreme configurability thing: Linux was developed for power first, and ease of use second. This doesn't make it flawed in any way - Windows NT was power first, and only by the XP line was it easy to use, so it can be done.

Look at KDE - one of the new features in 3.1 will be (more) complete support for "kiosk" mode, which is basically controlling and removing features. It's intended for public/corporate computers, but could just as easily be used for home PCs too. Alternatively, distros can easily remove features and configurability.

I guess my point is, that it's better to have power and then control/hide it, than not to have it at all. That's why MS scrapped the 98 line and replaced it with XP - better to have power than not.

Sweeeet!

[Ageless]

/If we have to go to trial where the word "windows" will be declared generic, we're prepared to do so."/

Damn that would be sweet. The whole "Windows", "Word", "Office" thing has always pissed me off.

Re:unfair

[Vicegrip]

"Lindows was originally a Microsoft product, and Linux was just a spin-off of that ..."

pbfft *sound of coffee spraying over desk*

Microsoft needs to recruit slightly more informed people to post on Slashdot. This current lot they've hired is rather abysmal.

*shuffles off to find a napkin*

Re:Lindows is a dumb name

[Dark Paladin]

I guess you are too ignorant to understand that some people like linux better than Windows and want to use ONE OS not dualboot all day./blockquote.

Now you know why I switched to OS X.

Mandrakesoft's Windows XP

[HanzoSan]

mandrake(in very small letters)SOFT
Windows XP service pack.

Have commercials telling users its an upgrade from "WindowS"

Demonstrate it in a mall, using a theme which looks exactly like XP.

99.9 percent of all users wont know the diffrence, it will be like coke vs pepsi.

What needs to be done, is marketing, thats what Linux is currently missing, With Windows as a generic name, all the Marketing Microsoft put into it, can be transfered to Linux distros

Re:Lindows is a dumb name

[NineNine]

But if you wanted to use Windows and Linux software at the same time, What would you use?

That's not the point. The point is that it's a dumb name. It's childish. Nobody, other than uber geeks, is going to buy a product named "Lindows".
It's called marketing. In case you haven't noticed, marketing is kind of important when you run a business.

Why?

[night_flyer]

The whole "Windows", "Word", "Office" thing has always pissed me off.

http://www.microsoft.com/info/cpyright.htm

TRADEMARKS. Active Channel, Active Desktop, Active Directory, ActiveStore, ActiveSync, ActiveX, Advisor FYI, Age of Empires, Age of Mythology, Allegiance, Amped, Asheron's Call, Ask Maxwell, Authenticode, Azurik, BackOffice, BackOffice logo, bCentral, BizTalk, Bookshelf, CarPoint, ClearLead, Computing Central, Crimson Skies, Developer Studio, DirectDraw, DirectMusic, DirectPlay, DirectSound, DirectX, Encarta, Entourage, Fighter Ace, FrontPage, HomeAdvisor, Home Essentials, Hotmail, Links, Links Extreme, MapPoint, MechCommander, MechWarrior, Microsoft, Microsoft Agent logo, Microsoft Internet Explorer logo, Microsoft Office Compatible logo, Microsoft Press, Microsoft TV logo, Midtown Madness, Mobile Explorer, MoneyCentral, Monster Truck Madness, Motocross Madness, MSDN, MSN, MSN logo (butterfly), .Net logo, NetMeeting, Nightcaster, Outlook, Outsmart, Passport logo, Picture It!, PowerPoint, Precision Racing, Project Gotham Racing, Revenge of Arcade, Rise of Perathia, SharePoint, Slate, Tex Murphy, The Age of Kings, The Everyday Web, Trekker, UltimateTV, UltimateTV logo, UltraCorps, UnderWire, Urban Assault, VGA, Virtual Golf Association, Visio, Visual Basic, Visual C++, Visual C#, Visual InterDev, Visual J++, Visual Studio, WebTV, Where do you want to go today?, Windows, Windows logo, Windows Media, Windows Media logo, Windows NT, Xbox, XBOX logo, Xbox "X" logo, ZoneFriends, ZoneLAN, ZoneMatch, ZoneMessage, Zoo Tycoon, and/or other Microsoft products referenced herein are either registered trademarks or trademarks of Microsoft Corporation in the U.S. and/or other countries. The names of actual companies and products mentioned herein may be the trademarks of their respective owners. The example companies, organizations, products, domain names, email addresses, logos, people and events depicted herein are fictitious. No association with any real company, organization, product, domain name, e-mail address, logo, person, or event is intended or should be inferred.

In other news..

[RailGunner]

Microsoft will be filing suit against Home Depot and Lowes for selling windows, as well as major home builders such as Choice homes and Pulte for including windows in buildings they sell to the public.

:)

Lindows: Windows Methadone

[mikosullivan]

I originally hated the name "Lindows". I would have prefered a clean break from Windows. However, I'm starting to come around to the name from a marketing perspective. "Lindows" may serve as an enticing transition for Windows-addicts, sorta the methadone of the closed source.

Lindows is bad

[lkaos]

I'm sorry, but I cannot help it.

For one, Lindows goes to great length to distant itself from Linux. In fact, most non-open source people do not even realize there is _any_ relationship between Lindows and Linux.

Lindows *is* Linux. All it is a regular distro of Linux that has renamed everything and drops into single user mode. Others have mentioned how they renamed KWord and a lot of the other KDE stuff.

Then they don't release their source code (clearly violating the GPL). Free Software is all about preserving credit for the original authors and Lindows seems almost to spit in the face of all the people who have worked on Linux.

I don't care if Linux overtakes Windows. I don't care about Windows and the people who use it. I do care about people abusing the hard work that has gone into developing Linux though.

I personally am disappointed that Lindows won here only because I would have liked to see them fade away. They are not good for the community and I can just imagine the harmful effect they will have when they eventually go belly up.

Re:Lindows is bad

[lkaos]

From their own site:

Lindows.com is a consumer company that brings choice to computer users. Lindows.com, Inc. uses the latest technology to create affordable, intuitive, user-friendly products. Lindows.com, Inc. was started by Michael Robertson, founder and former CEO of MP3.com. At the core of Lindows.com is a new operating system called LindowsOS(TM), a modern, affordable, easy-to-use operating system with the ability to run both Windows® and Linux® software.

WTF! The core of Lindows is LindowsOS??? No it's not! The core is the Linux kernel. Wine is not an operating system, it is an emulator. It's not like they wrote even a significant portion of any of their components (yeah, a little bit on Wine, but not much in comparision to the entire project).

I'm sorry, I just don't see why more people don't despise Lindows... Is this not a big FU to the Free Software community?

Re:Lindows is bad

[killmenow]

Actually, if you dig a little deeper, here's a question posted on the support.lindows.com member forum...

Q: Does LindowsOS use Windows drivers?
A: LindowsOS is based on BSD linux [emphasis mine] and uses linux drivers for hardware and compatibility.

Now of course, my first thought is, "What in the hell is BSD linux?" My second thought is, perhaps much of the kernel in LindowsOS is BSD, with a smattering of Linux compatibility improvements and some Wine poured in for Windows compatibility.

If much of what they do is based on BSD, how much do they really have to give back to the community anyway?

So now the question I want answered is this: When is someone who's signed up for the $99 fsck-you program to get the sneak preview gonna post it online? Or for that matter, if any of you have it, will you run strings on the binaries and post the results of that?

Or would that be a violation of the NDA?

Re:Lindows is bad

[MsGeek]

This is why I am rooting for Lycoris as the "Linux with Training Wheels" for recovering Windows users. Lycoris releases source. Lycoris is based on a standard distribution (Caldera OpenLinux) and openly acknowledges that it is a species of Linux.

I am only waiting for Lycoris to tweak KDE 3 the way they did KDE 2.2.2.

It actually is a Good Thing (tm) that the Lycoris Group changed their name from Redmond Linux. The whole Lindows thing is a distraction from the goal of creating a simplified Linux for the desktop.

Re:Lindows is bad

[laserjet]

When they say "BSD" Linux, they are referring to *types* of Unixes. If you haven't heard, there are two main branches of Unix: BSD and System V. Not a lot of differences, but they are not speaking of the BSD you are thinking of (i.e. not FreeBSD, OpenBSD, etc.) They are tlaking about a system type.


This dates from 1992:

>What is (are) the fundamental difference(s) between System V and BSD?


The only true fundamental difference is that System V is a for-profit venture and must therefore sell whatever people want to buy, while BSD is a research vehicle and must therefore provide a base on which to write papers. The result is that System V has lots of features, costs a lot, and is comparable to many other commercial systems, while BSD has lots of *new* features, eventually drops old features that turn out to be useless, and does not cost much. Unfortunately, since BSD was originally based on AT&T's `32V' Unix, you need an AT&T source license to buy BSD (which is sold only in full-source form). --

Re:Lindows is bad

[prizog]

"Or for that matter, if any of you have it, will you run strings on the binaries and post the results of that?"

Are you a copyright holder on any part of any software that might concievably be in Lindows? If so, mail me (novalis@gnu.org or license-violation@gnu.org) and I will send you what you need.

Re:Lindows is bad

[killmenow]

I am aware of the differences in SysV and BSD style *nixes. And Linux is very SysV-ish, if you know what I mean.

Are you suggesting they have taken the linux kernel and put a BSD-style userspace, filespace, etc. to it?

If so, what would be the point? I mean, why NOT just use FreeBSD? Starting with FreeBSD, hiring programmers to improve linux binary compatibility, and throwing in Wine would not require you release your changes to FreeBSD back to the community right? I mean, I thought that was the point of the BSD license?

This is why I'd like someone who HAS a preview to run strings on the binaries. I'd like to know if they actually came from linux or [Free|Open|Net]BSD?

Re:Lindows is bad

[prizog]

Yes, it's based on GNU/Linux. It uses KDE and lots of GNU utilities. I didn't see anything BSD-related in there.

Re:Lindows is bad

[i_am_nitrogen]

If you had taken the time to read the site more thoroughly, you'd have seen that it indeed states that LindowsOS is based on the Linux kernel.

Furthermore, upon correctly reading the paragraph you quote, you will understand that it states that LindowsOS is the core of Lindows.com's business model.

I know I sound rude, that's not my intention, but sheesh.. Can't people read before they flame?

Re:Lindows is bad

[i_am_nitrogen]

Somewhat obviously this is just the result of an overworked, underpaid, tech support guy, accidentally confusing one three letter acronym for another as he hurriedly typed in questions and answers to rush whatever he was working on out the door before his boss gets mad...

Heheh...

Re:Lindows is bad

[doubtless]

Actually Slackware is very BSD-like, as opposed to Sys V.

Check out slackware.com, I am still using slackware, it's a little bit 'primitive' in terms of getting updates and such, but on the other hand, the internals are very simple and visible even to a novice, just my view. :)

Re:Boys, boys, and its

[Xandis]

Time to look in the mirror and start applying more makeup as you are no longer passable...

Anyway, this has nothing to do with bait as most likely the Lindows people aren't enjoying spending time and other resources defending themselves. It is just MS trying to defend a trademark and seeing how far it can go. Also, there is the issue of whether it is "fair" to allow a company to ride the wave of someone else's work in building up a brand.

I think it is an important case. If MS wins then corporate lawyers everywhere will be licking their chops to go after anything that even remotely looks similar to an established corporate trademark...it will be another headache for small businesses.

Microsoft Windows (MS-Windows) is one thing; Linux Windows (Lindows) should certainly be another; Bindows (BeOS-Windows) could be another; etc. The "Windows" part is too generic alone to have exclusive right to use --- the identifier "Microsoft" _plus_ the generic though I think is fair to establish as one's own exclusive trademark.

Lurrah...

[Tarquin Sidebottom]

Lh lood, L Lnti Licrosoft Ltory, L Las Letting Lnti Licrosoft Lithdrawl Lymptoms. Lhank Lod Lor Llashdot!

Okay, maybe thats not quite so funny as I thought it was going to be!

Remember Webster's?

[Rayonic]

Remember when the courts ruled that the brand name "Webster's" was ruled to be a generic term for a dictionary? Compared to that, this ruling on the "Windows" name seems tame. I mean, at least window is both a common English word and a term for GUI object used across multiple OSes.

Hm... I wonder, if the case keeps going like this, people can name any OS "Windows", as long as they brand it properly: Sun Windows 2001, AOL Windows ver 5.0, Rayonic's Windows Infinity+1 - 'So there, nyah' Edition.

why not just change Lindows to

[snatchitup]

!Windoze (i.e Not Windows...)

Well... It is Friday afterall. I'll spend today polishing my
Light Saber for the battle this weekend...

Re:Its time for Redhat Windows, Mandrake Windows e

[pubjames]

Redhat Windows, Mandrake Windows etc

This is, I have to say, a brilliant idea. I don't think it guarantees that the Microsoft monopoly is over, as you say, but it would be a very clever marketing move.

I think many people in the Linux world underestimate how important marketing is. Very simple things really, like the language you use, really do make a difference.

You may like to think that marketing doesn't influence you. And perhaps it doesn't. But it influences a hell of a lot of people - that's why companies like Microsoft pay hundreds of thousands of dollars to develop product names like "XP".

Apple. think different. Repeat. Repeat again. Repeat a hundred times. Eventually people make the association between Apple and creativity.

The reason "Redhat Windows" (or SUSE Windows or whatever) would be a brilliant move would be because it would immediately make an association in Joe Publics mind. The billions that Microsoft has spent making people associate Windows with terms such as reliablity, quality, etc., would be transferred to Redhat, for free.

Now, I can here some of you thinking "bullshit, people aren't so stupid", but you've got to remember that we are not Joe Public. Joe Public doesn't understand what we understand, and to you and me, that makes them appear stupid:

Joe: I want to buy a computer.

Sales dude: Oh, this one's nice. It's a Linux machine.

Joe: Oh, no, I want a Windows computer.

Sales dude: Well, how about this one. It's got RedHat Windows on it.

Joe: Oh, is that like Microsoft Windows?

Sales dude: Yes, it's very similar. And it's cheaper.

Joe: Great! I'll take that one.

Re:Its time for Redhat Windows, Mandrake Windows e

[HanzoSan]

Thats why everyone returned windows NT and XP right?

MS English XP addition

[ehiris]

There is another new addition to MS English XP.

window
n.

8 - Computer Science. A smurf like looking rectangular area on the screen that displays Microsoft's own file or message dependently of the other areas of the screen.

The real dictionary term is here.

Re:unfair

[Vicegrip]

perhaps, though of late, the number of such preposterous posts seems to have gone up exponentially. In this case it appears he believes this.
More to the point, there are enough people out there who actually believe Microsoft is the raison d'être of PC computing (and I deal with them frequently) that I've started to respond to disinformation a lot more vigorously.

Re:at least X is safe for now

[Stonehand]

It's not "X windows". It's "X Window System", or "X11R{insert version number here}", or the "X Protocol"...

Re:Its time for Redhat Windows, Mandrake Windows e

[HanzoSan]

Joe Sixpack was willing to buy Windows2k, WindowsXP etc, I mean even though his programs broke, it was the Windows name that sold those OS's.

The Games may not work as well, But Microsoft marketed it as a new upgrade,

Linux people should market linux as an UPGRADE.

Tell them go ahead and use Windows, but when you are tired of crashing, dealing with viruses, and want freedom to burn cds and have freedom in software choices.

Graduate to Linux.

Re:Its time for Redhat Windows, Mandrake Windows e

[HanzoSan]

By the way we need TV comercials to market Linux like this. Nothing short of tv comercials will work. We need to market Linux to the younger college/highschool crowd not the adults.

Put Linux Commercials on MTV. Make it seem like a huge movement, perhaps complete with protests and people throwinng their windows computers in the trash.

You know, something like what was done for those anti tabacco commercials.

Re:Its time for Redhat Windows, Mandrake Windows e

[GrenDel Fuego]

I also think that retail stores would be less likely to carry a Linux-based operating system labelled "RedHat Windows". Why? Because anyone confused enough to buy "RedHat Windows" only because of the "Windows" in the name is going to return it the very next day when it fails to "work" (where "work" equates to running all his/her existing MS Windows-based programs; wine or other emulation packages aren't going to be enough to appease a novice end-user who was expecting actual MS Windows).

On top of that, a lot of stores have policies against returns on open boxed software.

I'd rather not have people thinking of linux as "the OS that screwed them over"

Could loose?

[StevenMaurer]

While technically correct that MS "could loose the final case", I think it's highly unlikely, as you can see from this excerpt of the original order:

...Microsoft has only raised serious questions about the merits of its case...(and) has failed to make a sufficient showing of likelihood of success on the merits.

Given this, we are just biding time for the fat lady to make her stage entrance.

Windux

[thumbtack]

Windux.com

Talk..Both Side...Mouth

[biostatman]

"'Pocket PC' is a generic term used throughout the industry," company representative Marianne Peterson said to a judge in a near-empty court. "Microsoft is simply not infringing this trademark...and asks the court to dismiss the case." Cnet

"The evidence relied on by Lindows is insufficient for two reasons," said Microsoft. "First, it shows use of 'windows' as the name of a feature, not as the name of a genus of products. Such feature references may show that 'windows' is descriptive of the goods, but not generic. Second, Lindows' evidence shows repeated uses of Windows as Microsoft's trademark. Thus, it offers no support for a finding of genericness." zdnet

Maybe not a complete contradiction, but amusing nonetheless.

those thing i use to look outside now have a name!

[V_drive]

finally! i have a simple name i can legally use for those clear things i use to look outside. i was really getting tired of saying, "take a look out the transparent viewing portal" or "please close the invisible atmospheric circulation inhibitor."

It already exists.

[MsGeek]

http://www.lycoris.com/

Just add Open Office and you have the "Linux Challenge" all ready to go.

Coke, Pepsi or Lycoris? ;-)

Re:It already exists.

[HanzoSan]

The problem with Lycoris

While its a good Linux distro, It doesnt seem to have the kinda backing that Lindows has.

I mean whats Lycoris's Business plan? is Lycoris being funded by guys with hundreds of millions of dollars? I worry about their business plan not their product.

IF lycoris can find a workable business plan, they'll do fine.

Re:It already exists.

[MsGeek]

Everything in Lycoris is Open Source. If Lycoris dies then others can pick up the project and run with it. That's the diff between it and Lindows.

Windows users dont care about security

[HanzoSan]

They've never used a Secure OS before, So why would they CARE about security? The goal is to place them on linux, not give them "security"

And they expect Wine to be the magic bullet for compatibility with the users software. While Wine is amazing technology and certainly praiseworthy, it's hardly a universal solution. What Transgaming and Codeweavers have done with Wine is excellent in their relevant niches. But to build up expectations that Linux will be able to run pretty much whatever Windows software you throw at it? Not a chance. There's still some Win 3.1 apps that won't run (Distant Suns: First Light is the only one I care about. :-)


WindowsXP doesnt run Windows 3.1 or Windows95 software yet no one seems to care as long as it runs Word, IE, etc.

No, Lindows takes the weaknesses of both OS's in Windows lack of security and Linux's lack of wide commercial software support and emphasizes them.


What really matters is if Linux is more stable than Windows, More powerful than Windows, and offers more FREEDOM than Windows.

Windows users who want Security will eventually upgrade to a better Linux, the goal isnt to give security to people who dont understand how security works.

The goal is to give them stability and freedom and let them decide what to do next. Linux wont crash. Linux wont have DRM, People like to burn their CDs and not have their computer crash.

These people are used to being hacked by tom dick and harry and wont really notice a diffrence there.

Re:Windows users dont care about security

[HanzoSan]

Mr.Coward writes "I've crashed Linux, and I generally know what I'm doing (at least far better than the average Lindows user would). I've also crashed a hell of a lot of applications on Linux, and it can sometimes give the appearance of less stability than Windows with some distributions. As far as DRM goes, that's primarily a function of the distribution medium. Unprotected CDs burn and rip just as well from Windows as they do from Linux or OS X or anywhere else, and mp3 files convert back and forth between formats just as easily. In the future there may be a case to bring this up, but it's likely to be a government issue if that happens."

"Ah, I see, if they're running Windows they must get hacked all the time. Sorry to burst your bubble, but most people have never experienced having their computer hacked. At worst, some percentage of people have encountered a worm or virus and had to deal with that, and just how great would it be to see a worm targeted at LindowsOS that not only destroys data, but also roots the system?"

How did you manage to crash linux? perhaps you just crashed kde or gnome, but you surely didnt make the kernel crash if you were using redhat.

Windows users had to deal with netbus, trojans, msn, ie hacks, icq hacks, aim hacks and exploits, nimda, code red, the melissa virus, etc etc

Re:Windows users dont care about security

[aardvarkjoe]

How did you manage to crash linux? perhaps you just crashed kde or gnome, but you surely didnt make the kernel crash if you were using redhat.

If you haven't crashed Linux, then you obviously haven't used it that much. Kernel panics are a dime a dozen, even with the stock Red Hat kernel. (At work, I had some trouble with SMP systems and the SCSI driver that was included with Red Hat; we had to compile our own with a patched kernel to get it working.)

Yeah, once you get all your hardware set up and so forth, it's generally rock-solid (my computer hasn't crashed in months.) But if you claim that 'never crashing' is a virtue of Linux, and then people actually try it, they'll just write you off as fanatic who doesn't know what he's talking about.

Re:Windows users dont care about security

[HanzoSan]

Linux Mandrake has crashed.
Redhat Linux has never crashed, not even ONE time.

I'm on a dell laptop, and I'm using Redhat 7.2, not a single crash and its been over 6 months.

Whats this tell me? That Linux is stable. I have XP on this laptop as well, It crashes every few days.

It just hasnt crashed on me, I mean some people claim Windows never crashes on them. Linux has never crashed on me once, the only time it has, was when I used linux mandrake.


If you haven't crashed Linux, then you obviously haven't used it that much. Kernel panics are a dime a dozen, even with the stock Red Hat kernel. (At work, I had some trouble with SMP systems and the SCSI driver that was included with Red Hat; we had to compile our own with a patched kernel to get it working.)


Thats a configuration problem, NOT a crash. A crash is when everything freezes and you get a kernel panic. I've NEVER gotten one on a properly configured machine. Now, I did get one when I was a newbie using Linux Mandrake, but I was using Linux MANDRAKE not redhat. I dont even have Redhat perfectly configured (KDE3 is giving my problems)
Still Linux has never crashed once,

On the PC, Linux would go for months at a time straight without shutting the comp off. ONE crash with Linux Mandrake, 0 Crashes with Redhat, this is in my 2-3 years of using Linux.

Re:Windows users dont care about security

[aardvarkjoe]

Right. So a kernel panic that happens when using Red Hat is, by definition, not a crash. That's a brilliant definition right there.

Silly troll.

Re:Windows users dont care about security

[Decimal]

Lindows takes the weaknesses of both OS's in Windows lack of security and Linux's lack of wide commercial software support and emphasizes them.

If running an emulator of an insecure system on a more secure system makes the entire system less secure, you're at least half right. But Lindows is trying to sell itself on the idea that it will run both Windows and Linux applications. If the Lindows we've been promised ever becomes a reality, it will have a software Library the size of Win32 and Linux combined.

Re:Windows users dont care about security

[HanzoSan]

I havent gotten a kernel panic with redhat

I think Lindows _is_ infringing

[Ed Avis]

The thing is, 'windows' may be a generic term, but Lindows are not trying to make an operating system that just happens to have a windowing GUI. They are trying to make a substitute for Microsoft Windows. I am sure they will market it on this basis too.

However, in any sane trademark system you'd credit the consumer with a minimal amount of intelligence and assume that Lindows can be distinguished from Windows, as Radiation Dude from Radioactive Man. Who knows, perhaps this will even be the outcome.

Re:Its time for Redhat Windows, Mandrake Windows e

[Rinikusu]

Negative on that. They've got other non-generic trademarks such as Office, Word, Access, etc. How many times do you hear people in your office say a word like that when they access the system?

Re:Its time for Redhat Windows, Mandrake Windows e

[mr_gerbik]

This is why nothing gets accomplished, because as a community you silence the cold hard truth, while living in your pipe dream worlds that have linux coming out as the victor. I use linux every day, but defeat windows on the desktop it will never do. Wake up.

Mod me down some more.

Re:Its time for Redhat Windows, Mandrake Windows e

[jgerman]

This is true. I'm betting you could get away with something like Word. Technically I'm sure the trademark is on Microsoft Word (anyone volunteer to look it up?). RedHat could make RedHat Word with no trademark infringement. Or at least I'd hope so, but I could be wrong, TSR was allowed to trademark the word nazi which seems bogus to me.

Re:Its time for Redhat Windows, Mandrake Windows e

[jgerman]

but defeat windows on the desktop it will never do

Thanks for the opinion Yoda, but remember that's all it is opinion.

Re: No, keep that pipe going!

[jedidiah]

No, Jobs & Wozniak were responsible for the PC revolution. They produced the first non-kit consumer microcomputer as well as the first mass market GUI.

You're the one revising history.

The "PC revolution" afterwards was caused primarily by hardware companies trying to cash in on IBMs good name. Bill too was trying to cash in on IBMs good name as well. He distinguished himself not so much by being a visionary but by being willing to do anything including fraud and extortion.

Compaq has more claim to the title that you would give to Bill Gates and Microsoft.

Re:Its time for Redhat Windows, Mandrake Windows e

[jedidiah]

Never is a long time.

Many of us still remember DOS 6 and all of the associated manual memory management shenanigans. The success of DOS over Macintosh quite clearly demonstrated that success in the computing market has little to do with features or software quality.

Re:Tradmark common nouns.

[jedidiah]

You are using the term "generic" overbroadly. Perhaps this is due to the shorthand manner in which the term is being used here. "generic" refers to the industry in question, not to society in general. "Deere" is not "generic" when speaking of what "Deere" does (farm machinery).

Yes, Apple sued Apple

[Ethelred Unraed]

What about Apple? Were there any cases where a company was forced into submission by Apple over their usage of the word "Apple" in a product's title?

Yes, Apple sued Apple, but not in the way you think.

Apple Records, the Beatles' record company, sued Apple Computer over the name. If I remember right, both Apples settled out of court. The agreement basically said that Apple Computer would keep the name "Apple Computer" and that Apple Computer would never get into the music recording business.

This is, by the way, the origin of the system sound on Macs called "Sosumi". Apple Records was not happy when Apple Computer started adding all kinds of sound capabilities to Macs, which Apple Records thought may violate the agreement. Ergo the cheeky name for the sound -- "so sue me".

cf. Wikipedia

Cheers,

Ethelred

Re:The LindowOS core

[Glorat]

I guess it's a point of perspective. The ultimate core of any operating system is the kernel, in this case the Linux kernel. However, these days people look at the OS at a wider layer than just the kernel.

For example, all the wars about IE being part of the "Windows OS", one may wish to argue that the core of Windows is actually the windows kernels; that's ntdll or user32/kernel32/shell32 and that everything else is built on top.

If you regard the operating system as the layer(s) that allow applications, Windows or Linux based, to interface with memory, CPU and other hardware, then the end result appears that Lindows OS is indeed the core of the Lindows distribution. They've taken what were previously applications/emulators/applications (cf browsers/windows media player/explorer) and integrated it into the operating system to give a better (depending on your perspective) interface that is the operating system

Amazing, common sense in a ruling...

[markmoss]

Page 24 of the March 25 ruling: While the court agrees that the Windows mark has acquired secondary meaning, no degree of secondary meaning will save a generic mark... no matter how much money or effort it pours into promoting the sale of the merchandise.
...otherwise a manufacturer could remove a common descriptive word from the public domain...

So "windows", "word", and "office" can't be trademarks. ("Microsoft Windows" is a solid trademark because "Microsoft" is not at all generic.) My only question, if "Windows" by itself can't be a trademark, why didn't this end the case right there?

Could there be allegations that, like "Bolex" watches, Lindows could be sold as a counterfeit MS Windows? I don't know if that would matter even if it was true, once "Windows" loses trademark status, but in any case it's not true and it's not a reasonable sales strategy for Lindows. A major part of their sales pitch is that it ISN'T MS Windows, but is (or will be, someday) better because Linux is underneath. Anyhow, they aren't selling this on street corners, and anyone who didn't understand what they were buying would soon bring it back - so accentuating the difference is in Lindows vendors' best interest.

Re:That's more like it...

[HanzoSan]

Yes thats why everyones buying Windows 1.0

I mean why not buy the original product? Why buy the new upgrade?

You cant show the advantages to joe sixpack if joe sixpack doesnt even know what linux is, by marketing linux as an upgrade to windows, joe sixpack instantly knows what linux is, its no diffrent than what windowsXP, and those service packs are.

Re:Its time for Redhat Windows, Mandrake Windows e

[Decimal]

I know I'd feel dirty if Linux had to start tricking people into using it.

Me: "Here you go. That'll be $1,500."

Customer: "Wow. That's a lot of money, but at least I now have the fastest computer on the block! Thanks for putting it together for me. Now you did put Microsoft Windows XP on it like I asked, right?

Me: "Uh, yeah. Just click on that little penguin in the lower left-hand corner to start using it. Gotta run."

Re:Lindows is a dumb name

[Capt_Troy]

Hey Hanzo-

Thanks for the unwarrented insult. Feeling bitter today?

If I wanted to use both Windows and Linux software at the same time, I'd be shit out of luck! We all know that Lindows will never achieve this, applications will never run as well on Linidws as they will on Windows. And if I am wrong and things will run equally as well on Windows and Lindows, then it will be because of all the hard work that the Wine developers put in, not because of the mp3.com yahoo!

Now if I wanted to run Linux software on Windows, I could try to compile it meself, port the code myself, check to see if someone else already did it, or just run Linux.

Lindows.com has been in the Wall Street Journal 2x

[i_am_nitrogen]

...not enough characters in the "Subject:" line to write "twice" But yeah, they've been in the WSJ twice, and this is post-dot-com era mind you. ZD-Net? Bah... They've got the friggin WALL STREET JOURNAL.

http://www.net2.com/lindows/source

[i_am_nitrogen]

Dude, it's all there for crying out loud! http://www.net2.com/lindows/source

Re:Respect MS'es work

[i_am_nitrogen]

Have you heard of Click-N-Run? It's full of -- guess what -- Linux apps, with the exception of AOL. They're adding a publisher interface soon so that all of us developers out there can start putting our own open or closed source software on their site, in a user-friendly, one-click-install database of applications.

Although I'm sure that Robertson was very excited to hear that Microsoft was suing him, just because of all the publicity he would get, it does seem like he wants to revolutionize the software industry with a place for software similar to what mp3.com is for music.

Re:Grousing

[Muad'Dave]

Me too! That's really irritating.

2002-05-16 17:44:37 Lindows.com wins court battle against Microsoft (articles,microsoft) (rejected)