LindowsOS Softens Microsoft-Compatibility Claim

jukal writes: "As seen originally at newsforge: On Friday we reported the appearance of Microtel PCs with LindowsOS pre-installed at Walmart.com. Then, Walmart.com and Lindows were claiming that LindowsOS 'delivers the stability of UNIX with the ease of Windows and the ability to run most Microsoft programs.' Today, that last phrase has gone missing and there is no more talk of running any programs designed for Windows, let alone Microsoft products"

Comments

I might like cheese...

[Astrorunner]

but I'm no rat.

no, it hasn't

[Alan Partridge]

I justlooked at the Wal Mart page and the phrase in question was still there. Therefore this story is bollocks.

Re:no, it hasn't

[scrm]

Er yes it has. To quote from the page in question,


The low cost alternative to computers preloaded with Microsoft Windows. These PCs ship with an exciting new Linux based Operating System (OS) named Lindows. This exciting new OS delivers the stability of Linux with the ease of Windows and they include a trial membership to a library of over 1,000 software programs so they can be outfitted for any purpose whether business, home, or entertainment.

I don't see anything in there about running most MS software.

Re:no, it hasn't

[kir]

I really hate to argue, but where? I can't find it. ". . .and the ability to run most Microsoft programs." is the part that is missing. Show me where on Walmart's page that exists.

If you can't find it, then the story is not bollocks as you so quickly stated.

Re:no, it hasn't

[karmawarrior]

It isn't here. The text is as Newsforge ("read the page source, Luke! Read the source!" - the link that Slashdot's mangled is http://newsforge.com/newsforge/02/06/18/1344258.sh tml?tid=23 ) claims it to be.

Re:no, it hasn't

[Anonymous Coward]

How do you know he said it quickly?

Re:no, it hasn't

[eXtro]

Perhaps excitedly was a better work. He probably said bollocks slowly as he imagined a pair of them, brimming with man-juice, slapping against his treble-chins. The editors would like to take this opportunity to apologize for the incorrect wording.

HTML

[Jucius Maximus]

Having HTML spill accidentally into comments is one thing, but into the story itself? I believe this is a new never-before-seen low on slashdot.

newsforge

[Anonymous Coward]

.yesterday

Did we....

[nordaim]

actually, honestly expect that phrase to last?

I am surprised that the MS lawyers weren't over then in minutes.

Re:Did we....

[Weird_Hock]

It had to take at least a couple of hours. They had to drag them off of the golf course! :-)

Re:Did we....

[Anonymous Coward]

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

Thats because Linux (And lindows by association) are for BITCHES.

Fuck Linux

If you want to buy a PC to run any decent games, or any good office platform, sorry man, you're stuck with Windows...

I would say OSX, but Apple's support for games has always been terrible.

Re:Did we....

[Anonymous Coward]

The author of that page is truly clueless. And a closet homosexual to boot.

And the people buying PCs from Wal-Mart....

[TheDick]

Need to run Linux? Their boxen would get r00ted faster than people who didn't patch their apache yet.

Then the hackers can do real damage, as the poor chumps with a cable modem spew malformed packets at unsuspecting routers.

Wait, with XP and the ability to get raw socket access, we're in trouble anyway.

Re:And the people buying PCs from Wal-Mart....

[ScannerBoy]

"And the people buying PCs from Wal-Mart....Need to run Linux? Their boxen would get r00ted faster than people who didn't patch their apache yet."

Uh huh, and just last week you were complaining that these same people are zelots and run windows because its spoon fed to them. Why don't we just kill them and forget the whole thing? Oh wait, that would be mean.

Re:And the people buying PCs from Wal-Mart....

[thesolo]

Wait, with XP and the ability to get raw socket access, we're in trouble anyway.

OT, but here we go. You know, with the increasing ease of creating a worm or a virus that can take over a machine, kill routers, flood mailservers, etc., how long will it be before computers start getting treated like cars? i.e. They have their purposes, but you need to have a license to use one legally.

Frankly, I'm just waiting until this happens, or rather until someone at least proposes the idea in a bill. Of course, if the CBDTPA passes, we essentially wouldn't have computers anymore anyway.

Re:And the people buying PCs from Wal-Mart....

[Tink2000]

I'm no elitist (see, I didn't even spell it right), but I totally agree. I work in a computer retail store that is on campus at a rather large southeastern university that is trying very desperately to move away from it's former Agriculture days and into the Tech society (they even changed thier name to reflect this). Nonetheless, day after day I deal with this: Them: "Uhm, I like, uhm, need to by some like, um, ink for my like, um, printer?" Me: "Allrighty, what sort of printer to you have?" Them: *pause, widen eyes* "Uhm. Uh, uhm. Uh. It's like, uhm, Beige?" And of course who can forget the myriad of people who walk in and say: "Uhm, uh. I'd like to uhm, by a copy of Microsoft Windows Office Word XP Mellenium Edition Home Pro 2000?" One day, in absolute frustration, I asked this customer, "Would you ever consider walking into a car lot and asking for a 'Toyota Lexus Marquis Miyata Ranger Jimmy'?" Thank Zaphod he had a sense of humor.

Re:And the people buying PCs from Wal-Mart....

[Anonymous Coward]

I'll summarize this post for everyone:

I'm no elitist but I am so much better than people who don't know much about computers.

Also, do you really find it odd that people know less about what software they want than what car they want when the prices are two orders of magnitude different??

Re:And the people buying PCs from Wal-Mart....

[HaiLHaiL]

CBDTPA? what is it? how about a link?

Re:And the people buying PCs from Wal-Mart....

[thesolo]

CBDTPA? what is it? how about a link?

CBDTPA stands for Consumer Broadband and Digital Television Protection Act, and is the formal version of the original SSSCA bill. The seemingly innocent name hides the horrible truth of the bill; it would require copy control devices in every digital device; from your computer to your camcorder to door locks on hotel rooms. The bill is authored by Senator Fritz Hollings from South Carolina, who receives a very large contribution each year from the major media companies like Disney, Viacom, and News Corp (Fox).

You can read more about this atrocious bill and ways to fight it at the EFF Action Alert site.

If this bill disgusts you, call your members of Congress today!

Re:And the people buying PCs from Wal-Mart....

[Anonymous Coward]

Dick is a fag, he says so on his site.

P.S. Hit her in the shitter.

Re:And the people buying PCs from Wal-Mart....

[epukinsk]

how long will it be before computers start getting treated like cars?

As soon as using your computer recklessly can kill someone.

-Erik

Re:And the people buying PCs from Wal-Mart....

[thesolo]

As soon as using your computer recklessly can kill someone.

In this day and age, taking down a large corporation's mail server could probably put you in a hotter pot of water then a hit-and-run could; you could certainly face more fines from the former than the latter.

Re:And the people buying PCs from Wal-Mart....

[Tink2000]

Well, AC, I'll not respond to your meaty bit of flamebait there. I'm talking about educating yourself to find out what you need before you go off and render any help I might be able to have useless because you don't know what you want. Perfect example. Them: "Uh, I want a new video card." Me: "Allrighty then, do you need AGP or PCI?" Them: "Uh... I have a laptop..." _You_ work in computer retail for a bit. See if you don't develop a case of cynical attitude. I never said these people don't walk away with me standing there laughing in the isle; more often than not I can piece together the little pieces they _do_ know and have them walk out happy, and usually a little more enlightened. Lastly, being geek through and through to the core, I don't have a car (public transportation is excellent where I live), and thus I tend to spend quite a bit more on my computer. No, not $20k worth, but a bit more than I probably should. Do I go rushing blindly off to buy whatever buzzword of the day? No, I study and read and question whether or not it will be useful to me. Would I put as much thought into the car I will eventually buy? Absolutely. There are buyers and there are consumers. Don't be a consumer.

Re:And the people buying PCs from Wal-Mart....

[Anonymous Coward]

I'll summarize this post for everyone: I'm an asshole who has a beige printer and has lost $30 bucks on ink when the store refused to accept a return because I was too fucking stupid to 1. take the old ink cartridge with me or 2. write it down before I left. Asshole. Move on.

Re:And the people buying PCs from Wal-Mart....

[OptimizedPrime]

What's scary here is that he pretty much has to be referring to Virginia Tech, formerly VPI, which has one of the better if not the best CS programs in the south.... Back in Charlottesville, I find most of the students have the computing capacity of the average officer worker plus some when they get there, and have mastered a little more (mathcad et al) before leaving.

Re:And the people buying PCs from Wal-Mart....

[epukinsk]

In this day and age, taking down a large corporation's mail server could probably put you in a hotter pot of water then a hit-and-run could

This is ridiculous. First, anyone who can drive a car can assault and kill another person with that car very easily. Taking down the mail server of a corporation big enough that the damages you would do would outstrip murder or manslaughter is something that requires significant knowledge.

Secondly, in no way shape or form do monetary damages to a corporation compare to maiming or killing an innocent person. It doesn't matter how much money is involved, any resonable person can see that murder is a far serious offence than what amounts to corporate vandalism.

-Erik

Re:And the people buying PCs from Wal-Mart....

[Fig, formerly A.C.]

I think his point was that the punishment does not fir the crime. Yes, it is worse to mow someone down with a car, but it seems like you get in more trouble for hacking a computer. IIRC, there was a story not long ago about getting more jail time for killing a dog than a person by way of sentencing guidelines...

Re:And the people buying PCs from Wal-Mart....

[Fig, formerly A.C.]

fir = fit , sorry
I hate ergonomic keyboards.

Re:And the people buying PCs from Wal-Mart....

[Iffy Bonzoolie]

That's funny... as a programmer, I have a pretty cynical attitude of people who work in computer retail, because you would really hope they know something about what they are selling, but usually they have no idea what they are talking about.

On the other hand, I don't expect everyone who owns or wants to own a computer to have to study up on the difference between AGP and PCI... I'm happy if they know the difference between "memory" and "hard disk". I mean, really, I own a car, but if I had to replace something in it, I would be just as clueless as those people ordering a video card for their laptop. Is that terrible?

I NEED a car for everyday life, because I live in suburban California, and this state was pretty much designed to be used with a car. But that's where the relationship with my car ends. On the other hand, I know a good deal about computers and use them constantly. I know the difference between volatile and persistant storage, AGP and PCI, L1 and L2 cache. Not because that I need to know these things for my job, but because that's what my interest is in. It's my job because it's my interest. I have only so much time to spend learning about things, and space in my brain to store it all, and I don't want to waste that learning about cars, which do not interest me at all. I imagine most people have the same attitude towards computers. Why shouldn't they? It's called "specialization" and has been around since the Industrial Age.

I do not expect a student who wants to play Dungeon Siege and write a paper with his computer to know or care about these things. But he may need a better video card for DS to be playable. I think it's up to you, the retail personnel, to help them figure out what they need. If you help them with that, then you are a good employee, better than most of the people out there at Fry's or Best Buy who have a one-track mind ("Extended Service Warranty... Extended Service Warranty...").

-If

More On Topic-er Postscript:
I thought "Lindows" was a pretty funny name when I first heard about it - but the more I hear about this Wal-Mart/Lindows thing, the more I feel like it's a sleezy marketing gimmick. Even if the damn thing runs 95% of all windows binaries, I think it's not right to call it "Lindows," as most consumers (who pay the bills for everyone, by-the-way) would probably not catch the difference between Lindows and Windows, even if you disclaim it to high heaven. I would be concerned with Linux getting a bad reputation once people find that they got something other than they were expecting.

Re:And the people buying PCs from Wal-Mart....

[Tink2000]

I think people are missing my point. You are 100% correct ... but I don't expect someone to come in and know the difference between PCI, AGP, USB, IEEE1394, ad naseum. What I do expect is for them to not come blindly groping in and expect me to telepathically extract vital data (sometimes the question "do you have a Windows machine or a Macintosh" is too much) from them. Back to the car: when you take your car in, you can tell the mechanic at least the following: the make, model, year, last time you had an oil change. All I want from my customers is the computational equivalent to this (make, cpu speed, number of devices on the ide chain. It's a pain in the ass to sell an internal FOO to someone only to find out later they have no more FOO slots.). As far as I'm concerned, they don't need to live and breathe this info; they can simply bring me the manual and I can figure things out from there. *shrug* Either I expect too much from people who are in a college town (and most of them are enrolled in this college), or I pay too much attention to details when I shop. (yeah yeah mods, blow my karma of 4 away with a -1 offtopic *sigh*)

Re:And the people buying PCs from Wal-Mart....

[Steve Franklin]

Suspecting that many of the Wal-Martites who buy computers do so in order to play video games, I wonder what's going to happen when they bring one home from the games department of Wal-Mart and find out it won't run on their Wal-Mart computer. "Where DID I put Ralph Nader's phone number?" One would expect Lindows to run Windows games at some point, I don't know how far down the road, but Mandrake certainly won't. Or has WINE improved to that point? Does this all seem all too complicated for a mortal mind to comprehend?

How Long Before

[JohnHegarty]

"most Microsoft programs"

How long before "most Microsoft programs" have little bits of code added to shot them working on anything but offical microsoft windows.. that really would be the end of lindows

Re:How Long Before

[TheDick]

This is illegal as you can imagine.

Though.... "DOS isn't done until Lotus won't run" does ring a bell.

Re:How Long Before

[Anonymous Coward]

This is illegal... yes... and that has always stopped microsoft before

Re:How Long Before

[Anonymous Coward]

That already happened with windows and DRDos. Microsoft was found guilty of checking if the PC was running DRDos and then refusing to load windows.

Re:How Long Before

[Anonymous Coward]

Microsoft may make their programs incompatable... but other developers will not. I remebmer the old days when there were 300 versions of Dos, and all programs ran on MS-DOS compatable OSes... in other words, if you tried to emulate MS-DOS, and you did a pretty good job, the program will run on it...

Microsoft products are not the entire world... and Lindows does have a shot... if other developers will work with them...

Re:How Long Before

[Anonymous Coward]

Look, I'm on Slashdot, and I'm a paranoid idiot .. and .. I fit in perfectly!

Re:How Long Before

[Anonymous Coward]

Q: How long before "most Microsoft programs" have little bits of code added to shot them working on anything but offical microsoft windows.?

A: -10 years, if you go back to the DR-DOS/MS-DOS wars (which I include because about 10 years ago most people got into DOS via Windows3.11.

Re:How Long Before

[RailGunner]

They've done it before - remember Windows used to intentionally not run on top of DR-DOS...

Re:How Long Before

[TheCrunch]

"How long before "most Microsoft programs" have little bits of code added to shot them working on anything but offical microsoft windows.."

"most Microsoft programs" have enough trouble running on official Microsoft Windows as it is.

Re:How Long Before

[ajs]

That would just result in an arms war, which realistically, Wine is already fighting. They add calls to undocumented API entry point X; code breaks on Wine; Wine adds undocumented API entry point X; code works; call Y; code breaks; Wine+Y; code works; etc....

In the end, Wine is sort of doomed to always be a revision or so behind MS products (perhaps ultimately a service pack or two), but it's still doable.

About the only thing MS *could* do is add code that checks for some Windows license data and call it "anti-piracy" code. Then they could press charges under the DMCA when Wine "circumvents" that measure by adding the data or a stub function that reports its existance.

Re:How Long Before

[Anonymous Coward]

I hope they don't. Developers who make their products run on both will have more expensive development and support making the products more expensive

Re:How Long Before

[Anonymous Coward]

In the end, Wine is sort of doomed to always be a revision or so behind MS products (perhaps ultimately a service pack or two), but it's still doable.

Although I won't argue that Microsoft has used this strategy (they have), I think it is not a reasonable long-term plan. It works as long as things are obsolete anyway within 5 years. But here we are, 7 years post Win95, and it is still very relevant.

Microsoft cannot make things "a moving target" simply because it breaks old versions of their own OS. WINE doesn't need to keep up with the latest XP service pack. They only need to keep up with the latest Windows 95 service pack. The target simply cannot move very fast when it has to be compatible with their own 4-5 common flavors of Windows as well as WINE.

Re:How Long Before

[Anonymous Coward]

Score: 4, Insightful because hundreds of people have expressed similar sentiments on similar issues in similar slashdot stories before. Groupthink is worth +4, who cares about being informative, original, or thought-provoking.

*AC Projectile vomits on you!*

Re:How Long Before

[NanoGator]

Wouldn't matter if they did. What are they gonna do, change the bits every Service Pack? All that'll do is give Lindows incentive to figure out what they did and correct it. Given the release rate of SP's, that wouldn't be near as challenging as Trillian's attempts to stay on AOL's network.

Re:How Long Before

[HiThere]

Not if they just write so that they'll run under Wine. I suspect that anything that would run under Wine would run under all versions of Windows, possibly except for NT (or possibly Win95).

Re:How Long Before

[HiThere]

Microsoft cannot make things "a moving target" simply because it breaks old versions of their own OS. WINE doesn't need to keep up with the latest XP service pack. They only need to keep up with the latest Windows 95 service pack.

Sorry to disagree with you here. The new XP updater is designed to avoid this very problem. And MS has already officially written off Win95, with Win98 already scheduled to soon follow. The question is only how long until the declare that "Win2000 is obsolete and will no longer be supported". Once that happens, they can roll out their code-breaking updates weekly if they want to.

OTOH, there's all those people out there who are perfectly satisfied with their Win95 systems. Give it a couple of months to work the bugs out and they would also be perfectly satisfied with a Lindows system, and probably even a Mandrake system. (The probably is because of my wife and her mother. My wife gets confused if you move an icon on the screen, and her mother has seriously worried about who was qualified to change a battery. [This was actually a ploy to get her son to visit her from out of state, but she wouldn't admit that even to herself.])

But if WalMart can sell the new systems even a bit cheaper than the MS systems, they'd probably get a raft of new users, who wouldn't have a bunch of old programs that needed to be matched. And as Lindows comes with OpenOffice, they can read notes that their friends send to them.

I bet that most people will be 90% satisfied, and that half of the dissatisfaction wouldn't be solved no matter WHAT system they choose.

Plus, if the system can run Lindows, then it can run Mandrake, so there's a natural upgrade path. (But Mandrake had better work harder at keeping the bugs out of its distributions. These folks will be REALLY sensitive.)

Re:How Long Before

[Anonymous Coward]

Actually, this has been done before. When PC-DOS and other DOSs were competing with MS-DOS, Microsoft works had a couple of bytes in the code, xored out that basically generated errors randomly if it was not an MS-DOS operating system

If someone called and complained, they just said "That is not supported on " and recommended the user switch. It never would have been found out except that the coder that did the code was so proud of it, he encoded his initials at the end.

If it worked then, It'll work again.

Re:How Long Before

[paulbiz]

They did it before with OS/2 as well, MS found out OS/2 couldn't load anything past 512M of memory (at the time - it's no longer an issue), so they made the change in win32s 1.30 release try to load past 512M, thus breaking any programs using win32s under OS/2.

Re:How Long Before

[EverDense]

Sorry to disagree with you here. The new XP updater is designed to avoid this very problem.
And MS has already officially written off Win95, with Win98 already scheduled to soon follow.

That they have "written off Win95" is neither here nor there. Most Win32 programs will run
on ALL the Win32 operating systems.

What the original post was (I believe) saying, is that Microsoft cannot break this compatibility.

Re:How Long Before

[alonsoac]

How long before "most Microsoft programs" have little bits of code added to shot them working on anything but offical microsoft windows.. that really would be the end of lindows

On the other hand the day could come when for-windows software publishers are more careful and test their programs in Lindows before realeasing, or provide patches or whatever to make their programs run on Wine. That would be a good bussiness move for any software publisher as it increases it's target market.
If Microsoft programs don't work on Linux it's their own problem and loss.

how much you wanna bet....

[jeffy124]

...that MS threatened infringement or something like that over using the phrase "Microsoft" or "Windows" in the advertising of LindowsOS?

Re:how much you wanna bet....

[JamesOfTheDesert]

Maybe Lindows realized it couldn't deliver on the promise to run "most Microsoft products".

And if that is true, will the name change as well, or will the Lindows folks work harder on FUD than on having the OS run Microsoft apps?

Quite similar actually

[OpCode42]

Promises one thing... delivers another. Its well on the way to MS territory already! ;)

Re:Quite similar actually

[Indras]

Promises one thing... delivers another. Its well on the way to MS territory already! ;)

Yeah, all it has to do is swap "delivers" with "inflicts", and it's there!

Well...

[Anonymous Coward]

It was more Walmart's claim than Lindows' claim, wasn't it?

love the missing link

[Anonymous Coward]

great job on the link there buddy

editors

[nihilist_1137]

I guess they dont even read the submissions anymore. That messed up html sticks out.

A little too early

[Iscariot_]

Is it just me, or is giving linux to the consumer this early a bad thing? I'm sure Lindows is great and all, but your average Joe buying a PC from wallmart for $700 is NOT going to want to run linux applications, much less deal with managing the OS. I still think linux (or in this case Lindows) has a long way to go.

Am I wrong? Do people that buy PCs from walmart frequent this site?

Re:A little too early

[mark_lybarger]

iirc, the lowend box there was 299$ w/o monitor. that's not to shabby for a lowend box w/ preinstalled linux. even if it's not your favorite distro. i assume there's some support for those things. it could make better than ordering all the pieces from pricewatch and then assembling/testing the unit yourself, though not quite as fun.

Re:A little too early

[IamTheRealMike]

To be honest, I think you're right. It is too early yet for mass adoption of Linux, there are still a few too many rough edges. KDE and GNOME are making great progress, but the quality of those suites is variable, and again - rough edges.

Ditto with software installation. It's too hard. No, your average user will not build software from the source. These things are being dealt with, but they're not fully dealt with yet. I'd give Linux a few more years to mature before pushing it hard into the desktop marketplace.

There's also the problem that there aren't any truly professional (imho) end user distributions that don't attempt to clone Windows, and if there's one thing I think will fail, it's attempting to out Windows Windows. It's not going to happen, wine or no wine. Mandrake comes the closet, but it's busy fighting financial battles, and it's still less than perfect: their urpmi tool doesn't always work. I had a friend give up on Linux in frustration after he couldn't do something as upgrade Mozilla with it.

But ... it is coming. A few years from now, Linux will be ready to compete on its own terms, rather than just by cloning Windows, and MS are going to be even further up the creek than they already are. That is when I'd start to seriously start pushing Linux on the desktop. Not before.

Re:A little too early

[DrSkwid]

they bought win3.11, nuff said

Re:A little too early

[morgajel]

users come in waves. think of us as explorers, and these people as a wave of settlers. they don't know what they hell they're doing, but they're pretty sure there's a better life out there, and they're willing to try it.

Re:A little too early

[scott1853]

You're right. Of course it's still too easrly for most people to handle running a Windows PC. I get people calling me that have had a computer for a couple years and don't know what right-click is. One lady still refers to her desktop as her screen saver.

Oh, and so the people that buy their computers from Wal-mart find this post: "NASCAR", "BEEF JERKY RECIPES", "INCEST".

Re:A little too early

[s10god]

Don't forget to repair the 'cup holders'

Re:A little too early

[rseuhs]

You are wrong.

PCs preloaded with Lindows are not replacing Windows-preloaded PCs (or well, not primarily), they replace OS-free PCs that Walmart already sells for quite some time.

Lindows-PCs are perfect for those tasks IMO:

• People who want to put their own OS on it (either an existing or pirated copy of Windows or Linux or something else)
• PCs used only for email, web and simple office stuff. Yes, I do think that it's ready for grandma, too. It's preloaded after all and I assume they test their hardware against it, too.
• PC terminals. For example at our universtity, there are tens of PCs used for administrative purposes (students can subscribe to courses, exams etc.) and all those PCs ever do in their whole livetime is run one browser-window that shows the institute's website. The only reason why those PCs currently run IE/Windows is because it was preinstalled.
• Yes also *gasp* people who want to check out Linux and don't want to mess much with installation. The cheapest LindowsPC costs as much as a full retail copy of Windows XP pro. (300$) Hell, why not?

Lindows costs not much if anything, I don't see a complelling reason NOT TO put it on PCs that would otherwise be sold without an OS.

Re:A little too early

[MrResistor]

One thing you seem to be ignoring is the fact that it's preinstalled. That removes most of the barrier of entry for the Linux newbie. I expect that the Lindows folks have chosen apps that are easy to use, and they do exist, believe it or not. As for managing the OS, the sad truth is the vast majority of people buying prebuilt PCs from Walmart aren't going to do any OS management, regardless of the OS installed, and I don't mean that in an "only dumb hicks shop at WalMart" kind of way. Most people in general don't manage their OS, they use and abuse it until it gets so cluttered up that it can no longer support its own bloat. That said, though, as far as updates and such, there are Linux distros whos update tools far surpass anything MS has offered so far. SuSEs YOU comes to mind here, and I hope Lindows has taken a hint from them.

I see it as a 50/50 thing. About 50% will only care about surfing the web and getting their email, and so will probably never care that they aren't running Windows. The other 50% will be perfectly happy until they discover that their new Hallmark Greeting Card Maker won't work. On the hardware end, I think printers will be the sticking point, as Linux support for cheap printers is still pretty sketchy. This could be averted, though, if these PCs come with printers. Does anyone know?

Re:A little too early

[Sloppy]

Is it just me, or is giving linux to the consumer this early a bad thing?

It's just you. ;-) Actually, giving Linux to consumers may be either good or bad, depending on what the consumer expects to do with it.

As an example, Tivo gave Linux to consumers years ago, and it was just fine. Not too early for Linux.

If grandma wants a computer to surf the net, email her grandkids, and write the occasional letter, it's not too early for Linux.

If someone needs a server up and working easily and quickly, it's not too early for Linux.

If someone needs to take their work home from the office, and their work is stored in a closed Microsoft-only format, then it's probably be too early for Linux, depending on how you feel about OpenOffice or Lindows or CrossOver's compatability and performance.

If someone needs to play the latest Windows games that require DirectX 8.1 and the game uses an obscure method to detect the version of DirectX installed, along with copy protection, IPX networking, and a few other things that the latest version of WineX doesn't have, then it's too early for Linux.

It's too hard to generalize about whether it's too early for Linux. Linux advocates shouldn't take that too hard, though: the situation with MS Windows is just as iffy. :-)

And don't forget that just because it isn't too early for Linux for some particular use, doesn't mean that Linux is the right choice. (Perhaps OpenBSD belongs on that server instead of Linux. Consider a Mac if you write a lot of letters. Run MS Windows (even if Wine runs your apps) if you're going to be doing tech support for Windows users.)

Re:A little too early

[Anonymous Coward]

this early? It's more than 10 years into the project.
If anything, it's LATE in the game, not early.

Re:A little too early

[NanoGator]

"The other 50% will be perfectly happy until they discover that their new Hallmark Greeting Card Maker won't work...."

Just imagine when they pick up their new PC, then walk over to the software aisle and pick up a few things....

Re:A little too early

[Ryan Amos]

I've bought Walmart PCs before. Not because I was particularly impressed with them or anything, but when I'm building a cheap server box (i.e. nothing mission critical or anything) I can buy one from Walmart for about the same price as I can build it with the same hardware, except I don't have to worry about shipping 8 different pieces of hardware from 8 different online vendors. The quality is not phenomenal, but if you just need a web/ftp server, they're very decent machines for a fair price.

Re:A little too early

[MrResistor]

Just imagine when they pick up their new PC, then walk over to the software aisle and pick up a few things....

I must not go PC shopping with people often enough, because I've never seen anyone do that without a salesperson leading them to it. If a WalMart salesperson is doing that, well, WalMart deserves the fallout that comes from that.

The real question is; how does Apple deal with this situation? They seem to have dealt with this problem just fine for many years now. Perhaps it isn't as much of a problem as everyone is making it out to be?

Re:A little too early

[Ryan Amos]

Tivo is a bit different. Embedded machines are very different than PCs. All Linux is really doing in embedded applications is replacing the old, proprietary operating systems. If Tivo had existed 10 years ago, they would have written their own OS to do just what they needed to.

IMO, it's too early to use Linux as a Windows replacement. Servers are fine (its a sysadmin's job to learn new software) and embedded systems are fine (the user never really gets beyond the UI, so the OS is irrelevant) but on the desktop Linux really isn't ready yet.

Device support and application support are the two areas where Linux REALLY lacks. Sure, Linux supports devices, but it's often buggy, requires lots of configuration, and generally isn't available for the newest hardware (drivers are often developed after the product is no longer the "great new thing".) A lot of more obscure hardware is only partially supported, if at all.

Software support is basically an issue of Linux running Windows programs. Free software is great and all, but users don't give a flying fuck about the GNU/FSF ideals. They want a computer that will run the software they already own, because most people are against lerning new software. Until Linux can run Windows software as well as (or better than) Windows, it will never be a major player on the desktop.

Re:A little too early

[GoldMace]

I actually bought a PC from Walmart specifically to run Linux on. I would've loved it if they would have sold ones with it preinstalled. I guess I have to explain:

A couple years ago, when I was still in college, my professor suggested that we install Linux on our computers at home. Since I was using an old computer with a tiny hard drive, and still needed Windows for some other classes, a new computer was about the only option. Since it was the beginning of the school year, everywhere but Walmart was sold out. In that town, everywhere was only a couple of other stores. It wasn't the best computer to run Linux on(WinModem, sound card with no Linux driver), but was good enough for my needs. It was a lot cheaper than the ones they didn't have in stock in the other stores also.

Re:A little too early

[NanoGator]

"They seem to have dealt with this problem just fine for many years now."

Hmmm, well there are two places here in Portland (that I know of....) that I can buy a reasonable amount of Mac stuff: CompUSA (with a dedicated Mac secton...), and the Apple Store.

This is a hint to me (again, I'm not claiming to know everything here...) that Apple had to make special arrangements to sell their stuff anywhere but in the Apple store.

Re:A little too early

[Sloppy]

Device support and application support are the two areas where Linux REALLY lacks.

Device support isn't a big issue if you're getting a whole system all at once.

In regards to Application support, you're right for the case of "Windows replacement." None of those arguments hold for old Grandma who still writes letters with pen and paper, children who don't have a computer yet, etc.

Re:A little too early

[Anonymous Coward]

> As an example, Tivo gave Linux to consumers years ago, and it was just fine. Not too early for Linux.

No, Tivo gave Tivo to consumers; Linux wasn't part of the consumer's awareness at all, it could've been powered by any embedded OS and the great majority of customers wouldn't know or care. They bought a TV timeshifter, not a PC with a particular OS.

Re:A little too early

[Doomdark]

NOT going to want to run linux applications,

No, and they don't want to run Windows apps either. They want to "use Internet", "send email", possibly use "messenger", "use word" (as in generic word processor, not MS Word), "use excel" (ditto).

In short, they don't care what OS they have. And that's just fine, as long as your Friendly Linux Apps work well enough. Install StarOffice and Mozilla and you are halfway there already.

Re:A little too early

[Eythian]

Is it just me, or is giving linux to the consumer this early a bad thing?

I don't think so. I recently spent a week back home with my parents and I installed Mandrake on their computer (leaving windows there Just In Case), set it up (which was easier than windows - I didn't need all the driver CDs), they are currently using all the KDE default settings, quite happily. Showed them LyX for nice looking documents, kword for fancy looking documents, konquerer and mozilla etc, and they found the games themselves. As I am mostly a commandline user, it surprised me how far and mature KDE is, and I think that it is ready for average users. Soon I will be doing the same to my g/fs computer, as she is annoyed by winME crashing often.

The only problem was with one part of an online banking website not working with konqueror, however that was fixed by telling them to use Mozilla for that (the computer doesn't have a lot of RAM, so Moz isn't good for all the time use)

Based on my experience, I say: install Linux where windows software isn't completly necessary, and people should be quite happy. (It also serves to get the name out there, which is a good thing.)

Re:A little too early

[Anonymous Coward]

The problem is, this isn't being sold as Linux. It's being sold as "cheap Windows", but when it doesn't work very well as "cheap Windows", many of the Walmart shoppers will associate the blame with Linux. Not realizing or caring that Linux, per se, never promised or aimed for the goal of running 100% of Wintel binaries.

say it with me

[Anonymous Coward]

g to the oatse
c to the izzex
fo shizzle my nizzle see me use an alternate OS

Comment removed

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion

is this a suprise?

[T.Monk]

i mean seriously, there's no way they could've gotten away with that kind of campaign.. MS would've tied them up in litigation just for using the word windows with a capital W until their money ran out and they went bankrupt. On the good side, Wal-mart isn't really afraid of Microsoft, so Wal-mart is in the unique position of being able to weather MS's wrath and make an offering of something like Lindows... now if we could just get them to package something decent like a BSD variant and KDE3, and build the computer out of lots of translucent brightly colored plastic, we might have some appeal. Go after that Mac market!

Re:is this a suprise?

[kontos]

M$ is already trying that, and losing.

Re:is this a suprise?

[Anonymous Coward]

Your words spew forth like a total moron. Given your use of seriously I think you must be homestar runner!

package something decent like a BSD variant ... Go after that Mac market!

What Mac market? Like it really takes redoing something they screwed up to go after them? What a stupid butt.

Seriously.

Re:is this a suprise?

[Anonymous Coward]

Microsoft tried that, but the court found that Microsoft can't trademark the word "windows".

In fact, it might have a huge impact against Microsoft's trademarks in general.

Re:is this a suprise?

[analog_line]

Sorry, we Mac users already have a highly functional, highly stable, and highly usable UNIX operating system that comes free when you buy the machine, that also happens to run most free software (beer or speech) you might want to use.

Thanks for drinking Coke. Play again.

Re:is this a suprise?

[scribblej]

A) UNIX is a brand name.
B) YOu think you don't PAY for the operating system on your mac?

You mac people really are delusional.

Re:is this a suprise?

[Anonymous Coward]

> Sorry, we Mac users already have a highly functional, highly stable, and highly usable UNIX operating system that comes free when you buy the machine, ...

That's like saying Windows comes free on a PC. You don't really think you're getting OS X for *free*, do you?..

Re:is this a suprise?

[Seth Finklestein]

Cost of PC without Windows: $900
Cost of PC with Windows: $1000
Cost of Windows: $100

Cost of iMac with Mac OS X: $1900
Cost of iMac without Mac OS X: $1900
Cost of Mac OS X: $0

Oh my GOD, I am so very smart. Give me some karma, you bitches! I own you!

Re:is this a suprise?

[epukinsk]

Macintosh hardware is priced so that it can cover the cost of R&D in software development as well as hardware development. They offer the software for free as an incentive to buy the hardware.

-Erik

Re:is this a suprise?

[analog_line]

1. It's a brand name that hopefully, through the efforts of many people using it, will go the way of asprin and cease to be a trademarked brand name here (asprin is a brand name everywhere except the US).

2. I certainly do pay for the operating system on my Mac. However, unless you can point out how much that is (not like Apple charges itself OEM licensing costs) or find me a way to buy a Mac new, without the operating system installed, and show the price difference, we'll talk.

Apple is a hardware company. Iron (well, plastic too). Darwin is free for the taking if I want it. The only thing I pay some small amount for is the interface, which is certainly worth it to me. They don't slap extra charges for each bit of everything that comes with it. Here's what you get. Here's the price. Don't like it? Next customer please. They're in the game the same way IBM is (and they're using FreeBSD the same way IBM is using Linux). To get their iron out the door. A different class of iron, but iron nonetheless.

Please get your head out of your rear. Apple isn't even trying to play the same game as Microsoft is with Windows, let alone compete. They don't want their OS to work on anything under the sun. The DO NOT WANT their operating system to run on your cheapo homebuilt machine, or your cheapo Dell, or your expensive homebuilt machine, or your expensive prebuilt machine, becuase they aren't getting money from the hardware, which is how they pay their bills, ya know?

Re:is this a suprise?

[Sloppy]

They would have been tied up in litigation, alright, but the threat would have been their own customers, not Microsoft. MS Windows compatability just isn't something anyone can reliably promise.

Re:is this a suprise?

[Anonymous Coward]

Free? How do you get it for free on slower hardware that costs twice as much.

And don't even tell me that you think that your 800 MHz G4 is faster than my Athlon XP RAID monster.

You Mac morons don't have a clue.

Re:is this a suprise?

[Sloppy]

Sorry, we Mac users already have a highly functional, highly stable, and highly usable UNIX operating system

The more, the merrier. What's there to be sorry about?

Re:is this a suprise?

[Anonymous Coward]

Oh yeah. And I forgot. You are locked into buying a new computer every year or two because the next Mac OS doesn't work on your one or two year old hardware. Don't think that it is an accident, either.

Re:is this a suprise?

[Anonymous Coward]

It's truly unbelievable, but Mac elitists talking down to *nix users are starting to get more annoying than *nix users talking down Windows users.
Congratulations on your OS and good luck with your virginity.

Re:is this a suprise?

[Anonymous Coward]

Mac OS X: Unix for people who can get laid.

Re:is this a suprise?

[tshak]

Amen. Although I'm a Windows user through and through (ditched Linux about a year after Win2K came out), I'd say the most compelling "Unix on the Desktop" for me right now is a MAC. As I'm looking at relatively lame PC laptops, the TiBook is looking very attractive!

Re:is this a suprise?

[fpsucculent]

As a matter of fact I've only had 3 computers in the past 10 years and still use all of them. And hey, at least I'm not buying a new computer and OS every few months because a shoddy OS let someone hack my computer.

Re:is this a suprise?

[Anonymous Coward]

Darwin is about as free to a Mac owner as a BMW is to me.

Re:is this a suprise?

[Anonymous Coward]

> Cost of iMac with Mac OS X: $1900
> Cost of iMac without Mac OS X: $1900
> Cost of Mac OS X: $0

How does any of that make OS X "free"? The price is bundled into that $1900. The fact that you can't get the hardware w/o the software doesn't mean the software doesn't cost you.

No, you're not so very smart. Just obnoxious.

Re:is this a suprise?

[alienw]

Yeah, but show me a $299 machine that can run it.

Re:is this a suprise?

[ATAMAH]

Can you, Mac users, install any other operating system on the machine you buy ?
Nope. You are bound to your "classic" and "X"
for ever.

Re:is this a suprise?

[Entropy_ajb]

Yes, but you also have to pay over twice as much for that computer :-), kinda negates the fact that it has "operating system that comes free when you buy the machine", doesn't it?

Re:is this a suprise?

[Anonymous Coward]

There are several native distributions of Linux available for the Mac. LinuxPPC, Yellow Dog Linux, SuSE, ...

There is also Virtual PC, through which you can run Windows 98, Windows 2000 Professional, Windows XP Home, or other Intel OSes (Intel Linux distributions, OS/2, etc.) if you are so inclined.

That's without getting into emulators for 8-bit personal computers.

Re:is this a suprise?

[Seth Finklestein]

No, you're not so very smart. Just obnoxious.

Actually, I am smart. So smart, in fact, that I taught myself how to make a web site. I've also been working in computers since the 1980s (that's right, I said *80s*!). I bet you thought that I took a lot of computer courses to get where I am, but I didn't, bitch! I didn't take any computer courses. No mis-education for me.

A feature, not a bug.

[Anonymous Coward]

Maybe it's to ease the migration to Linux :-)

Technical or Legal Backdown?

[Geek In Training]

Did Lindows really fail to live up to the compatibility hype or did Steve Ballmer come in and say, "All your Windows interoperability claims are belong to us; there is no chance to survive, make your changed specs!"

(Lame, I know. I'm sorry.)

But the question is; how sure can we be that the technical compatibility (which you and I know was not nearly as good as it should be, thanks to threat of MS suit and hidden APIs) causing this pullback, and not legal threats for using MS Trademarks on their marketing materials?

Re:Technical or Legal Backdown?

[pboulang]

We can be sure because Lindows and Michael Robertson love publicity, as a way to increase their company image and sales potential.

Hmmm, I wonder about the company image. In fact, I also wonder about the sales potential. Living in San Diego, I've had the joyous experience of seeing Michael Robertson drive around in his porsche with his "MP3 COM" license plate. That about as much I've seen of him in the community, literally or on-line. I see two issues with Lindows.

1) It doesn't seem to have any linux community support. Outside of the lindows.com site, I haven't seen one positive statement. That is, it looks to be more of a land grab by Mr. Robertson (ala mp3.com) than a worthwhile company to promote a viable alternative to Microsoft. What I'm saying is that what with the outlandish claims of "WINE just needs capital to be pretty much fully Windows compatible in under 2 years", Lindows screams "fly-by-night" to me.

2) The business model is: For maybe $100 less per workstation, we will give you an OS that will mostly do what you want it to do. Now, this might appeal to the home market, but most businesses that I've worked with would rather pay the extra money to have something that works. Arguments that Microsoft doesn't work is crap, it runs Excel which everyone and their brother has a plug-in for.. now if Reuters would work under Open Office. . . but then, when someone wants to write a program, they write for the biggest audience, not a posix compliant OS with a really slow Java front end. Solve the issue of compatibility and yes, you have gold. Solve it only 75% and what you have is worthless.

--paul

Re:Technical or Legal Backdown?

[13Echo]

Why do people confuse something that works with MS software compatibility? Linux works very damn well. I am sick of people saying that they "want something that works" when they haven't a clue of what they are talking about.

Mod me down, if you wish, but this argument is getting stupid. You don't need Windows for ANYTHING to work, unless you make yourself believe that you need to rely on it (for some rediculous reason).

Windows 2000 is a good OS, but I certainly don't NEED it, as the free and open alternatives work just fine.

Re:Technical or Legal Backdown?

[Anonymous Coward]

When the claim is "you can run Windows software well" then yes, they want something that works. Wine does not work in this regard. It can run some software, and less still well. That's not bad, the task is large. However to a business that's buying the claim that it does work, it better.

The argument isn't stupid, you're just too much of a retard to read someone else's post before wanking off about why people don't need Windows.

People need Windows if they want to work in the real world with multiple vendors of support and content. If you don't do anything at all, then no you don't need Windows. Even if for your niche, useless, whiney market doesn't need it, it has no bearing on what he said.

Learn how to read.

That URL

[X86Daddy]

Here's the functioning link.

Here's the actual URL:
http://newsforge.com/newsforge/02/06/18/1344 258.sh tml?tid=23

Kinda better wording actually.

[MarvinMouse]

I think the new wording is better, and perhaps a bit more accurate for two reasons.

1. It doesn't accidentally promote windows products or even microsoft products. It lets you know that Lindows is a completely new OS, but it "delivers the stability of Linux with the ease of Windows." As well, it now lets you know that instead of having to return to the old Windows products, which were known to be buggy. There are new products made specifically for Lindows that will fit your needs (Which may or may not be buggy, but there is the chance that they aren't). This is the first really good reason for the change, because now a new user will feel that instead of just getting another computer like the rest of the world, he's riding the wave of a "exciting new OS". :-)

2. As well, now it is more accurate. Originally it used a lot of terms making it appear as though Lindows was a UNIX operating system, when it is really a Linux one. This would deter customers since UNIX has a sorta connotation of difficulty to it for newbies (who have just kinda heard of it from users who just touched it and saw commands like egrep, col, ls, and wc ;-), but Linux doesn't have as difficult of an aura around it. Thus, it is more accurate, and also more likely to sell to the ordinary computer user.

To be honest, their new wording is considerably better then the old one. IMHO.

Re:Kinda better wording actually.

[stilwebm]

I also like the new wording because it keeps people from buying a Microtel box at WalMart and then saying Lindows/Linux is a piece of shit, it doesn't even work like they said. The people who are buying these machines are likely to take their frustration to work, to their social circles, etc. I'd much rather hear these people saying "Linux is really neat but you can't run most of the software at CompUSA" than "Linux doesn't do anything it is supposed to."

Re:Kinda better wording actually.

[Anonymous Coward]

It doesn't accidentally promote windows products or even microsoft products.

I actually think they need a disclaimer saying it wont run must of the software we sell. I think that is going to get them into big trouble. People will buy the computer and three or four games, only to find out that none of them can be played under Lindows.

Re:Kinda better wording actually.

[fruey]

Clearly, the wording had to go. They were setting themselves up for all sorts of trouble by trying to make the PC look like it was running some kind of "Free Windows"

What I'd love to see is some kind of mass market push for a Linux system that is actually better than Windows for the users. The issue is really compatibility, as many newbie Mac users know when they get files from their Windows chums which won't launch on their machines.

The moves are already there anyway. Having too high a %age of one OS is always going to be bad for cross platform compatible programs, since everyone is just *expected* to run Windows, as many of my clients gasp when I tell them I can't open their email because I run Linux on my desktop. People have cussed me for this, but until people like you and me take a stand then it's no good moaning that Linux doesn't support x, y or z. I can get good documents to clients, I can use open standards, and I will continue to do so. Linux doesn't need to be Windows binary compatible, and it has many advantages over Windows in terms of networking tools. I get all my software for free, learn way more, and have only about 5% time overhead for cross-platform tasks, whereas I save time with software like mutt, Opera, Apache and GIMP because I don't need the additional functionality of IE, Photoshop and Outlook. I'm not even going to gripe about Office suites. I do fine with Star Office and HTML as basic tools.

Re:Kinda better wording actually.

[keep_it_simple_stupi]

"UNIX has a sorta connotation of difficulty to it for newbies"

Heh... Yeah, Linux doesn't have that kind of connotation at all... Okay, whatever.

Re:Kinda better wording actually.

[GutBomb]

however the people buying this most likely don't know much and will think that it is supposed to run "computer programs" that they bvuy at compusa. when they find out it doesn't run windows programs (even though it did not claim to" they will get angry. i met a guy that was pissed because his mac couldn't open an "exe file" correctly.

Re:Kinda better wording actually.

[micromoog]

This would deter customers since UNIX has a sorta connotation of difficulty to it for newbies (who have just kinda heard of it from users who just touched it and saw commands like egrep, col, ls, and wc ;-)

Most people's only exposure to UNIX is that scene in Jurassic Park where the little girl says "This is a UNIX system. I know this", and proceeds to use the mouse to fly over a 3D virtual-reality file system.

Re:Kinda better wording actually.

[MarvinMouse]

Yes and there's the movies that show UNIX as this amazing three dimensional futuristic operating system. :-P That doesn't help either.

Re:Kinda better wording actually.

[Peter Harris]

And yet the Mac still exists, because most people *aren't that thick*, and like pretty things.

Let's not get hung up about the "stupid" tail of the normal distribution curve. They will always be with us, and neither mocking them nor pandering to them will get us anywhere.

Maybe a few people will like LindowsOS for what it is. Maybe some will learn what's heinous about it and switch to Debian or Mandrake once they are confident enough. But if 99% of the purchasers get fed up with LindowsOS and revert to Windows, so what?

Re:Kinda better wording actually.

[Anonymous Coward]

To be honest, their new wording is considerably better then the old one. IMHO.

You don't have to be humble about it, you didn't write it. IMO would have been fine.

Re:Kinda better wording actually.

[theRiallatar]

As Rich Cook said,

"Programming today is a race between software engineers striving to build bigger and better idiot-proof programs, and the Universe trying to produce bigger and better idiots. So far, the Universe is winning."

No matter how hard programmers try, programs are always a smidge too complex for the increasingly apathetic world. Agreed, there are still those who care, but apathy, and having everything done for you, are a growing phenomenon, one that's really the root cause (or so the Corps claim) of why programs (Win* programs specifically) are becoming more and more bloatware with features few people know about, let alone use.

Re:Kinda better wording actually.

[Anonymous Coward]

> think the new wording is better, and perhaps a bit more accurate for two reasons.

It's less accurate. They say now:
"This exciting new OS delivers the stability of Linux"

Ah, the stability of Linux and nothing else.
So they must have implemented their own OS kernel!

Re:Kinda better wording actually.

[Anonymous Coward]

"Programming today is a race between software engineers striving to build bigger and better idiot-proof programs, and the Universe trying to produce bigger and better idiots. So far, the Universe is winning."

I prefer Zappa's:
"Some scientists claim that hydrogen, because it is so plentiful, is the basic building block of the unerverse. I dispute that. I say there is more stupidity than hydrogen, and that is the basic building block of the universe."

Re:Kinda better wording actually.

[protonman]

This is the first really good reason for the change, because now a new user will feel that instead of just getting another computer like the rest of the world, he's riding the wave of a "exciting new OS". :-)

I'm sorry?

People don't like riding waves of new exciting OSs. They want what they use at work, at school, what their friends use, the OS games are made for, the OS hardware manufacturers make drivers for, the OS that's explained on television, in magazines, etc. etc.

Re:Kinda better wording actually.

[GutBomb]

it's not just switching to windows. if lots of dumbasses get ahold of these machines and start talking to other people not in the know, lidows, and indirectly linux, will get a reputation for not doing what it is supposed to do. for not operating correctly. I can see uninformed mainstream media covering this in the near future, and even some uninformed people starting a class action suit against walmart or the lindows people, simply because they do not understand how thier computer works.

Re:Kinda better wording actually.

[Peter Harris]

Oh well. You could be right, but who cares if they sue Walmart? And Free software thrives without the acclaim of the uninformed news media. It's not a popularity contest, after all. It's about freedom to use the right tool for the job. I am lucky to have a manager who will not be swayed by uninformed opinion anyway. Any software gets in the door on its own merits or not at all.

Whether LindowsOS is the right tool for *any* job is purely a matter of speculation at the moment. My guess is that uptake will be negligible anyway. Slashdot is a great place for intense debate about fuck all - let's wait and see.

The Full Phrase

[sehryan]

Since the link is broken in the article, the full phrase is:

"The low cost alternative to computers preloaded with Microsoft Windows. These PCs ship with an exciting new Linux based Operating System (OS) named Lindows. This exciting new OS delivers the stability of Linux with the ease of Windows and they include a trial membership to a library of over 1,000 software programs so they can be outfitted for any purpose whether business, home, or entertainment."

The link

Broken link

[ezs]

http://newsforge.com/newsforge/02/06/18/1344258.sh tml?tid=23

The phrase in question

[Wingchild]

Found here,

Lindows is an exciting new Linux based Operating System (OS). This exciting new OS delivers the stability of Linux with the ease of Windows. These computer systems are a perfect low cost alternative to computers preloaded with Microsoft Windows.

Correct as written - there's no phrase explicitly about being able to run Windows applications. ..but is it sinister? Or just a precursor step to keep Microsoft from bashing the living hell out of any merchant agreement they might have?

... not long

[Anonymous Coward]

Check the EULA for VS.net. In order to distribute the redisributables, they must "only operate in conjunction with Microsoft Windows platforms". 3.1(a)

Also 3.1(b) seems (I'm no lawyer) aimed at forbidding open source licensing of .net derived programs.

Re:... not long

[VertigoAce]

You'd be right, except for the fact that there is very little need to do anything that would make section 3 apply to you as an open source developer. MS allows you to distribute (in source or binary) your application. Their license gets more strict if you decide to modify MFC and redistribute it (as things like the GPL might begin to apply to their code). You'd be in a gray area to distribute the system libraries with your application.

As an open source developer, I would distribute my applications and .NET components with source in one package. I would then either distribute a closed source package (with the condition that it not be redistributed) for any files in REDIST.txt. As an alternative, just point people to MS's website to update their system with the current libraries.

Re:... not long

[Anonymous Coward]

As an open source developer, I would distribute my applications and .NET components with source in one package. I would then either distribute a closed source package (with the condition that it not be redistributed) for any files in REDIST.txt. As an alternative, just point people to MS's website to update their system with the current libraries.

I can think of a variety of ways MS could make this a real PITA. The only way around it is to not use MS .Net libs at all and use either free .Net libs or ones from 3rd parties that don't care how you use/licence/distribute your own software.

Re:... not long

[VertigoAce]

I could see running into the problem you mention if you use C++ since you still end up linking to static libs. I refuse to touch VB, so I don't know what it's like. C# is the least likely to have problems since all that you redistribute is the name of a library (the framework is responsible for doing the traditional linking at runtime). Anyway, if you just distribute source you don't have to worry about that (and C# is made to make source distributions easy).

The Real Reason is...

[idfrsr]

It will run "most Microsoft programs"....

The phrase had to be removed, because not even Windows can run "most Microsoft programs".

And this submission was checked?

[torinth]

that last phrase has gone missing

That last link has gone missing, methinks: "http://slashdot.org/&ltA HREF=". A pretty wierd link for a newsforge story...

Where are the editors?

-Andrew

Re:no, it hasn't --yes, it has

[Redwing]

I just went there and found the phrase missing. Where were you looking?

OT: Sig

[Anonymous Coward]

--You have just been scanned--

So why didn't my head explode?

Re:OT: Sig

[Alan Partridge]

only the most powerful scanners actually make your head explode. Jesus, everyone knows that!

Re:OT: Sig

[DoctorFrog]

Your head only explodes if you are also a scanner. Obviously, you aren't.

the mac market?

[Anonymous Coward]

Go after the mac market?

Clearly you do not understand the mac market.

Linux, despite its unix core, is the polar opposite of Mac OS X.

Mac OS X is designed to work without any real knowledge of BSD, and with linux I simply cannot say this is the case. These computers are the polar opposites of macs.

And its not the bright colors that sell macs. The cases do matter, but each of them is very elegant and stylish, something I haven't been seen other companies do. And the OS is designed to simply work.

Claim was out there

[Erasmus Darwin]

Linux emulation of Windows is making some impressive strides, but we all know that claim was a bit out there. Hell people commented on it back in the original story. John Q. Enduser wouldn't have been happy when his random, off-the-shelf Windows software didn't run on his new Lindows box.

And yet despite that, we've already got plenty of people raising the possibility that it's due to evil legal manuevering by Microsoft. Sometimes I wonder just how paranoid some of the Slashdotters out there really are.

(Disclaimer: I'm secretly receiving money, women, and youth rejuvenation treatments from Microsoft in exchange from posting pro-Microsoft comments here. I've also been instructed to bribe both RMS and Linus into joining our organization.)

Hmm

[ins0m]

No, I doubt many people who buy prepackaged comps from walmart actively follow /. However, what I do think is great is that the concept of linux is being offered right next to the Blue Light Special on aisle 5. Seriously, even if the "W" word is missing from the current marketing campaign, the fact remains that the hybrid-ish OS is widely available to people who may never have heard of *nix, or may have only heard of it in context with the "geek" community.

So long as Lindows remains in that sort of distribution circle, I have a feeling that more people are going to gain exposure, and even if touted as interoperable with most MS programs, most people only care about surfing websites, word processing, and gaming. So long as Lindows can perform with Win* on that regard, they should be fine; if the comparable cost of a PC pre-installed with "L" vs. "W" is low enough, it should be a success.

Hell, people may just be excited when they see that their fav porn sites pop up quicker. But for a moderate linux user (freebsd is my fav. os), I find that Mandrake is not hard to install or configure; anything easier than that will definitely have a mass consumer base. It's just a matter of keeping it on the shelves; I applaud the move of removing "Windows" from their promo, so long as they aren't going to get hosed for name-brand recognition entirely by doing so.

Re:Hmm

[nelsonal]

These systems will probably never be on store shelves. They are sold at the online arm of Wal-mart. Why give up higher prices and margins, in a store if you don't have to, they currently only sell HPQ systems in their bricks and morter stores. I would guess that they will add emachines, becuase its easier to negotiate if you have a second supplier. Also, the average wal-mart.com shopper is more likely to have, at least, heard of linux than a shopper in their physical stores.

Re:Hmm

[rseuhs]

higher price does not equal higher margin.

Walmart can lower the price AND grow their margin by using Lindows.

Re:Hmm

[demaria]

Blue Light special is K-Mart, not Walmart. :-)

Re:Hmm

[Anonymous Coward]

and increase the cost of running their returns/customer service department as people complain that they can't run a game they bought.

Re:Hmm

[Anonymous Coward]

Let's also keep in mind that not everyone on Earth is aware of what an 'operating system' is. Hell, a lot of people really don't know what Windows (though they may have heard of it). All they know is that they pay $400 for a computer and expect it to do 1) email, 2) wordprocessing, and 3) entertain them when they need it. Lindows probably accomplishes all this just fine, so why would these kinds of users (which are the majority) even care about Windows or running Windows programs at all?

Re:Hmm

[jonadab]

I concur.

This is a good thing. Most people have very vague notions about what Windows and Microsoft even are; the advertising campaigns have some of them believing that it's an important part of computing, but only because all computers seem to have these buzzwords "Windows" and "Microsoft" attached to them. Exposure to the idea that computers don't need these buzzwords is a good thing.

In terms of user experience, users want to do a few simple things:

• Send and receive email, without understanding anything about how email works. When someone sends them an image attachment, they want it to just display for them, and have a clearly visible "print" button. They also want to be able to exchange inane animated greeting cards (the ones spammers deploy to collect email addresses), so they'll need the Flash plugin. But they don't have even the foggiest notion what a "plugin" is, and they shouldn't have to.
• Print stuff out. This means mostly pictures, bog-standard word-processing documents (letters, resumés, garage sale signs, ... nothing complicated), and the kind of thing people used to use Print Shop for in the 80s (mostly inane greeting cards with cheesy clip art, but these days they want to do this in color; banners are also popular). Printing pictures is no problem. Word Processing is no problem; Open Office is serious overkill for these people. The thing that remains in this category is the cheesy greeting-card/certificate/banner printing package, and I've discovered that people will crawl over broken glass to do this stuff. The software can be _horrific_ (a la Print Artist) and they'll _LOVE_ it. Quality is not necessary, and ease of use is really not important either, as long as it will let them insert stupid clip art and style bits of text with shadow and outline effects and stuff, and give them prefab templates to modify. Currently I don't know of a Linux app that fits this bill, but maybe that's because I wasn't looking.
• Surf the web. This shouldn't be a problem. I've been deploying Mozilla for a while now at a public library, where the people who use it have no PC at home and know virtually nothing, and Mozilla works fine; I get very few complaints, and those I do get have to do with printing or with the difficulty of navigating certain sites.
• Play silly little games. Not a problem. Give em a dozen kinds of Solitaire, Gnome Mines, Iagno, and a handful of others, and they'll be happy playing them quite literally forever. (Yes, there are also people who want cool games, new games, 3D shooters, and such, but those people are younger and know more about computers.)
• That's pretty much it. Most people don't know they can do more than this with computers.

I'm glad Wall-Mart is no longer claiming that LindowsOS runs most MS programs. Lindows was not ready for that claim. But Linux *is* ready, or very close to ready, for the consumer desktop, as long as it comes preinstalled and preconfigured. I worry just a little about the silly-greeting-card thing... developers don't do such inane things, and I don't know whether anyone has put together a Print Artist equivalent for Linux.

Re:Hmm

[jcast]

Appearantly you don't grok Walmart's business model: lower prices, raise profits.

Re:Hmm

[Dratman]

Excellent developer opportunity here. Nothing in GPL says you can't make money selling software for Linux. Source included, of course, or available on the web site.

The user wanting to put together greeting cards and signs (ok, "cheesy" if you like) just wants to buy a CD that will install and run. S/he couldn't care less where the source code resides.

$9.95, anyone?

Re:Hmm

[nurb432]

Dont forget games.. aside from 'surfin the web', users want to play games that are being sold on the shelf to the left..... so expected compatbilty WILL come in to play.. and just piss them off with a 'linux sux' attitude..

Re:Hmm

[smyle]

One minor nit-pick:

- Print stuff out.

This includes being able to buy a $40-$50 printer (probably sold on the shelf right next to the $300 PC), plug it in, and expect it to work. Or at least expect nothing more than inserting the CD.

Re:Hmm

[skt]

I agree, all hardware support is going to be rough for a while.. not just printers. Microsoft has enough power and market share to get hardware manufactures to support their operating systems. Linux-based systems do not have the same power, and I would imagine that most hardware manufactures are having a difficult time justifying the cost of developing for that platform. Drivers and software may be available free on the Internet from third parties, but it isn't the same. At the very least, hardware developers need to reserve a special spot in their documentation that contains links to places where the user could download software for "unsupported" platforms, even if the company doesn't actually write it.

I know that at least mylex and USR have done this for a while, but I'm not so sure about digital cameras and scanners.

Re:Nerd Never Gets the Girl :(

[ryepup]

+1 insightful!

Too early? Been out as long as Windows!

[Viewsonic]

NT

Re:Nerd Never Gets the Girl :(

[Silverstrike]

Interesting place to dump your emotional angst. A slashdot forum on LindowsOS.

I'll respond with something I've learned over the years:

1) There isn't a woman alive that isn't bipolar.
2) There isn't a woman alive that isn't a masicist. (Hence their attraction to the "Woman get me a beer" gene)
3) Teenagers don't know what they want.
4) Women don't know what they want. (In life or otherwise)
5) Teenage women are (#3 ^ #4)
6) True love exists -- at the bottom of a liquor bottle

lol....just my impressions.

Linux?

[Jucius Maximus]

Why was this posted in the Linux category? This has more to do with Microsoft than Linux.

Re:Linux?

[jas79]

because lindows is a Linux distribution. wasn't that rather obvious.

Re:Linux?

[NanoGator]

"Why was this posted in the Linux category? This has more to do with Microsoft than Linux.

The Linux Community should pay very careful attention to what's going on here with Walmart. They could learn a few things. Here's two reasons why Linux users should care:

1.) It means that Walmart doesn't think that Linux is ready for entry-level consumers unless it behaves like Windows. The fact that they're shipping Lindows with it shows that Walmart is looking for a viable solution. Heck, this sort of thing could have made me a Linux user not too long ago.

Linux is still very much a niche product. If the Linux community wants it to be more proliferated, then they need to start getting Linux software on the shelves at Walmart. Once that starts happening, then Walmart will feel at ease with selling machines sans-MS. I mean think about it, Walmart has computers to sell but no software on the shelves for it...

2.) It shows that there is a need in the marketplace for machines w/o the MS tax. Linux users should be very happy about that. It means that one day we may be able to buy a Laptop without an OS. I don't know about you guys, but I wouldn't mind saving $500 (most of the big companies ram Office down your throat too...) on my new laptop.

This is an opportunity for Linux, and bad news for MS. The Linux community'd do good to make as an impressive of showing as possible. If Walmart gets tons of returns because people feel like they have the ugly duckling OS, then who knows when that opportunity will show up again?

Refresh

[Anonymous Coward]

Try clicking 'Refresh' on your browser.

At least that's what MIS always tells me when their web pages are screwed up.

Re:Refresh

[Alan Partridge]

...actually worked - I REALLY WAS looking at an old page - Christ knows where it was coming from, as I'd never been to Wal Mart before. I'd only just linked to the site from desktoplinux.com 5minutes before seeing the Slashdot story. Very strange. My apologies, the story seems to be true, most of the COMMENTS OTOH are bollocks as usual.

Parent is NOT offtopic!

[Anonymous Coward]

Comon, people, didn't you even read the moderator guidelines?

Source code for Lindows?

[DrXym]

Does anyone know if they make the sourcecode available online and if so where? Under the GPL they could probably make it available "upon request", but I hope they're being nicer about it than that.

Re:Source code for Lindows?

[G00F]

my understanding has been, they only need to make the source code disks availiable to those who bought the product.

Re:Source code for Lindows?

[blackwings]

Sourcecode for the changes they made to KDE can be found at http://net2.com/lindows/source/ As for the changes to wine they seem to have submited them all to the main wine tree, at least the says so in

http://net2.com/lindows/source/AboutTheseSourceFil es.txt

"Specifically, there are no WINE source code mods here, because ALL of our WINE changes (even those changes we made when WINE was X11) have been submitted for inclusion to the main LGPL wine tree. Pretty much all of our changes were accepted and are currently in wine. Lindows.com currently does all their development on the LGPL wine tree, submitting all our changes back."

Re:Source code for Lindows?

[jas79]

That is what is what my understanding was until I did the quiz on the fsfsite. The license says "any third party"

Re:Source code for Lindows?

[PhilHibbs]

So if they make a modification to WINE, it gets refused by the maintainer, but they distribute the modified version with Lindows anyway, where do we get the source?

Re:Source code for Lindows?

[Rytsarsky]

I can't find source code, but I found this in their faq:

Question: Can I allow my friends to have a copy of any software I obtain?

Answer: The Lindows.com Insider program is designed to be exclusive to the individual that signs up. As an Insider member, we ask that you not distribute copies of the LindowsOS to other individuals and that you abide by the end user license agreement that comes with our software.

I wonder exactly what that end-user license agreement says... doesn't sound very GPL-ish to me.

Re:Source code for Lindows?

[GuNgA-DiN]

Wrong!

Lindows = Debian + KDE + WINE

Re:Source code for Lindows?

[Royster]

There are two ways you can meet the minimum requirements of the GPL:

1) Give the source to everyone you give the program to.

2) Provide the source to all third parties for at least three years and for a fee no greater than the cost of making the copy.

Under 1), there is no requirement to provide the source code to third parties. Under 2) you may even charge to cover the cost of making and shipping the copies. No where is there a requirement that source be made freely available over the Internet.

Re:Source code for Lindows?

[DrXym]

It is a lot more than that. The Lindows website offers hundreds of "click-n-run" applications, most of which are GPL or otherwise open source. That would be fine if the the source is available, and/or a notice states categorically their builds are from generic tarballs and where to get those, but they don't.

For all I know, they *have* modified some of these programs. For all I know they're using versions with known exploits. There is nothing to say anything to the contrary.

Comment removed

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion

more accurate, but death for sales

[dirk]

The new wording is more accurate, but not stating it runs Windows apps will be a killer for many sales. This box is meant for Joe Enduser, who probably has never heard of Linux, and thinks Windows is the greatest OS around. All he really cares is if Word, Quicken, and Quake 3 will run on it. Most users don't want thousands of applications, they want the 2 or 3 they use. While this is a great line for geeks, that isn't the market for the PC. I predict this line of PCs will last about 4 months before they are pulled or have Windows put on them unless the marketing is changed ASAP.

Re:more accurate, but death for sales

[HiThere]

Umnnn...
Joe Enduser may not be as well informed as you believe. He may not know what windows is. He surely can't be depended upon to know what an operating system is. And there's a good chance that he will actually confuse the monitor with the computer.

I'm not overstating the case. Many users are even more ignorant than this indicates. What they know is what they see.

So what do they see. Both computers show similar pictures. Both can browse the web. Both can do e-mail. ... I suspect that they many of them will not see any large difference. Except, perhaps, price.

P.S.: Most windows end users will turn off the computer if a program crashes, rather than try to cancel it through the program manager. Or even to pick the shutdown option in the start menu. So Linux may seem no more reliable to them than Windows. (Boy is it a good thing that ext3 was released!!!) Many Linux applications are more stable, and it is certainly true that it's easier (and more thorough) to recover from them. But many are less reliable. And if the reaction to a crashed program is to shut off the machine, you don't see that much difference between Linux and Windows.

Re:more accurate, but death for sales

[Anonymous Coward]

And not only that, but he'll be unable to reinstall any other OS on the computer. Which will send shivers of delight through all you linux sadists, at the thought of poor souls just trying to get some information off the internet without first spending 8 hours tweaking their linux distro. Why would anyone not want to spend whole days just playing with their computer. It's ridiculous, people having other demands on their time. Compiling gcc is highest calling of any human, right?

But they'll limp along, like they always have, taking whatever scraps are handed to them, whether it's the candy coated high fat toxic waste crumbs from Redmond or the fat free high fiber no calorie morsels from the linux crowd.

If there is a hope for unix, it lies with OS X, and Apple being willing to port it to commodity hardware, but I'm not holding my breath. And I suspect as much praise as it gets from some of you, most of you secretly hate it, because you don't need a commandline to reconfigure things like disks or printing.

Re:more accurate, but death for sales

[Anonymous Coward]

... not stating it runs Windows apps will be a killer for many sales. This box is meant for Joe Enduser, who probably has never heard of Linux, and thinks Windows is the greatest OS around. All he really cares is if Word, Quicken, and Quake 3 will run on it.

The folks who run quicken and quake aren't in the market for this stuff. This is aimed at the folks who want email, and the web, and don't know what either of these things are.

If the system is set up to work, it will keep working (if it has a journaling filesystem, it will take abuse a LOT better than windows does) until the user goes out of his way to screw something up. Linux is good at at just working and working, and that's a real weakness of Windows. These boxes won't get bit-rot in the registry.

What will bug the users is not being able to get to sites which block out non-ie browsers, and not being able to see streaming video, and all the other proprietary crap that's lying about out there. If webmasters start getting flooded with ``your website is broken, I can't access my account anymore|sign up for your service'' messages, they'll begin to reconsider some of those decisions. This last will depend on the strength of the egos and ignorance of the purchasers of these boxes, of course.

If someone you know asks you why their new Walmart PC can't get to site xyz, solomnly inform them that the problem lies with the site; their computer is strictly standards compliant. Don't add the obvious point that strict standards compliance is the problem, nor any politics about why StreamingCrap version 123 isn't offered for their system. Just tell them that the stupid people at xyz built a system that doesn't work, and need to be told that they screwed up! Explain how to find an email address and send an email.

Re:Nerd Never Gets the Girl :(

[salgo]

The best piece of advice I ever heard:

"Women are non linear"

or run 15 OSes

[paradesign]

Windows 3.1/95/98/SE/ME/NT/2000/XP
DOS
Linux
BeOS
Lindows
OS X
OS 9 (classic)
Darwin

OS X and VPC, solves all of your puny OS problems on the best hardware!

Re:or run 15 OSes

[Anonymous Coward]

Lindows == Linux...and you forgot *BSD

Lindows = Inexpensive PC

[WellHungYungWun]

IMHO, most peeps will buy the pc for the price cut and borrow Fred's copy of M$ Windoze (Insert Flavor Here). I don't see my Father using and Flavor of Linux in the foreseeable future. I mean a prebuilt system loses most of it's geek appeal right off the bat. I am more for building it myself from my components. What about You?

Re:Lindows = Inexpensive PC

[Jacer]

i agree, it's a solution to pirates, a free OS on hardware, you don't have to worry about assembeling your PC, and you don't get stuck for the bill.....i get so much more out of building my own computer, and i'm sure if i built a $500 system, it'd be a hell of a lot more machine than this microtel....

Re:Lindows = Inexpensive PC

[GuNgA-DiN]

Actually, before Walmart started selling the Microtel PC's with Lindows preinstalled they were selling the same "bare bones" machines with no OS preinstalled. It really pissed off Microsoft too because they were thinking the same thing. Someone would buy a cheap $300 box at Walmart, come home and borrow Fred's copy of Windoze and have a fully functioning machine without all the licensing bullshit or the EULA.

Re:Lindows = Inexpensive PC

[zik0]

RMS is going to be really pissed off. Someone
could be buying systems with Windows preloaded,
installing Linux, and having a fully functioning
system without the GNU label.

Re:Nerd Never Gets the Girl :(

[Casualposter]

Sheese. Yep. Been there done that. Got a few scars to prove it.

Still, I gotta say, quite sincerely that you shouldn't give up--because the nice guys do get the girls. It just takes a while for the girls to grow up and realize that they'd rather have a nice guy that treats them well instead of the aforementioned Boys of Questionable Worth.

I've said and observed these things that you're saying years ago. I've warned many of the young women in my life about the dangers of the types of "men" they were suddenly attracted to. They wouldn't see the truth and didn't value my opinion enough to heed the warnings. They got hurt...some got pregnant, or maybe an STD. Sometimes they got used very thoroughly and left in the dumpster.

Here's the best advice I can give you on your rant. It's free to you, but I paid rather dearly for it: Never compromise your standards for another person. If you want to be treated well by the girl your dating, then insist on it or dump her. If she gets hurt, so be it. Maybe she'll learn form the pain and not treat the next guy like crap. Don't change being who you are just to get laid. And when some lusty wench tosses you off the deep end and sprays your heart and soul all over the pavement, get up and get a broom because its your mess to clean up. Nobody else is going to put you back together.

The pain will fade and the scars will remain, but in all of that, if you are intelligent, then you will learn wisdom.

Yep. Life is pain. As long as it hurts you know your still alive.

Re:Karma whoring... heres the link.

[oyenstikker]

what the?
He types the link thats in the story and works just fine, and gets modded up as informative?

Come on Moderaters, at least read the story if you're not gonna read the article first.

Claims.

[saintlupus]

Today, that last phrase has gone missing and there is no more talk of running any programs designed for Windows, let alone Microsoft products

Good. Now they just have to stop claiming that their cobbled together toy OS has the stability of UNIX, and the ad copy will finally be accurate.

--saint

Re:Nerd Never Gets the Girl :(

[Psion]

"6) True love exists -- at the bottom of a liquor bottle"

So...that dead worm is True Love? [pokes it with a stick] Eeew. I think I'll stick with one-night-stands.

sounds familiar

[oyenstikker]

Stability of Linux.
Ease of Windows.
Big software library, easy to get and they'll all install and work fine.
Hey! They made a graphical installer and GUI apt front end for Debian!

Re:sounds familiar

[Mwongozi]

At the risk of being modded down, my experience of installing and using Debian seem to indicate that it is far from the ease of use of Windows.

SuSE and Mandrake, however, come pretty darn close.

Re:sounds familiar

[oyenstikker]

I will admit that installing Debian was much less trivial than Mandrake (hence 'added a graphical installer'). Once I got it running, I apt-get installed a bunch of stuff, and it was all automatically downloaded, installed, configured, entered into init.d and runlevels, and started. (I did have to run xf86config a few times, but Lindows could take care of that in the installer). Upgrading to newer versions was cake. Making new kernels on Debian is far easier than on anything else I've seen. Suse and Mandrake are more 'user friendly', but Debian is easier. Just because they're holding your hand, doesn't mean they know what they're doing.

Maybe we will start seeing...

[gamorck]

Maybe we will start seeing Lindows run some "switch" commercials kind of like Apples. The difference would be that the whiny little idiots would complain that Windows/Mac was too "clunky and that I couldn't figure out how to move things around". Maybe they will also thrown in that, "Lindows just works more like my Brain does."

Speaking of which, are't those people the biggest idiots you have ever seen? Somebody should smack them all silly. My personal favorite is the Windows Admin who says that he just wants to come home to computers that "work". Perhaps he should seek a new area of employment if he's unable to get his Windows machines to work...

:-)

J

Re:Maybe we will start seeing...

[ActiveSX]

Perhaps he should seek a new area of employment if he's unable to get his Windows machines to work...

So you're suggesting that every Windows admin should get a new job?


*ducks*

Re:Maybe we will start seeing...

[NanoGator]

"Maybe they will also thrown in that, "Lindows just works more like my Brain does."

Ouch! Be sure to cast your spokesman correctly, you don't want Robin Williams saying that!

Re:Maybe we will start seeing...

[Anonymous Coward]

As a Windows administrator who owns a Mac it's more a case that after spending all day fixing broken Windows boxes (and if you're a Windows admin you know damn well it happens a lot) I don't want to come home and fix more of them. I'm good at keeping Windows running, but it doesn't mean I want to do it 24/7. It's nice to have a computer that just works as a backup for when some POS fries the registry or a critical DLL on my Windows box.

Re:Maybe we will start seeing...

[FueledByRamen]

"Lindows just works more like my Brain does."

I think that this is an inflammatory and degrading statement to those of us, me included, whose brains have been scientifically proven not to work at all.

This is also good because...

[dotgod]

Another reason that the removal of the claim for windows compatability is that it prevents people from buying lindowsOS with the expectation of running all of their old windows apps on this "new linux thingie". Obviously, soon after buying a LindowsOS PC, anyone such as this who is trying to run their Windows apps on linux *will* have a bad experience, because most programs will run slow or not at all. This bad experience could cause them to avoid linux from then on and tell others not to get it because "it doesn't run any of my programs"

Re:Karma whoring... heres the link.

[thesolo]

He types the link thats in the story and works just fine, and gets modded up as informative?

The link was originally broken when the story was first published, due to bad HTML. The editors have since corrected the link. The comment in question was posted while the link was still malformed, which explains why it was modded up.

emulators blow

[macdaddy357]

Emulators have never worked well on any platform. A lot of programs just have to be run in their native environment. It does not surprise me at all that wal-mart backed down from it's previous claim. There will be too much microsoft software that just won't work with Lindows OS. I would like to try Lindows, but I won't cough up $99 just to test a beta. Anyway, emulators blow.

Re:emulators blow

[AlgUSF]

Isn't Lindows based on WINE, and from the acronym we all know that Wine Is Not an Emulator.

Re:emulators blow

[dinivin]

Except that WINE is an emulator. It certainly meets the definition of emulator.

Dinivin

Re:Nerd Never Gets the Girl :(

[slaker]

Dude, at least your girlfriend left you for another GUY.

Me? I'm trying to help MY ex-girlfriend get a date with someone named "Melissa". Not saying that watching girl/girl porno with the woman I used to sleep with isn't fun, but given the choice I'd rather share her bed.

Anyway, you're right. Geeks should have girlfriends. It gets our hopes up.

So what happens to all the early buyers...

[forged]

Between the initial announcement and now, surely the masses must have flocked to Wallmart to get their Lindows machine. By now, all these guys will be wondering, "Wait a moment, this looks like Windows, sounds like Windows, doesn't work like windows and cannot run my Windows apps, err, ..... (silence)"

You get the idea 8-)

What I want to know is...

[rsidd]

do you still run it as root in the default installation? If so, it loses a key advantage over windows: stability and safety.

*groan* Not you freaks again...

[Anonymous Coward]

I will buy the hardware statement, though just barely given the recent innovations in the PC market that in some cases leave the MAC far in the dust. Best OS? Please... only if you are a poor educator in a school district that got hooked by Apple back in the 80s, a musician who listens to his/her peers and doesn't actually try anthing else, or a printer/graphic artist who is so deeply invested in MAC that they can't get out.

Claim a bit of a stretch for the average user.

[fishlet]

I think to claim it compatible with windows... it had *better* run MOST windows software very well. The standard wine (not counting the enhanced versions like wineX, codeweavers) cannot run MOST complex windows programs, let alone Games which you can be sure a home user is going to be very interested in running. I'm willing to bet these boxen will not last 6 months at Walmart.

Note: I'm a full time linux user and advocate, but I'm also a realist.

Re:Claim a bit of a stretch for the average user.

[rseuhs]

If you are a realist please tell me why Linux should not be used on PCs that would otherwise be sold OS-free?

(silence)

Despite all this elitist bitching, total dumb anti-computer types don't buy no-name PCs. They buy Dell or Compaq or IBM because they know these companies.

People who buy ultra-cheap no-name PCs know what they are doing - at least to the extent that they know that they will need to pirate Windows if they have to run Windows-programs.

Re:Claim a bit of a stretch for the average user.

[groove75]

You're basing this chimerical premise on a simply unproven supposition. There is no factual evidence to back up your claim. I could argue just as poignantly that most Walmart users perusing through the computer section are NOT tech savvy. They are simply average computer users looking for a good deal. Average computer users who's initial impressions of Linux will NOT be a good one and ultimately having a harmful effect on consumer confidence in the platform.

Re:Claim a bit of a stretch for the average user.

[fishlet]

If the target demographic were as you say , more advanced users than it would make more sense to put a more recognized Linux on the box (perhaps red hat or the like). By putting Lindows on the box and playing up Windows compatibility... it is obvious they are trying to attract just the opposite type of user. Despite a (relatively small) difference of price, the average user is going to find him/herself clamoring to install real windows on the machine as soon as he discovers MOST off the shelf software will not run correctly on it. As for the machines appeal to the geek crowd... I'd have to say 1) I doubt most geeks buy their machines at Walmart and 2) Desktop Linux using geeks are still a small minority of computer buyers. These machines aren't destined to be a big hit.

* I mean geek as a complement of course

Re:Claim a bit of a stretch for the average user.

[rseuhs]

You're basing this chimerical premise on a simply unproven supposition. There is no factual evidence to back up your claim.

Wrong.

Walmart has sold OS-free PCs for several months now.

Obviously somebody has bought them, otherwise they would have been discontinued by now.

Somebody who buys OS-free PCs knows what an OS is, that it has to be installed etc.

Re:Claim a bit of a stretch for the average user.

[rseuhs]

Everything you said is also true for OS-free PCs, even more so, because for basic email, websurfing etc. Lindows is just fine.

So obviously your statement "These machines aren't destined to be a big hit." is wrong as the OS-free PCs seem to sell quite well.

This elitism on slashdot is starting to annoy me. The average computer user knows very well what an OS is and can understand the concept of Lindows not being 100% compatible. Yes, there are people who don't, but those are clearly much, much BELOW average and don't shop cheap no-name computers.

Re:Claim a bit of a stretch for the average user.

[groove75]

Your trailing quote: "People who buy ultra-cheap no-name PCs know what they are doing - at least to the extent that they know that they will need to pirate Windows if they have to run Windows-programs." You're providing a correlative example to support your initial opinion. The problem is that your example has nothing to do with the genesis of this discussion. Who cares if Walmart sells pc's with no OS? We're talking about specific PC's which ARE being sold with an OS. That OS in question being...Lindows. To better qualify my statement. You have no factual evidence to support that the users buying these "Lindows computers" are tech savvy. In fact, the marketing strategy would seem to suggest otherwise.

Re:Claim a bit of a stretch for the average user.

[AVryhof]

Working tech support.....I will account that 99% of the people I talk to are scared to death of their computer....if they stick the CD they just bought in the drive and it doesn't work, they're gonna turn, run and never look back. Hows that for why Lindows is a BAD DECISION.

Re:Claim a bit of a stretch for the average user.

[rseuhs]

My argument is that Lindows PCs can't be worse than OS-free PCs because Lindows doesn't add costs.

In the worst case, the customer will do the same what he would do with an OS-free PC, in the best case the customer will use Lindows and be happy.

If there is a market for OS-free PCs (and there is), there is also a market for Linux-preinstalled PCs.

That was my point.

Re:Claim a bit of a stretch for the average user.

[groove75]

I'm not sure how you are making the demographic relationship between consumer's who buy OS-free pc's from Walmart, and consumer's who buy Lindows pre-loaded pc's from Walmart. I think you're assuming that they are indeed the same consumer, and that's just not realistic. Btw, I don't see any offer of OS-free pc's on their website, but didn't have time to search thoroughly. Even if they are selling OS-free pc's, the latest trend to sell MS or Lindows pre-loaded pc's could be construed as indicative of the lack of computer skills in their consumer base. Either way, an initial bad impression of Linux to the general public is indeed harmful.

sort of . . .

[hawk]

. . . that one's over stated--it was only a prerelease that did it (but it did it with encypted code, and wasn't proven until someone built a hardware debugger for the purpose).

THat never made it into the shipping product. However, it was there in the prerelease sent out to reviewers, causing them to conclude that dr-dos wasn't yup the the task.

THis was a factor in the half-billion dollar settlement . . . though I thought that trebling ten per cent of the current market would have been a more interesting remedy . . .

hawk

Re:sort of . . .

[CaptnMArk]

But windows 3.11 did break the OS/2 compatibility.

Re:sort of . . .

[Yakko]

THat never made it into the shipping product.

Not true, as turning on one flag would resurrect said code. See Figure 6.

For normal users, however, yes... the code was as good as gone. It -is- still there, tho.

Re:sort of . . .

[Anonymous Coward]

OS/2 ran windows 3.1 by patching certain memory locations as windows was loaded into ram. This is similar to win4lin, except win4lin patches windows on the hard drive. Any changes in the windows 3.1 code, even something as simple as a recompile with different optimizations, will break such a system. That is completely different that code that checks for Win-OS/2 and either displays a fake error message, or deliberately crashes the software.

Re:Nerd Never Gets the Girl :(

[cordsie]

Well said.

Lindows and AOL

[rob-fu]

I haven't seen this mentioned anywhere but I think it's important to look at the demographics behind Walmart's decision to market these computers.

This may be a bit offtopic but it's worth mentioning -- how do these people who are buying these boxes going to get on the internet? Perhaps they aren't the most technically inclined (trying to put it as nicely as possible) and so the most logical and easy way to get on the internet is to go through AOL.

Unless Walmart has bundled in some kind of ISP deal that supports Linux, has AOL released a Linux client, or did Wine start running AOL and I didn't hear about it, how do these computers get on the internet?

If none of the above are true then I would say this is a bad, bad move on behalf of Walmart. Let's face it-- these days, the internet is probably 90% of the point of owning a computer. I would love to know how these people are planning to have any internet connectivity.

Re:Lindows and AOL

[GuNgA-DiN]

Actually, Walmart offers its own Internet service: $9.94 a month for email and unlimited dial-up access. They are pushing this service instead of AOHell. And, yes it does work on the Lindows machines.

Re:Lindows and AOL

[Maul]

You make a pretty good point. I don't think these Lindows machines will do a great job of breaking the stranglehold on Microsoft because the AOL client only runs on Windows and Mac, as far as I know.

However, if AOL were to get a Linux client working and made some sort of deal with Walmart using these machines, it could become a very, very good business model for both AOL and Walmart.
Then the less tech-saavy people can have a cheap computer without the MS tax and still go online with an ISP they know.

Rather than Walmart trying to push their own ISP, if the average Joe saw a PC for cheap and an AOL deal included with it, it might be an even more attractive buy.

I guess that the rumors for some time have been that AOL would like to free itself from Microsoft's desktop, and this might be a way for them to do it.

Re:Lindows and AOL

[rseuhs]

I've seen the AOL-icon on some Lindows-screenshots, so maybe AOL does work just fine in Wine/Lindows?

Re:Lindows and AOL

[generic-man]

Funny you should mention that. Wal-Mart's Internet service works with "Windows 95/98/ME/2000/XP" according to the page linked, and is "© 2001 America On-Line." In fact, the whole thing is just a rebranded form of Compuserve, which in turn is just a bargain-basement version of AOL. (Hey, some people can't cough up $24 per month for AOL Platinum Premier.)

If it works on the Lindows machines, it would have to be through Windows not-emulation. Lindows supposedly runs AOL as well, so good for them.

Your ISP

[MemeRot]

probably had the page cached as a 'performance enhancer' for you.

Re:Your ISP

[Alan Partridge]

that's the kind of performance enhancement I can do without - I'll be getting yesterdays BBC news pages next

Re:Your ISP

[Anonymous Coward]

At a guess, I'd say you're using a cable modem. Quite possibly Blueyonder.

They have had "transparent" proxies on port 80 since time imememorial; using a third party proxy that is open on a port other than 80 or 8080 will do wonders for your web-browsing.

Re:Your ISP

[Alan Partridge]

I'm not, actually - I'm on an E-1 directly into Globix, we get superb network performance as a general rule, but I have no idea what proxies - if any - I'm using here.

Re:Gentoo rocks! (ummm)...

[Anonymous Coward]

(damn it, I hate having lost my account in the 300,000 range -- it looks so bad signing up as 589000, etc, and no one hears me,but here goes anyway)

I don't know if you've ever installed or seen Microsoft XP installed but during the installation the dialog displays an incredible amount of DLLs -- many of which are windows dll's, not MS office ones -- on your Windows box if it's not an XP box already. And, of course, we have all heard XP office won't run on Wine. So, I think it would be relatively safe to say it's happening already.

A shame, but we can only hope this is brought up in the trial.

The main problem is....

[GuNgA-DiN]

That Lindows parted ways with CodeWeavers. Back in October of last year they were all gung-ho about producing a system that could run Windows software. But, once the Codeweavers deal fell through they scrapped "plan a" and opted for "plan b" instead: sell basic machines to computer novices who don't plan to install Windows software anyway. A lot of the Lindows Insiders are still trying to get Lindows to support PC games with Transgaming's version of WineX. But, we'll see what happens. Honestly, I don't think this is a bad thing. In one sense you want to "provide a bridge" for people on Windows machines to make the transition over to Linux. But, on the other hand, you want people to stop supporting Microsoft's monopoly all together. And, that means stop buying Microsoft software and start using open source alternatives. It might also convince game companies, and others to start release Linux versions of their software as well.

Re:The main problem is....

[Anonymous Coward]

sell basic machines to computer novices who don't plan to install Windows software anyway

The trouble with this plan is that computer novices want something that can run off-the-shelf games, educational programs, finance programs, and the like. That means Windows or MacOS, unless you can line up a LOT more top commercial developers to put out programs for Linux.

Where's the source?

[Anonymous Coward]

I hope that those 3 no-charge GPLed applications users are permitted to download, come with source - or at least, with the ability for users to get source without paying or using up more of the three no-charge download credits. If not, then the warehouse is in violation of GPL.

Similarly, if (as some people are claiming) the package management is a "molested" version of GPLed package management tools from another distribution, then that had better have source available too.

Why Lindows?

[Zenex13]

As some other people said, selling Lindows can be damaging to the public image of Linux. Maybe it won't be that damaging, or maybe many people won't buy it, but it will be a little damaging. I think they would do a much better job using a easy-to-use distro, like Mandrake or Lycoris, simplify it so they don't confuse users (remove GNOME or KDE, etc), and bundle it with CrossOver Office. That way, they could market the fact that it runs Word, Excel, and Powerpoint (crossover doesn't run Outlook and Access very well), and also market the fact that its Linux.

Re:Why Lindows?

[Anonymous Coward]

As much as the Linux community likes to think that Linux is "easy-to-use" ... it's not. Just because we have time to read countless HOWTO's and figure out how to edit config files doesn't mean the rest of the world does. Lindows is an OS that a retarded monkey could install and use. That is what is missing from the Linux world -- and OS that is so easy to use that a lazy retard could figure it out. It insults our intelligence to "dumb-down" the Linux OS that far -- so no one has done it. Even though Mandrake and Lycoris are easy to use from our point of view they are extremely difficult for a novice Windows user. This is the niche that Lindows will fill: a single-user, no-brainer OS with no configuration or experience needed.

installation?

[MemeRot]

that's why lindows is using it's lamer click-n-run application library, so your average user won't have to deal with any complexities of software installation.

by the way, in a few years from now all OS's will be almost unrecognizable compared to today. don't expect MS to stand still while linux makes progress, they will have revolutionary changes too, and windows XX will probably be the first os to get the annoying file system out of the user's way - I figure *nix won't ever go that route and that will turn out to be a mistake.

Re:installation?

[IamTheRealMike]

I think click-n-run is a good idea actually, the ease of apt with a simple GUI for non-geeks.

And don't worry, I'm not expecting MS to stand still. Don't worry about the database thing, if MS manage to do it (and I'm sure they will eventually), then we can too - check out the plans for ReiserFS.

Re:installation?

[jawtheshark]

the first OS to get the annoying filesystem out of the way.

And why would you want to do that? Is there anything cleaner than a hierarchical system for classifying your stuff? You might argue a keyword-based database or some kind of thing (parsing the internals of a document for relevant keywords). However I fear most users won't be able to find back their stuff at that point: did you ever notice how miserable people are at the usage of internet search engines? They are not even able to rephrase their queries with synonyms and/or more details.
I'd prefer to stay with the tree-structured system: it's way easier to say "Documenst -> Marketing -> Presentations -> BigAssClient -> VeryImportantProject" instead of searching for those keywords and hoping that the indexer was smart enough to "get it". Because don't expect the users to keep their keywords up to date.

Pretty DOJ cannon fodder =)

[miffo.swe]

I cant think that its legal to do almost what kodak was sued for long ago.To force someone to buy a product if they buy or use the other is not legal. Especially since they are a convicted monopoly. If the trial continues this should most defenitly be in the evicence list! http://supct.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/90-1029.ZS . tml

Walmart woes

[gad_zuki!]

"I know a genuine Panaphonics when I see it. And look, there's Magnetbox, and Sorny!"

Anyone consider the fallout from this when a few hundred Walmart shoppers rant about how Linux is a cheap rip-off of Windows? Lindows may end up being a huge propaganda loss for Linux.

Re:Walmart woes

[Doomdark]

Then again, if they thought it's "Windows", they probably can't see connection between "Lindows" to "Linux" either? And if they could, they wouldn't have mistakenly bought it as Windows in the first place.

Then why?

[mshiltonj]

If Lindows is not windows compatible, then what are users paying for? Why not just put Mandrake (or other desktop-friendly distrib)?

Lindows (tm)
"Our name sounds like Windows and starts with an 'L'. We are clever."

Re:Then why?

[Anonymous Coward]

Because even though you are smart enough to install and use Mandrake.... most people aren't. Lindows == a Linux OS for dummies. They are paying for convenience and ease-of-use. Most people in this world really are that dumb and they need their hand held every step of the way.

Re:Then why?

[DaneelGiskard]

Because it's a nice way to sell computers without having to raise the price for the OS and without being accused by Microsoft to provoke people to install pirated copies on their machines. Even if they will do so anyways once they find out that Lindows does not run their favourite Windows program...

Re:Then why?

[Darth RadaR]

DaneelGiskard writes: Even if they will do so anyways once they find out that Lindows does not run their favourite Windows program...

A strange twist of fate might be if the hardware on the Wal-Mart computers do not have drivers for WinXX, only Lindows.

Re:Then why?

[garcia]

obviously the fact that "Mandrake" does not sound like Windows.

Remember, this OS is targeted at people who are normally running Windows. They are not the most saavy bunch. Lindows sounds safer to them than Mandrake.

Re:Then why?

[Anonymous Coward]

"Lindows" sounds like "sorny" or "magnetbox" to me.

Re:Then why?

[Anonymous Coward]

"Remember, this OS is targeted at people who are normally running Windows. They are not the most saavy bunch. Lindows sounds safer to them than Mandrake."

you elitist ass, 99% of slashdot's probably posting and reading from IE on windows right now.

Re:Then why?

[Anonymous Coward]

I suppose it could be worse.

They could be offering Lindows preinstalled on a Packaged Hell. With speakers by Magnetbox.

Why would they bother?

[MemeRot]

When Wal-Mart also sells OS-less PCs right next to the Lindows PCs? If you want to install an illegal copy of Windows you can just buy a box with nothing on it.

Re:90 percent also believe...

[mkoenecke]

I'm sorry to reply to this at all, but one statement really leaves me hanging:

"...the greatest aphrodisiac that is on this earth - The Harry Potter Movie..."

Uh... say what? A movie without a single attractive female over the age of 12?

Far more correct

[__aahlyu4518]

the ability to run most Microsoft programs

This was very incorrect, as it probably wouldn't have been able to run most Microsoft programs (SQL server for starters).
More accurate would've been that Lindows is able to run a number of programs that were designed to run on the Microsoft Windows platform.

But I think (as someone else said) that the current text is far better and more accurate and not mentioning windows-programs is probably better.

Well I can see just one problem

[2000 Britneys]

If an average Joe blow of the street come to Wal-Mart and buy the Lindows box he will be expecting to run any of the shelf programs available at your local Best Buy or Future Shop. That is just not going to happen. So now we will have one very angry and disappointed user to deal with. Talking about bad first impression for LINUX.

But then again I might be wrong and most people will be happy with their purchase.

have you actually used it?

[PcSarinIV]

As I read the comments here on slashdot, I am forced to ask a few questions. First off, how many of you claiming that it doesn't run windows apps very well have actually tried to use lindows? I know a few people that have ponied up the USD99 to be lindows insiders, and while they have had widely varying experiences, it seems to run MS Office 2000 Pro just fine, as well as Lotus notes. While this may not seem like much, think about it this way--the target user for Lindows is the average non-gamer. This means those people at Walmart that want to be able to run email progs, write a few letters and possibly even do a few simple presentations. Gamers simply don't go to Walmart most of the time, and therefore will only purchase Lindows once its proven to play Quake 3 (or 4 or 5, whichever version happens to be around when compatibility for games finally takes off), or UT2003. Myself, if Lindows will run Adobe Photoshop, Illustrator, and Macromedia Dreamweaver and Fireworks, I will ditch windows like a bad case of the runs. My Point? If you haven't tried the preview release, don't be quite so quick to say it stinks. I know I'll probably get flamed for this post, but think about what you're saying before you claim it sucks. Do you really have any evidence? If not, then wait until you do before bashing it. You might eat those words later.

Re:have you actually used it?

[Anonymous Coward]

While this may not seem like much, think about it this way--the target user for Lindows is the average non-gamer.

Judging by the software WalMart carries, their customers are very much into games. The ones who buy the $300 no-name Lindows boxes will not be thrilled to discover that the games they bought at WalMart don't work at all. Even if they were smart enough to realize they weren't getting a high-end AlienWare system for that price.

Tssss

[jawtheshark]

Yes, "they" did... But you forget one little thing: back then "they" was not the same as nowadays. Back then Win 3.11 was bought by business for business use and here and there it found it's way to a PC at home (I had Windows 2.0 at one point at home...stayed there for about 3 hours *grin*) Most of the time "they" in the days of Win3.11 were people that had at least some knowlegde of DOS, they knew what filesystems were and how to find files on a disk (cd, dir, start the application then open the file, that kind of stuff).

Things have dramatically changed: now the normal user wants to point and click and know nothing about filesystems, heck even the line between applications (code) and files (data) is blurred for the commoner nowadays. Also applications have changed: back then it was spreadsheets (Lotus 1-2-3) and word processors (Word Perfect, WordStar), now it is "the internet" (a.k.a. Outlook and Internet Explorer). The customer base is just completely different: actually it is less informed than it was back in the 3.11 days.

Click 'N Run Warehouse -- $99/year for GPL apps

[jaaron]

If you read the article or check Lindow's site you'll notice the part about they're Click 'N Run warehouse. With a $99/year membership you can get any software out of it you want. When you buy Lindows you get three free downloads to start.

The whole Click 'N Run Warehouse confused me when I first read about it. $99 a year to download essentially GPLed applications? If you check the warehouse, you'll notice most of the applications there are the sort that you'll usually find included in any large distrobution. Everything from gcc to OpenOffice is there. Now why in the world would you pay $99 a year to access applications that are already free? Well, that was my question, so I emailed Lindows and they responded promptly saying that: (1) Lindows is a debian based distro, so you can download .debs and install them yourself, (2) you can of course get the tools to make the software yourself from source, or (3) you can get it from the warehouse. Now why would you want to do that? Because it's "one click and you're up and running." No worry about configuration or install scripts. Considering this, I think Lindows is justified in charging for the software since they really are adding something of value (convenience) to the end user. Linux geeks can still install the software the old fashoned way too.

Re:Click 'N Run Warehouse -- $99/year for GPL apps

[L1nUx h4x0r]

You remember that there's one born every minute, don't you? There's nothing that legally stops me from charging any amount of money I want to 'allow' you to download the Linux kernel source, for example. You could laugh and tell me I'm a dumbass, but I could still do it.

It's all about selling the product. Just because you leave off the, "Now, you could get all of these aps for free using a different application that you can also download for free" just makes it so the average user thinks it's even more wonderful.

Did you know that every newspaper in Iraq has a picture of Saddam on the front page without a caption, each day?

Re:Click 'N Run Warehouse -- $99/year for GPL apps

[HiThere]

That's an interesting business model. I bet they let WalMart have the install for free, or possibly at cost (if manuals are included -- beyond the advertisements). Then they offer to sell all this software to people at really cheap prices. Yeah, it's free software, but:
1) These people don't know how else to get it
2) They make it really easy
3) They give away free samples

So people actually end up paying them $99 over cost for each machine sold. Whee!

And people said there was no way to make money off of GPL software!
:-)

Re:Click 'N Run Warehouse -- $99/year for GPL apps

[ozric2k1]

The problem is that you had to email lindoze in order to get clarifiaction that should have been available from the website. Will Ma -n- Pa Kettle know that OpenOffice is available from openoffice.org for free, that lindoze is debian based, or even what Debian is? When robertson and co. stop omitting information I will stop calling them hucksters.

Re:Click 'N Run Warehouse -- $99/year for GPL apps

[ndogg]

Yes, and also consider that downloading those applications is using up server time and bandwidth, and the GPL gives a person justification to charge for the trasferrence of GPL'ed apps.

Re:Click 'N Run Warehouse -- $99/year for GPL apps

[Anonymous Coward]

... they responded promptly saying that: (1) Lindows is a debian based distro, so you can download .debs and install them yourself, (2) you can of course get the tools to make the software yourself from source, or (3) you can get it from the warehouse. Now why would you want to do that? Because it's "one click and you're up and running."

Is apt-get really very far from "one click and you're up and running."? I suspect that some bright soul could dumb down aptitude to the point that it would be that simple for someone who was running as root. I understand that lindows has the (one?) user running as root.

What Lindows seems to be doing is levying a fool tax on folks who have more money than sense. That may not seem very nice, but there are a lot of people who would sign up even if they knew the facts. People do pay for convenience, and don't feel cheated at all. Remember, too, there is a huge market for lottery tickets, even though the expected value is negative.

Some people seem to enjoy being fleeced.

``Look, Ma, we'uns is so rich that them city folk are trying to slicker us! That fellow wanted to charge $1000 for that there bridge in New York , but I managed to jaw-bone him down to $50! Reckon we'uns is too smart for them city folk.''

Re:Click 'N Run Warehouse -- $99/year for GPL apps

[cpeterso]

If Click 'N Run Warehouse charges $99/year for GPL'd software, they are evil leeches. If Red Hat charges BIG MONEY for GPL'd software, they are savy business people.

Re:Click 'N Run Warehouse -- $99/year for GPL apps

[Anonymous Coward]

no shit, thank you mr. obvious

Re:Click 'N Run Warehouse -- $99/year for GPL apps

[Anonymous Coward]

They are not selling the software, they are selling the click and run service. The software is free, but the "click and run" server, bandwidth, code, and brain cycles behind the idea are not free. I think it's an interesting idea, sort of a cool idea for a package management extension. I wonder how it really works.. hmm, need to find a good review on Lindows or one of these lindows-powered walmart computers.

Re:Click 'N Run Warehouse -- $99/year for GPL apps

[Anonymous Coward]

If the other Linux distributors include these applications on their CDs, while the Lindows people charge their users $99 to download them (over a slow modem line at that -- people who buy these boxes won't have DSL/cable modem service), I'd say that Click 'N Run Warehouse is an example of value SUBTRACTED.

Even if there's nothing in the GPL prohibiting it.

Ridiculous

[groove75]

The basic move to sell pre-loaded Lindows machines was a faulty business decision in the first place. Linux is simply not ready as a desktop solution for the "average joe". You're inserting an OS with meager support services into a market dominated by 90% MS software sales. We all know that Windows emulation is not evolved enough to provide the smooth operability which an average computer user will require. This will cause a whiplash effect on Walmart. They probably have already begun to experience the incipient repercussive effects manifested through numerous complaints and support calls which probably prompted the modification of their sales pitch. As excited as every linux supporter is to see the OS start to dissiminate into the desktop market, it's simply not ready. The worst thing that can happen is to spread an immature "desktop" OS and destroy consumer confidence. Yes, we need consumer confidence (that's Mister Average Joe's confidence) in order to boost desktop sales. Otherwise, the 90% dominated MS software market will continue. Ok, I've gotten off on a rant, so I'll stop now:) Feel free to flame.

Re:Ridiculous

[groove75]

In fact, I think the only saving grace for this entire thing is the fact that the OS is being touted as "Lindows". Maybe the majority of joe's won't even know it's Linux...

Re:Ridiculous

[Anonymous Coward]

Please compare and contrast the worthiness of Windows 95 to Lindows. How would you feel if Walmart was releasing these PCs with Windows 95? 98? instead of the latest XP version?

Surely one could argue that Windows 95, 98, hell NT 4 might not begin to offer the 'windows emulation' for all the great new programs taylored for XP. You'll never get there if you need perfection - good enough, is, in fact, good enough.

Re:Ridiculous

[groove75]

My original statement did not include a "better alternative" solution, simply the caveats inherent in Walmart's "Lindows" decision from a business perspective. However, attempting to compare a 7 year old operating system to one significantly newer is not really a fair comparison, don't you think?;)

Re:Ridiculous

[Anonymous Coward]

If it meant they couldn't view certain websites (and a fair number of websites these days just assume you're running a windoze machine with IE, and maybe Netscape), and if I was the person Auntie Em was calling to "fix" the problem, and all I had on hand was a copy of Windows98 or Me, yes, I'd wipe linux off the box and slap it on. I'm not about to turn my aunt into a unix sysadmin, and I doubt she would enjoy the experience even if I wanted to.

I'd prefer to install Win2k or XP, as the liklihood of her calling me back would drop to close to zero, and she'd be able to use the machine to visit just about any site she would think of. And whether you want to hear it or not, for home use (not corporate server) Win2k/XP is STABLE ENOUGH.

Only if I didn't have anything else would I inflict linux on my poor aunt, and even then I'd have to provide training and checklists for her to operate the computer.

Licensing

[Moderation abuser]

Check the license requirements on your Windows software. You may well find that you are *not licensed* to use it on anything but a Microsoft Windows operating system.

Re:Licensing

[caveat]

i sort of doubt that, only for the reason that nobody's ever Seriously Tried to pull this kind of stunt before (WINE et al. are not Seriously Trying; they don't come preinstalled at wal-mart).
if lindows takes off, i wouldn't be surprised if M$ rewrote their EULAs to specifically ban use on a non-M$ OS, though. bastards.

Re:Licensing

[jcast]

Check the license requirements on you Windows software, and you'll one of an elite group of .000000000001% of Windows users...

Re:Licensing

[gorf]

License? What license? I don't recall ever signing an license...

Re:Licensing

[markmoss]

So then it's back to the anti-trust lawsuits again, eh?

Actually, I do expect something like this. MS has been so obviously oblivious of what the case(s) have been all about that I expect they will continue piling on new violations until there no longer is a federal judge that isn't "prejudiced" against MS. Unless they get hit with a really heavy penalty that sticks, first...

Re:Licensing

[alienw]

That's bogus, if anything. I know, these clauses exist, but they would certainly not be held up in court. This looks a lot like product tying, and given the fact that you paid for the software, MS would be in a pretty hard position to defend them. IANAL, so check with one before assuming that's true, though.

Ah get stuff off the inner net, but it don' work!

[aquarian]

Uhm takin' this thang back ta Wal-Mart. Sheeit!

Lindows: Going Nowhere Fast

[asv108]

When Lindows was first announced, I thought it could be promising, but they took everything that is great about Linux and through it down the drain. Robertson is basically taking the MS approach towards software but doing under the reputation of Linux. One of the many reasons why people are moving to Linux is that their afraid of M$'s push towards a subscription model. Lindows should be capitalizing on this instead of trying to apply it to Linux. Lindows has some good ideas but the website is full of bullshit marketing claims that make Oracle ad's look trustworthy.

Probably the worse course of action Lindows has taken so far is ignoring the development community that has made Robertson's 1/2baked idea possible. I especially love the idea of repackaging OSS programs and charging for them. Great model guys, let me know when you will be auctioning off your equipment and office furniture.

Re:Lindows: Going Nowhere Fast

[SurfsUp]

When Lindows was first announced, I thought it could be promising, but they took everything that is great about Linux and through it down the drain ... I especially love the idea of repackaging OSS programs and charging for them.

You're smoking something. The GPL has nothing to say about whether you sell GPL-licensed code for money or not, only that you must make the sources available on request for no more than it costs you to provide them.

Lindows is selling dumbed-down convenience in a nice, glossy package, that's their value-add, and I say more power to them. Especially if this lets me migrate the non-geek and MS-addicted members of my family to Linux.

Box has zero chance

[Anonymous Coward]

This box from WalMart has precisely zero chance of making it in the mainstream. Why? It won't run the programs people in the intended customer set want to run, which includes bootleg copies of all the CD burning, greeting card making, map making, and other "minor" apps that mainstreamers love.

I work with a lot of mainstreamers to help them learn more about PC's and Windows, and I can tell you getting those apps away from them is like trying to take a tiger cub away from its mother. Until Linux can run a very high percentage of them, and run them exactly as they do under Windows, Linux has no chance at all in the mainstream.

I thought it was deja vu...

[elocutio]

'delivers the stability of UNIX with the ease of Windows and the ability to run most Microsoft programs.'

After reading that phrase, I ran some of the keywords through Google. The results verified that it wasn't deja vu, after all.

It makes me wonder whose attorneys objected most strongly, and I'm laughing like crazy at how ballsy these guys are at ripping off (or on?) established intellectual property.

Compatibility list? Anyone used Lindows?

[Anonymous Coward]

I have a few questions...

Has anyone here actually used Lindows at all?
Is there a compatibility list for what Win* programs will work with Lindows?
How hard (or easy) is it to install Win* programs on Lindows?
How hard (or easy) is it to install Linux programs on Lindows - without using the "one-click install" service?

These are things I'd like to know before trying Lindows if I could. I suppose I could just get a Wal-Mart PC and try it and if I found it troublesome at least I'd have some hardware... but it'd be nice to know in advance (the Lindows site seems to be a bit less than helpful with these questions, or did I miss something?)

Yes, I am a Windows user, but I'm not really happy about it. I'm also not at ease with a sudden jump, though, so just fdwisk and reformat isn't a real option.

This looks like, if a few of the desired Win* programs work, like a nice way to transition away from Windows to Linux. I could still run the few Windows progams I'm a bit fond of, and be able to look for Linux replacements.. but not have to do it all at once in one big mess. Instead I could do it peacemeal and only replace one program at a time, and slowly get familiar with things.

And then after that, I might consider a total Windowsectomy.

Re:Compatibility list? Anyone used Lindows?

[Anonymous Coward]

Yes. I'm using Lindows SPX (Sneak Preview X) now.

No. There is no compatibility list for Windows programs yet.

It is very hard to get Windows programs to install and run properly. You just double-click the .exe file and use WINE to install it. But, usually the installer craps out or if the program is installed you can't run it (due to missing DLL's, etc..).

The Click-N-Run service is VERY easy to use. It works just like they describe it. But, you are limited to the choices they offer you. If you want to install your own .deb or .rpm files you have to do a bit of work.

If you are looking for an "instant" replacement for your Windows machine -- save your money and wait until they iron out all the bugs. They have a long way to go before Windows software will work properly. Their decision to cut ties with CodeWeavers was their biggest mistake. Without CodeWeavers their chances of getting Windows software to run properly are slim to none.

LindowsOS is in the "pre-beta" stages of development at this point. It has lots of bugs and problems. If you like hacking and you have a spare junk box that you want to play around with -- what the hell? Fork out the $99. It will give you something to do and you might actually help the cause.

people that buy PCs from walmart

[cascadingstylesheet]

Do people that buy PCs from walmart frequent this site?

If I need/want a PC. I'll buy it from anywhere that gives me what I want for the lowest price. If you want to pay more, have a blast :)

Course I buy dented cans of coffee too, so obviously I'm not worried about image when I shop ...

why?

[MemeRot]

You know the technology well now, so you think it is the 'natural' way for things to work. It's not. If I want my MP3's in my 'Shared' folder, but also want them in my 'Music' folder - what do I do? Do I make duplicate copies of several gigs of files? That's stupid. What I want is for single copies of the files to be available from both locations. There's nothing wrong with 'folders' as an organizational metaphor, but as a rigid file system it blows goats.

With your "Documents -> Marketing -> Presentations -> BigAssClient -> VeryImportantProject" example, maybe I want the file to be accessible under my 'Resume Projects' folder, my 'Power Point Presentations' folder, my 'Recent' folder, etc. but have only one actual version of the file, so that I open it from one location, save changes, and the next time I open it from another location it has those changes since it's not a physically separate file. See some uses for that?

walmart.com, not Walmart down the street?

[Anonymous Coward]

AFAIK, it's just walmart.com selling these computers.

I checked my local (Bryan/College Station, Texas) Walmart, Super-Walmart, and Sam's Club for Microtel computers.

They all just carried HP computers. They had no clue about the Microtels.

Re:walmart.com, not Walmart down the street?

[Anonymous Coward]

I think that the machines are drop-shipped from Microtel directly and Walmart just collects a percentage of the profit. I looked for them in my local Walmart (Rockland, ME) too and found nothing.

ln -s

[jawtheshark]

Ehm? Did you ever heard of symbolic links? So you want to be able to access the MP3 folder in your Shared folder. Make a symbolic link. Oh, sorry, I forgot: windows cannot do that. I'm sorry. My Mac, OpenBSD and Linux systems don't have too much problems with it.

Your second example works too with symbolic links. However most people have a "way" of organizing stuff. They tend not to think in different organizational structures every time they access a computer. It's akin to people sorting they socks by colour. It's weird, but most people I know (not geeks) do have quite a good concept of what is in their "My Documents" (but not beyond...). They eiter have all files cluttered in one directory with huge filenames describing the content or they have folders classifying about anything. Most people classify...

darwin and OSX

[caveat]

*sigh*
dude...if you're running OSX on your PMac, you're running darwin...so you can run 14 OSes.
although i suppose you could run darwin w/o the OSX wrapper...but why?

lindows bad, linux good

[Datasage]

I think that walmart adding lindows to the computers they sell is one of the worst things that could happen to linux. Here's why:

1.The average person that would by a buy a walmart computer is not going to be very computer savvy. They probably wont know the difference between windows and linux. What happens when that person buys windows software and assumes that it will run on his or her new computer?

2.Tech support. Most computer repair techs are familiar with windows, but not that many would be comfortable working with linux if at all. If they buyer needs help with running widows, they cant just call thier local computer guy.

There is one good thing with this, we finnaly have a version of windows thats easy for anyone with some computer knowlege to install and use. i know mandrake and red hat are supposed to be easy also, they still require a bit of technical knowlege.

my $0.02

Re:lindows bad, linux good

[DarkProphet]

I don't think that walmart adding lindows to computers they sell is bad.

1.The average person that would by a buy a walmart computer is not going to be very computer savvy. They probably wont know the difference between windows and linux. What happens when that person buys windows software and assumes that it will run on his or her new computer?

True enough, but that also can be said of the next version of Windows(C)(R)(TM). I've got certified built for Win98 software that doesn't work for shit in XP, compatibility mode or no.

I think the fact that a company like Walmart is considering doing this at all is great for open-source in general, at least in the long-term. Yes, there will be some people who can't handle a change from Windows. Microsoft knows this all too well, and thats why Windows has had the same basic GUI since Win95. Whats more, this is the real first step to unveiling Linux to the masses, make no mistake about it. Sure, it won't be all roses, but it wasn't for Microsoft either, and look where they are these days - antitrust suits aside, I mean.

Softens?

[Anonymous Coward]

"The ability to run most Windows programs" suggests to the consumer -- but will it really run the programs that I want to run? What if they're not among the "most"?

Leaving it out allows the buyer to assume that it will work fine for them, and not bring up the ugly questions.

definition of an emulator?

[caveat]

err...correct me if i'm wrong, but doesn't an emulator emulate (my english teacher would KILL me for that) one particular bit of hardware (in this context, at least) on a different bit of hardware by converting one set of machine-language instructions to a different machine language on the fly, ala VirtualPC (x86 on PPC)?
WINE seems to me to be more a sort of runtime or somesuch - it doesn't actually emulate an x86 processor or anything, it just gives Win apps the right APIs and time on the processor.
like i said though, i could be totally wrong. but how i love semantic hairsplitting.

Re:definition of an emulator?

[dinivin]

emulate
3. Computer Science. To imitate the function of (another system), as by modifications to hardware or software that allow the imitating system to accept the same data, execute the same programs, and achieve the same results as the imitated system.

how i love semantic hairsplitting.

Me too! :-) Emulation doesn't necessarily involve imitating hardware :-)

Dinivin

Re:definition of an emulator?

[LiENUS]

is windows itself then not an emulator (the 9x series at least) after all it runs on top of a 16 bit os but lets you run 32 bit applications through software trickery.

Re:definition of an emulator?

[Stonehand]

That's my understanding as well -- basically, that it's a wrapper which understands enough about MS Windows executables, .dlls, and the MS Windows environment sufficiently to map API calls. It can use the actual MS Windows libraries if you have an installation, or some replacements written for Wine, but it doesn't provide a virtual x86.

i use windows exclusively

[Anonymous Coward]

so fuck off

i don't give 2 shits what your mac can do, and neither does the rest of the world

Broaden your world dumbass.

[Anonymous Coward]

Your loss....

What the heck are you doing on slashdot, then?

-- jawtheshark, posting anyonymously because I already lost enough Karma yesterday...

Where is the free version of the LindowsOS Distro?

[Picass0]

I cannot find a way to download the OS from the site without signing up for the $99 membership.

They are selling GPL software, are they not compelled to have a free download available?

Aw, come on!

[Anonymous Coward]

Not even a +1, funny?!!!
Throw me a bone here! (errr, maybe that's not the best phrase to use here on /.)

MODDED OFFTOPIC ???

[Anonymous Coward]

Yes, pointing out a broken URL in a post is Off topic and "Are you a virgin ?" is not a personal question.

Dumb Editors and Dumber Moderators.

It's not a big deal

[jester-tx]

It seems to me that the removal of that statement is simply a CYA thing. It's pretty clear (to my feeble mind, at least) that they are running some version of Wine/Crossover and therefore alot of MS programs *will* run - those that won't may run later as updates are written and distributed.
The big thing here is Wal Mart facing off against Microsoft. Sam Walton is a very powerful man, he obviously isn't standing for Microsoft's bullying tactics - and is willing to take some major risks to prove it. How major these risks are is not a question I can answer. Wal Marts huge success as a company is not some stroke of cosmic luck; I feel like they must know what they are doing. When Joe Bob sees that he can have a PC for 299$, he may actually go and get one for the first time. We may be seeing the beginnings of the revolution that we have all wondered when, how and if it ever would or *could* happen. Let's cross our fingers.

Re:It's not a big deal

[Deziex]

Sam Walton died in Little Rock, AK, on 5 April 1992... his survivors, however, are still in charge of the chain.
The Wal-Mart Timeline can be found here.

Re:It's not a big deal

[jester-tx]

Doh.

news for nerds

[Anonymous Coward]

there are lots of topics of interest here. i am a programmer. however, linux is not of any interest whatsoever to me, never has been, never will be. windows is the real world.

Re:news for nerds

[Anonymous Coward]

>windows is the real world.

It's scary enough MS wants Windows in cars.. now the WORLD??

Re:news for nerds

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm a programmer myself and I have to deal with Windows every day. Every day I see a reason not to use Windows. Defend it I dare you.
jawtheshark -- Even if I got my 50 Karma back today, it it no reason to lose it again.

Re:Where is the free version of the LindowsOS Dist

[Anonymous Coward]

No, they are simply obligated to make the source code available to whomever they distribute the binaries to.

Read the damn GPL before opening your ignorant hole.

True Windows compatibility...

[Anonymous Coward]

will not be available until the "Lindows.NET" release, currently in "vaporware" stage. Following Microsoft's lead of pre-announcing a release date, Lindows.NET will be available in 1st Quarter of 2003 (read: 4th Quarter of 2006).

the swine strikes back

[Anonymous Coward]

these morons are all for making a buck.
there is nothing in their efforts that is
directed to quality, coolness, etc.
the masses are in the vice grip ot the
microsoft mantis, except that it is not
praying. It has the law on its side. The
way to bust the bitch is to legally challenge
every fart, in the US that is, and overseas the govs need to just say no based on security,
monoculture, cost, support, foreign dependence, freedom of information, longevity of data, protectionist import tariffs, standards, open source, transperancy, and just the simple fact that there is no need in the 21st century to pay
microsoft tax anymore, there is a way out.

Re:Where is the free version of the LindowsOS Dist

[Software]

... are they not compelled to have a free download available?

No, that's not what the GPL says. The GPL imposes no requirement, in general, that you make the source code available for public download. If you distribute binary-only copies, then you have to provide a written offer to make the source code available to purchasers.

If Lindows ships with the source included (or if they provide some other means to get it for the cost of distribution), then they have no obligation to make it available for free download. They can charge $1M for downloads if they like. Of course, people who bought Lindows can make it available for download, at whatever cost they like.

That being said, I have no idea whether Lindows includes the source or not.

the bad guys used Microsoft software

[Anonymous Coward]

to communicate, plot, plan, conspire, etc.
How come Microsoft is not legally liable for
the ensuing fallout? After all, Microsoft programs were used according to the EULA.

Exciting new Operating System (OS) named Lindows

[Sloppy]

I'm sure glad they cleared up that ambiguous full term by parenthetically including the unambiguous abbreviation.

All the stability of Linux...

[sterno]

From the article:
After that the users are encouraged to sign up to access the thousands of applications available in the warehouse for $99

Yup, all the stability of Linux with all the sense you are getting screwed we've come to appreciate from Windows. Excuse me, but paying $99 to have access to free software is just a little ridiculous. Basically seems like they are taking advantage of people who don't know any better. Nice business model, eh?

Re:All the stability of Linux...

[3am]

Oh come on... The servers, bandwidth, storage, maintainence, and support cost a lot of money as you must know. It's one thing to host a archive that has sporadic users, no guarantee of uptime, and multiple well known mirrors. It's something else to run a business site that has to be up.

Anyway, I'm sure they make money off of that price, but nobody's stopping you from getting 99 of your closest acquaintences together, putting in $1 each, downloading the programs once, and burning a CD to pass around. The programs are GPLed after all.

Re:All the stability of Linux...

[Anonymous Coward]

Lots of people pay $80 for distributions like Red Hat or SuSE. But with those, you get binaries and sources for a lot of Open Source applications up front, on a convenient CD. The only time you need to download is if you want something newer.

It sounds like with Lindows, you pay $99 for the wonderful "convenience" of pulling the programs over a modem.

If WalMart wants to sell Linux machines, instead of imitation Windows machines, perhaps they could go with one of the major Linux distributions, and a somewhat better-known hardware vendor.

Re:Where is the free version of the LindowsOS Dist

[Stonehand]

Absolutely not. An imprecise summary of the GPL rules --

1. Don't take credit for what you didn't do.
2. If you provide somebody a binary, you have to provide the source to them as well (if they ask) for a nominal fee (at most).
3. If you received software under the GPL, and you redistribute it, you must provide them the same rights and obligations you received.

Re:Where is the free version of the LindowsOS Dist

[Thomas M Hughes]

Common misconception if I am not mistaken. You are allowed to sell GPL software all you want. However, you cannot stop people from redistributing it. So, if your friend buys Lindows, you can install it on as many computers as you want, legally under the GPL. Also, they are required to provide access to the GPL'd source.

Lindows may also employ proprietary parts that are not directly linked in with the GPL parts of the code, and Lindows is not required to release that freely or with source at all, assuming it isn't GPL'd.

Then again, I'm not a GPL expert.

Regarding "Lindow$" and Window$

[talks_to_birds]

At the Lindow$ help pages:

• "...Our goal is to eventually run some of the more popular Windows® software. That's an ambitious objective that will take time to achieve. At this time, Microsoft® Office 2000 has undergone the most testing and is the most compatible.."

This was last updated Date Updated 06/08/2002 01:32 PM so I'd call that pretty current information.

Note that this does not claim that Office will work -- it says "most compatible".

It's been pretty clear all along that this "Lindow$" deal has been a scam, from day one.

They want you to sign up and pay for support; they want you to pay to download software you could get elsewhere for nothing; they want you to pay...

And check this out:

• "...For $99 users will obtain LindowsOS along with the promise that Lindows.com will work hard to give consumers real value..."

Whoa!

Getting something for your money!

Well, at least they got Micro$oft beat there...

t_t_b

Why doesn't Lindows just say...

[Codifex Maximus]

will run Certain Certified Microsoft Programs.

I agree that running as root is a Bad Thing(tm). However, the vast majority of people are still running Win9x so it's not a tremendous stretch.

I agree that Lindow's policies can alienate some users. However, the target market is composed of people who largely would not have ever tried Linux anyway. (Let em get thier feet wet!) So... getting Linux into thier hands will at least expose them to it and maybe garner a few more users for Linux. They will probably graduate from Lindows to a more mainstream Linux distro.

Not exposing these potential users to Linux is a You get Nothing from Nothing proposition. Exposing them to Linux will generate a larger userbase. It's guerilla marketing sort of but... maybe it'll have a long term positive effect. We already know it's gonna have a short term negative effect.

Bottom Line: Many users want to be spoonfed.

You All Miss The Point

[wingspan]

The market is

1) People who don't know enough about computing to know that You Must Use Windows To Compute. Those people don't have Windoze software to load.

2) Those who know something about computing. I bought one Walmart box today. I'm loading Red Hat on one partition, and keeping Lindows for play. If it works, great. If not, I've got a inexpensive and useful computer.

What a silly thought.

[Erris]

How long before "most Microsoft programs" have little bits of code added to shot them working on anything but offical microsoft windows.. that really would be the end of lindows

Try, "Most Linux programs won't run on Windows, Microsoft must be dying." Actually they are, but that's beside the point. Lindows might just be enough for most people. When they get tired of it or it has problems, we can be sure that someone will be good enough to put Debian on it. Oh yeah, that will kill Micrsoft. Oh well.

Troll Alert! - #582901 is a troll imposter

[Anonymous Coward]

The above account is a fraud

The real Seth Finkelstein has slashdot uid #90154

The name is also a subtle misspelling

My name is Seth Finkelstein, the troll is using the name Seth Finklestein

I did not post the above message in this thread. I have enough troubles without troll imposters.

Though this message is posted anonymously, I will attest to it and verify it if needed. Other message posted by similar-looking accounts, or not attested, are frauds. - Seth Finkelstein, uid#90154

Re:Troll Alert! - #582901 is a troll imposter

[Seth Finklestein]

I don't need to deal with this harassment. If Seth Finkelstein (a subtle misspelling of my name, Seth Finklestein) wants to question my identity, he can do so while logged in. Otherwise, Michael Sims posting anonymously, stop bothering me.

Re:Troll Alert! - #582901 is a troll imposter

[Seth Finklestein]

God, you suck, Michael Sims posting anonymously. If you really are Seth Finklestein (instead of an impostor using the last name "Finkelstein") then log your trolling ass in and say so, bitch.

Troll Alert! - #582901 is a troll imposter

[Anonymous Coward]

The above account is a fraud

The real Seth Finkelstein has the slashdot uid #90154

The name is also a subtle misspelling

My name is Seth Finkelstein, the troll is using the name Seth Finklestein

I did not post the above message in this thread. I have enough troubles without troll imposters.

Though this message is posted anonymously, I will attest to it and verify it if needed. Other message posted by similar-looking accounts, or not attested, are frauds. - Seth Finkelstein, uid#90154

kidding

[SeanAhern]

You *are* kidding, right? You must be a troll. Ah well, I'll bite.

There have been two times (count `em), when Apple had to stop supporting old hardware. First, when they went from 68K to PPC. Even with emulation, Apple had to cut the cord some time. Mac OS 8.1 was the last that ran on 68K hardware. And that wasn't too long ago. Then we had the Mac OS 9 version. Apple released Mac OS X, which runs on hardware that's 3 years old. They did the best they could, but you need a bit of power to play the graphics games that OS X does.

Except for Linux, I can't think of many OSes that have as good of sustainability on older hardware than Mac OS.

Re:kidding

[FueledByRamen]

Actually, Mac OS 7.6.1 was the last one to run on 68k hardware. I tried to install OS 8 on a 68040-based machine, and it barfed at me.

Re:kidding

[SeanAhern]

Odd. I had a 68LC040-based laptop (540c) that ran Mac OS 8.1. 8.5 would not work. I wonder if there were differences among the 68K family.

Re:kidding

[Anonymous Coward]

NetBSD by far is the best in this regard.
Minix, Open|Free|MSDOS, most other Free unices do a better job on their respective platforms than MacOS. Of course it's all a matter of functionality. Apple obsoletes hardware to sell new hardware. Can't deny it. "Graphic games" are not necessary to use a computer.

Not like I give a shit that they obsolete hardware.

Re:kidding

[SeanAhern]

Of course Apple obsoletes hardware to sell new stuff. They don't wait until a piece of hardware is no longer functional before they don't sell it any more. Heck, I find it hard to think of a hardware manufacturer (in any industry) that doesn't do that.

I never claimed that you have to play "graphics games" to use a computer. All I was saying was that Apple chose to make their OS require some graphics processing power, either in hardware or with the CPU. That immediately disqualifies certain (somewhat older) hardware. If you're just going for utilitarian, you aren't gonna buy a Windows box or a Mac. You generally run some Free flavor of UNIX and disable X11.

Good point about the free UNIXes. That's pretty much when I meant when I said "Linux". My mistake - thanks for keeping me honest.

Re:kidding

[Anonymous Coward]

Indeed there are differences. Pardon my spew, but I'd like to set the record straight:

With System 7.5 Apple stopped supporting the 68000. This would be the Mac / Plus / SE / Classic.

With Mac OS 8.0 Apple stopped supporting the 68020 and 68030. This would be the Mac II series, the SE/30, the LC/LCII/LCII/LC520/LC550.

With Mac OS 8.5 Apple stopped supporting non-PowerPC machines outright.

With Mac OS X Apple stopped supporting machines based on the 60x (i.e. pre-G3) architecture.

Re:kidding

[Anonymous Coward]

MacOS 8.1 will run on a 68040-based machine. I know. I ran it on one (a Quadra 660av).

MacOS 8.0 and 8.1 require a 68(LC)040 or better; MacOS 8.5 through 9.1 require a PowerPC. MacOS 9.2 and X require a PowerPC G3 or better.

Re:Where is the free version of the LindowsOS Dist

[Anonymous Coward]

Go to your favorite P2P app and search for:

"osinstaller.iso"

You might just find something.

:)

shortcuts?

[GoldMace]

Ever heard of shortcuts? Although they are not quite the same as symbolic links, they are in some ways. Why can't you just put the mp3s in your shared folder and put shortcuts to them in your MP3 folder. WinAmp at least recognizes them as if they were mp3s, don't know about other MP3 players. I don't share, so forgive me if this doesn't work.

Re:shortcuts?

[MemeRot]

Yes, shortcuts, and symbolic links, are ways of SIMULATING what i'm talking about within the constraints of a traditional file system. I really bumped into the file system problem because I do a lot of music production and have a huge (4 - 5 gig) loop library of license-free, legitimate samples I wanted to be able to share. The sequencing program I use is file system sensitive, it expects to find the file (and not a shortcut) in the same place it was last time. It can find it if it's not, but it's a pain. So I didn't want to move my library. At the same time, I didn't want to allow general access to that particular folder to the outside world, it has a lot of stuff I didn't want to share. I usually just copy any file I want to share and stick it in a special 'Shared' folder that actually is a share and that I point all file sharing programs towards, but that seemed ridiculous for 4 to 5 gigs and would have taken most of my empty space on the drive. And again the actual files would need to be there.

Anyway, then all the file sharing programs I actually liked (sorry open source zealots, but Gnutella just does NOT scale) started folding so I just gave up on the proposition. But it would have been really convenient in this case to allow the same file to really seem to be accessible in two locations.

Re:shortcuts?

[jawtheshark]

So fold your stuff up in as database (Postgress, MySQL) and provide it to the world with a PHP website and stop complaining. Specialized problems need specialized solutions. It's that easy. You are a exception in comparision with Joe User.

has anyone here acutally picked one up?

[ed1park]

I just ordered 2 of the $299 Lindows systems for work. Should be here within 2 weeks. Anyone else already have em?

"The rest of us" ain't that rich

[po8]

When Apple's $300 OSX box comes out, I'll be first in line to buy one. Until then, I'm afraid JQP is stuck with commodity HW and free SW. Guess he'll survive somehow.

Where's that damn copyeditor?

[Jason0x21]

It's not "exciting new Linux based operating system"! It should have been "exciting GNU/Linux beased operating system!"

Re:Where's that damn copyeditor?

[Jason0x21]

Or, more correctly: "exciting GNU/Linux based operating system".

It looks like I could use a copyeditor, too!

Re:Where's that damn copyeditor?

[Anonymous Coward]

"exciting MULTICS/UNIX/GNU/Linux based operating system".

Re:Where's that damn copyeditor?

[Anonymous Coward]

I wish Richard Stallman would just give it a rest. Jeezus... it's just plain-old, fucking "LINUX"! Now go take a shower you smelly hippy.

I'm just waiting for...

[bmalia]

Macindowsnix to come out!

Re:Nerd Never Gets the Girl :(

[Anonymous Coward]

www.seduction.com

Buy the course. Follow it. It works. No more complaining about women. Trust me on this, I'm trying to help.

8 Cents/Program!

[dprior]

Lindows' PR rep Cheryl Schwarzman says that Walmart.com PC buyers are entitled to download three (GPLed, mind you) applications for free from the Click-N-Run Warehouse. "After that the users are encouraged to sign up to access the thousands of applications available in the warehouse for $99." Schwarzman adds that with more than 1,300 applications in the warehouse, that comes to less than 8 cents per application.

Next, you will have AOL marketing their internet service as only .00000000000000001 x 10 ^20th cents per web page.

Re:8 Cents/Program!

[Entropix]

Certainly you mean .00000000000000001 x 10^(-20), since .00000000000000001 x 10^(20) would mean that AOL is charging 1000 cents, or $10 a webpage, which is quite a scary thought (although, given the status of AOL, likely to happen -- maybe MSN will do it if all that monopoly stuff doesn't quite go their way).

That;'s not the point

[intermodal]

The point is that a major company is vending computers (aside from those in China with Red Flag) with a Linux variant preinstalled for the masses. Even if people say, 'screw this lindows shit" and install Windows, the name is getting out there. Five years ago I didn't know a thing about AMD, but now I run a Duron in my main box. You don't start at the top.

Saw It Coming...

[RAMMS EIN]

I saw that coming...compatibility with Windows apps (especially the big ones like MS Office) is nearly impossible to maintain -- M$ always uses undocumented extensions, both allowing it access to functionality that their competitors on Windows must do without, and preventing their programs from running on anything but the Real Windows (tm). I don't think any company would risk being sued to death because they claimed compatibility and M$ broke it...

Huh?

[mlarios]

Windows doesn't even run Microsoft products.

Interesting moderation

[MemeRot]

"Where is the free version of the LindowsOS Distro? (Score:3, Troll)"

I think this is the first time I have ever seen Score:3, Troll in my life. If this had been a serious attempt at trolling my hat would be off to you.

Re:Interesting moderation

[Anonymous Coward]

"Where is the free version of the LindowsOS Distro? (Score:3, Troll)"

I think this is the first time I have ever seen Score:3, Troll in my life. If this had been a serious attempt at trolling my hat would be off to you.

I've seen Score:4, Troll a few times, as well as Score: 4, Flamebait. It tends to happen most on highly-controversial posts. It's actually kind of fun to imagine the moderators battling each other over whether it's Insightful or Flamebait.

number 3.

[MemeRot]

Your third point addresses the issue. No, lindows does not have to give you the binaries for free, but I believe that anyone who has the binaries CAN redistribute them for free, provided they also make source code and GPL license terms available.

One mouse button

[Anonymous Coward]

Even if OSX was free....
you still only get one mouse button.
You loose. Thanks for playing
That's a good enough reason for me not to use a mac right there. Oh, and don't even bother saying that I could change the mouse. I could figure out some way to replace it with a modified etch-a-sketch if I really wanted to but that doesn't mean the OS would work well with it.
Apple has had a lot of good ideas, but they refuse to admit when they are wrong.
If Apple does something right, MS copies it.
If MS does something right, Apple won't admit it.

DON'T START WITH THE '$' $HIT !!!

[MemeRot]

I'm $o fucking $ick of people writing Micro$oft and Window$. If you ba$tard$ $tart writing lindow$ too I think I'll be $ick.

GENIUS!!!!!

[Anonymous Coward]

Who modded this down, this rocks!

spirit of the license != letter of the license

[Jammer@CMH]

I haven't read the end-user agreement. However, they're free to ask that I not give copies away. They are not free to require that I not give copies away.

I can redistribute GPL'd software, still under the GPL, with a note attached (and credited to me, not the original authors), asking the recipient to please plant tulips. I cannot require them to do so. As long as the language is obviously a request, and is not confused with a term of the license, I am in compliance with the GPL. If my tulip request starts to look like a licensing term, then I may run afoul of the GPL in a hurry.

It's an odd strategy, but it may be legal.

BTW, I am not a lawyer, and have not consulted with one. Etc.

Re:Where is the free version of the LindowsOS Dist

[Anonymous Coward]

= no result on ka---
= no result on Wi---
= no result on gn------

will someone pleeeeeese allow me the data?
pretty please.

Re:Where is the free version of the LindowsOS Dist

[Anonymous Coward]

Yes! An FTP would be quicker.

it's not a specialized problem...

[MemeRot]

It's a general design decision. Should a file be known to the OS by it's location on a physical disc? Or should it just have some unique identifier which isn't disc-specific?

It seems clear that if you planned it out ahead of time, you wouldn't choose to make the physical location of the file its unique identifier. That approach doesn't offer any advantages I can think of, other than it was easy to build at the time.

What happens to shortcuts when you delete the original file? The shortcut doesn't know about the event and continues to point somewhere useless. Same if you move the file. That doesn't make much sense from a user perspective. From a conceptual perspective, you pointed the shortcut to a FILE, not to a disc address. I don't know what happens to symbolic links, do they handle this case any better?

Re:Where is the free version of the LindowsOS Dist

[Anonymous Coward]

I really want it but need a clue where to find spx.

No, more like five times

[yerricde]

There have been two times (count `em), when Apple had to stop supporting old hardware.

Make that five. 5.something was the last to run on the Fat Mac (512 KB of RAM). 7.5.5 was the last to run on black-and-white 68000 machines, 68020 machines, and 68030 machines without the latest version of soldered-on ROM chips (i.e. "32-bit dirty" ROMs). 7.6.1 was the last to run on 68030 machines. Then you mentioned 8.1 and 9.x (last for 68040 and pre-G3 respectively).

Except for Linux, I can't think of many OSes that have as good of sustainability on older hardware than Mac OS.

What about the BSDs? What about MS-DOS (for classic games)?

Contracts require consideration

[yerricde]

You may well find that you are *not licensed* to use it on anything but a Microsoft Windows operating system.

You assume that Microsoft EULAs are completely enforceable. Don't be so sure of that. To be enforceable, a contract must be legal, and as alienw mentioned, monopolistic product tying isn't. In addition, a contract must require both parties to give something up, such as money or rights. (In legalese, this is called "consideration.") In the United States, a EULA doesn't give the user any rights that 17 USC 117 and other applicable law doesn't already give the user.

Where's the beef? In particular, where's the consideration that would validate an agreement forbidding a user from using a Microsoft Windows application with LindowsOS or any other Wine distribution?

Well not too long ago....

[Anonymous Coward]

You walked in a Walmart and saw a little Mac sitting all by its lonesome. It didn't have many games nor did it microsoft word. It didn't have packardbell explorer desktop installed to bog down the limited system resources. It had a little word processor and a small printer it came with. Most people just want to type papers and browse the net. Give them that and they will be happy. A majority of these people have X-boxes and Playstation's so they arent concernd with runing Doom 8.

Gimp isnt much harder to use than Adobe photoshop.
Abiword works just fine. I was reading that the HP printers work nifty with linux so go for it. I would buy one. The computer that is.

Lindows & GPL

[Alsee]

What ever happened with Lindows and their source code?

I seem to recall discussions that they hadn't released GPL covered sourcecode because they were "still in beta testing". It doesn't matter weather that claim was legitamate or not because now they are clearly distribiting commercial executables. Is the source included or available?

-

Will users stick to linux?

[winME_hacker]

I mean this pc setup is perfect for "cousin billy bob" from the trailor next door to bring his 3|337 copy of WinXP Pro over. I doubt Lindows would convert many to linux, yet if it does do any good, it would probably be by awarding recognition to linux, bringing it into the limelight for what it truly is, a low-cost (or free) powerful quality operating system. For most people, o.s != religion. Most don't care if they use IE or Mozilla, or Linux or Windows so long as they can do basic tasks. While you can do those in both operating systems, you have to practically force it upon people for them to realize.
I'd say that's why M$ has done well. Before switching to linux, it was a vague concept in my mind. I am not really impressed by lindows, but I hope it does well so linux as a whole gets more attention. Truthfully, I don't know if linux is ready for mainstream. I'd like it to be, but I would hate it if everybody struggled(that brings me to another point, mandatory programming lessons! people should have some basic understanding of whats under the hood)

creepy

[Anonymous Coward]

There's something creepy about the head of Lindows (Michael). He looks like an actor who plays the bad guy on a cheap made for TV movie. Can we trust a distro like this?

other options than Mac OS

[Anonymous Coward]

I dont know why you would get an Apple machine and install something else on it .... kinda like getting an SGI and installing something other than IRIX ... or kinda like getting a BMW and putting a Chevy engine in it ... hahah

but, for some god awful reason ... if you did want to ditch Mac OS X ... you could opt for OpenBSD (great mac support) .... Yellow Dog Linux (sucks, but try to think of a linux which does not suck) ... Debian (just plain bloated) ... and last but not least FreeBSD (which Mac OS X is related to, kinda)

How about you do some research before speaking. You people on slash are just ridiculous ... you want a beefed up intel machine (hahah) and you want it for $199 and you want it to work great with some hacked up OS

How about you actually go out and try other machines ... get a Sun machine ... try it ... get a SGI machine ... try it ... get an Apple ... try it ... then, if you go back to windows or linux ... then you will most likely be learned enough to make a good argument as to why you decided that way. Its not unreasonable to try all those platforms ... im a poor ass college student and with a little help from ebay and the university auctions ... i have owned all those machines for about a hundred each

LEARN SOMETHING BEFORE SPEAKING!

The emperor has no clothes

[eco2geek]

Why would anyone pay $99 for a Linux distro (esp. one that's in beta) when for $20 to $50 they could buy RedHat, which is very user-friendly, bundled with a book on how to use it, or just d/l it off the net at no cost? If they bought a PC with Lindows installed, why would they pay $99 to access a library of apps that are free for downloading elsewhere? Can't people figure out that what Lindows is offering, they can get elsewhere for free?

If people want MS Windows compatibility, why wouldn't they take their $99 and spend a bit more to buy Windows?

I just don't get it.

Add to that Michael Robertson's comments about Linux developers eating their young by demanding to see Lindows source code, and the graphics on Lindow's "Click-N-Run Warehouse Showroom" web page with KDE apps with X's through prices - $339 for a word processor? No, it's free! - and my skeptical assessment is that Lindows is using Microsoft marketing tactics, and Lindows probably won't be around for long.

Why I like the Lindows business model

[Anonymous Coward]

I haven't bought Lindows but I intend to once the official release is available. I really like the "click 'n' run" feature.

Why?

I'm sick of trying to get different software to work on linux. I want to pay somebody else to go out their find all the free software and tweak it so that it runs smoothly on my system without me having to compile or download libraries etc. If Lindows can achieve that goal, then they have delivered an exceptional service that deserves my money.

I don't have time or the inclination to be a linux guru. I just want an easy to use alternative to Windows that runs on PCs. The lindows site says that if you have lindows installed, then all the software on their site will work on your system with just one click... Great!

Kinda hard to flatten someone with a PC.

[way2muchsense]

So, pointing out my entire argument in the subject line triggers some lame-assed "lameness filter?" Sometimes what is in the subject line is all that needs to be said, did anybody at /. think about that?

or in a common DLL

[tamboril]

...which would shoot down any non-MS programs, too.

Of course they want to run Windows programs

[bcaulf]

Yeah, yeah, MS are evil. But there is far more packaged software development effort for Windows than any other platform. That's been the case for ten years. This effort has produced the most innovative and diverse set of independently developed packaged software products, not to mention MS's own estimable efforts.

It's a network effect, people! Everyone runs Windows, therefore everyone develops first/only for Windows, therefore everyone wants to run Windows. I would be pissed, too, if I had a Mac that had no ability to efficiently run all that software.

I realize I'm exaggerating a bit here. If you're a geek, then Linux is the place where you find the software you most desire. But for the mainstream that's not at all the case, not even close. It's normal and healthy to want to run all the software at CompUSA!

Trademark Overstepping

[Snover]

An easy way to fix that would be to say "runs programs created for the top-selling desktop system, that starts with an W, ends with an S, and has an INDO and W somewhere in between!"