Slashdot Mirror
Lycoris Desktop/LX update 2 Released
David writes "Redmond Linux Corp has just released Lycoris Desktop/LX Update 2 (build 46 final). Relatively user-friendly, loads of goodies and nice features. Should give Lindows a run for its money. Who says Linux is dead on the desktop? ;-)"
I went with an earlier version of Lycoris as my first distro, and dropped it after about three days. One of my favorite things about other popular distros is the shear amount of apps you have to choose from. The Lycoris install, while allowing you to play Solitare while it chugs away (very cool), leaves you with ONE word processor, ONE web browser, etc. While this may be nice for newer users, it just doesn't quite appeal to me...
Q: Who says Linux is dead on the desktop? ;-)"
A: Everyone who isn't a Linux chauvinist, OR who doesn't believe that before Linux can be dead on the desktop, it has to first be "alive" on the desktop first. I don't think that Linux even registers as being on the desktop in the orthodox sense.
N.B. I believe this even though I am writing this from Linux.
Their network browser looks very very nice. Anyone know if a similar tool exists for gnome?
Spanks.
Unable to read configuration file '/bigassraid/htdig//conf/14229.conf'
Geocrawler error message.
So how come everything they do is worthy of being copied
I don't think the interface to the Windows OS was ever something people complained about (minus that damned Paper Clip..). The more ghastly problems are not in the UI, but the underside that the user doesn't see (VM subsystem, TCP stack, etc), and the coding methodology used to develop it. So not 'everything' is worth being copied...however a GUI that people are familiar with might not need too much improvement, and may make people more willing to try something new, and more comfortable in general.
--Kylus
Idiot-proof something, and Life will build a better Idiot.
Unfortunately to get Linux on the desks of many businesses two things have to happen (actually 2 or 1 thing). First, it must be an identical experience to Windows. I don't understand that as much of Linux is from the user standpoint (ie tech support handles installs etc...)Businesses do not want to interrupt a known good proccess without an obvious ROI. Second, Microsoft itself must provide motivation (they are working on it with their licensing scheme).
Alternatively, if a big group of corps start using it other people will too.
the everyday win/mac users don't really know what options are available. the big things keeping linux off the desktop are:
drivers: people are using new hardware all the time and have a perceived image that linux doesn't have drivers for their hardware (wireless network, usb mouse, video, sound, etc).
installation: the install programs NEED to be able to identify hardware on a users system and configure drivers w/o user intervention. being asked what type of network card i have on my box isn't something i should know much about, let alone what integrated sound chip i have, or what kind of mouse i have. to sum it up, linux will find more spaces on the desktop when the installers and drivers are as upto date as possible.
The overwhelming numbers of BSD users do. As I always say, Linux for serving, OpenBSD for firewalling and Mac OS X for when you got to get things done.
Strange women lying in ponds distributing swords is no basis for a system of government.
What any free os needs to succeed is a really good pinball version and atleast 13 versions of Solitare.
I don't know, but to me it seems that while the current state of the linux desktop leaves a LOT to be desired, it is continuing to make improvements. If groups like Redomnd Linux keep making improvements, the linux desktop will keep getting better and more compelling. I admit I only use the linux desktop to toy around right now, but I can definitely see it being viable in the future. Why does everyone have to say that linux on the desktop is dead? Obviously if you don't like it, you don't have to use it. I'll bet that there are pleanty of people that do use it and welcome any improvements. (Okay, I'm starting to rant)
I wasn't going to join into the 'linux is dead' flame war, but you drew me in. Quite frankly, I think linux as a desktop OS is great. I've pretty much gotten to the point where I can't handle windows for anything more than games (try as I might, I can't get Solder of Fortune 2 running under linux...). I run mandrake 8.1, and everything just works. It never mysteriously shuts down on me like win9x likes to do (although I must admit, win2k has been pretty stable, though I only use it for games). There's more than enough software available for anything I want to do under linux (browsers, irc, office apps, graphics, multimedia). All in all, I think quite the opposite - linux on the desktop is just starting to get good. Now that there are some more user-friendly distros (mandrake, redhat, and apparently lycoris) with easy installation and a pretty gui for the newcomers, now is the time when linux installs on desktops should be on the rise. The more people use it, the more it will improve as a desktop OS, and the more it improves, the more people will use it. Things are just getting interesting...
do not read this line twice.
I'd say that the most intelligent people trying to get away from Windows aren't doing it to get away from the kludge-y look-and-feel. I don't run Windows because I don't agree with their business tactics and their "get it out the door before we're sure it works" development model, not because I abhor the start menu. If emulating the look and feel of Windows over a free and open operating system draws more home users, then more power too them. Linux users have always had a love/hate relationship with it becoming a prominent desktop OS, and that's sad. If the community wants Linux to be a desktop force, then we're going to have to unify on how that is possible. To be possible, yes, we're going to have to swallow a little pride and make it more user friendly.
--- What
I'd rather they be running linux (not as root...) than running XP, where there random clicking won't destroy the system as easily. Considering how much MS invests on making their OS look and feel the way a user wants it to, versus what any linux distro spends (ie. nothing) I'd say that the best way to bring Win users to linux is by copying the look and feel of windows. Buf if your best argument is "it's bad because it looks like XP" then maybe you should be showing those screen caps to your grandma, and see what she prefers: the xp look, or KDE. Average users want pretty and easy. Want to see more people use linux? Make it pretty and easy.
do not read this line twice.
In order to get people to switch from Microsoft products they need to feel familiar and comfortable with the environment. Do you think anyone would willingly switch if they had to look at something they didn't recognize or couldn't easily figure out how to use? If you don't like the way it looks don't use it, but don't know the fact that it might actually get some people to switch.
Are you implying that it can't be dead because it was never alive? If so, consider that for something to be dead, it doesn't have to be alive first. If you kill something, yes it would have to be alive in order to be able to be killed.
Once again ... "recompiling the kernel" seems to be a pretty good excuse.
With most modern distros you never, ever have to recompile the kernel. I've been running Linux for 4 years, and I haven't HAD to recompile a kernel in almost two. Linux on the desktop does not mean Grandma compiling kernels and reading man pages.
Please get your facts straight.
I remember one of the big things they claimed the first time around was that the network config would easily let you share your internet connection through the Lycoris box. But it turned out not to be the case, you had to go manually edit some files. (fortunately they had a pointer to a decent howto, but not the same as click-and-share).
So, does it work "correctly" now?
And my Karma Whoring for the day:
it's probably pronounced "Licorice". Some people like Licorice, other's don't.
"Sometimes a woman is a kind of religion, she can save your soul & set you free from all your sins" - Bad Examples
As I have said before, my wife and I have moved to using SuSE 8.0 exclusively in the house, we have NO windows products. My wife is visually impaired so this is not a move we would make lightly. We use KDE 3.01, Mozilla and KMail amongst others. For us it is great. My wife particularly likes the zooming function with Mozilla.
Linux may not be fully alive on the desktop, to get there it requires people to stop talking about it, drop Windows and get on with it. As far as games go, I have a copy of dungeonkeeper that I would love to get running, I will just have to be patient!
As far as "Windows clone" distros go, we are not interested. This would be a move back to the propriatory software that we are deliberately moving away from.
I can't see this stuff appealing to corporates either. Will linux run my windows apps? The answer should remain "No", far better than "Maybe". In terms of support "Maybe" is a real non-starter.
Huh? Linux does X.
My beliefs do not require that you agree with them.
I am tired of the FUD. it's flying from both sides now and it is stupid.... STOP IT!
And you continue to spread the FUD - you were unable to make your point without mentioning Microsoft 18 times.
Here is the truth - sit 80% of the general population in front of a Linux desktop (KDE or Gnome, it doesn't matter) and ask them to do their daily work. Its very difficult, because bad things can happen, and usually do. A process might hang, or the printer might not be working, or the network goes down. For those of us who are Linux literate, its very easy to pop up a command line and fix the problem - but its as familiar as brain surgery to my fiance. Face it - the linux desktop is developed for geeks (because its geeks that wrote it). It just doesn't adapt to the other 80%.
And the other 80% is the group that decides if Linux is dead on the desktop, because they are the important market. It does not matter what your average geek thinks about some new electronic toy, it only matters what the average person on the street thinks.
linux cant die because it can't be killed... that's the great part of open source..
Linux != desktop. You've been living in Microsoft land too long.
But to end on an on topic note - I really like the looks of the Lycrois desktop - heres hoping that its as easy to use as it looks.
Do you have Linux and a DotPal? Click here now!
The true measure of the quality of a user interface... the airbrushed icons.
1. depending on who you read - a bad idea or a very bad idea
2. the worst name for a company since lindows
3. because someone wasn't feeling very original that day
4. hard to say - neither distro was designed with the advanced user in mind
5. see 3.
To celebrate the occasion of my 1000th post, I will post no more forever on Slashdot. Goodbye.
Can you imagine your average user recompiling the kernel or some such?
No, but can imagine the average user inserting the Red Hat 7.3 disc and pressing the the big "Standard Install" button. Is it that simple yet? Might it been soon. No, and yes.
Then after they reboot into Ximian Gnome, they should see a big button or menu item that says "Get Security Updates", which will prompt them for a "security password" (root). When Red Carpet finishes, remind the user the press the button again in a few weeks.
I believe it really can be that easy -- soon.
Software Wars
I think this makes a good point and highlights a split in the Linux community that not every insider seems to recognize. Maybe as an outsider (Mac-user at home, Win2K at work), I can make the point.
The Linux community, as I see it, is broken into two factions:
Lycorix and Lindows are both aimed at the second group. They want to increase marketshare at all costs and as such, want to reduce the barrier to entry to nil. The first group is more supported by Gentoo and the other distros which can be compiled at install time in all ways to be precisely alligned to your specific setup. Most distros try to please both factions equally.
Which faction is right? Neither and both, probably. MacOS X taught the Mac-heads like me that change is good in an effort to increase marketshare, but that it is important not to surrender the essentials. Of course, all of life is a balancing act and no two people agree on the right balance. But if you can find it, it is a holy grail. Don't be too quick to blast efforts like Lycorix. They may be too far on one side, but in the end, they may move the middle and give Linux a direction which benefits both sides of the aisle.
But seriously, Linux on the desktop isn't dead. Just struggling. But it holds it's own as a server which suits me (and I suspect a lot of people) just fine.
Avantslash - View Slashdot cleanly on your mobile phone.
Bullshit! First, it appears your copy of Linux isn't even ready for spell checking. As someone that maintains a "Corporate Desktop" environment, I can tell you Linux is not ready and not even close. A pipe dream of yours.
As much as I hate Microsoft Windows, it is blows Linux off the map when it comes to corporate desktop computing. When I have problems, I have access to the latest, professional information instead of working with a HOWTO that some guy wrote three years ago after doing copious amounts of bong hits in his college dorm or trying to dissect information from a mailing list involved in a flame war over a memory pointer. You cannot plop the average corporate drone in front of a Linux Desktop machine and expect immediate productivity. You might get away doing that with Mac OS X since everyone and their mother has copied the original Mac OS GUI. Cost is not a factor if the employees are able to generate more income using the computer than the cost of the computer, software, training and electricity that it uses. Even if the operating system, hardware and software is free, if the employee cannot get work done, that is an expensive computer to the employer. While there are many software packages available for Linux, none of them have the polish and quality of the typical Windows package available. Almost good enough is not good enough. And we could go on and on about the limitations of Linux on the desktop in a corporate environment but Slashdot has a finite level of storage.
Don't let your zealotry cloud your judgement. Linux is ready for the Corporate Environment, not on the desktop but in the server closet serving and protecting those Windows Desktops.
Strange women lying in ponds distributing swords is no basis for a system of government.
I tried out Lycoris a while ago when I was exploring other distros. I was really pleased with the overall experience. Generally user friendly, clean interface, network browser worked well for me, and the forums on the company web site were very friendly and helpful. All in all, I think Lycoris is probably the best Linux desktop available for an average [windows] computer user (not the average linux user that is).
My only gripe was that so much software I'm used to finding on a unix-like OS was simply missing. Unless you knew better, you ended up after the initial install with out a compiler or make or anything to roll your own software. This of course became a hastle when wanted to install new software later.
My point is, Lycoris is NOT for the linux power user out there (or maybe even average linux user), but then, it isn't targeted to be. For it's target audience, I think Lycoris makes an excellent choice of a Linux desktop (although, one might wonder how much of such an audience exists).
Who said Freedom was Fair?
Jebus... If you're going to quote The Simpsons, at least do it right:
Who controls the British crown?
Who keeps the metric system down?
We do! We do.
Who leaves the Atlantis off the maps?
Who keeps the Martians under wraps?
We do! We do.
Who holds back the electric car?
Who makes Steve Guttenberg a star?
We do! We do.
Who robs cave fish of their sight?
Who rigs every Oscar night?
We do! We do.
at a customer's worksite. Yesterday I took a win2k workstation, blew off the OS and installed SuSE 8.0. Then I downloaded the Citrix client for Linux and installed that and configured it for the user. Today we'll take the box to the client and put it to work.
The biggest problem we've encountered with Linux on the desktop isn't using Linux (I've used it on my desktop for years) but interfacing it with the applications that have been sold to businesses that only work with MS operating systems. This particular customer uses its main application over a Citrix server and we convinced them to give Linux a try. After all, there isn't much difference between using Citrix on a Win2k box than on a Linux box... but the websurfing will be done with Linux (Galeon)... and email with Evolution.
No one ever had to evacuate a city because the solar panels broke!
Linux is already easy to use. Linux with X and KDE or Gnome is as easy to use (maybe easier) than Win2k etc. That's not the issue.
Linux will take off on the desktop when it is dead easy to install, easy to configure, easy to add new hardware, easy to get X installed, and easy to add new software.
In my mind this implies the following:
- A separate setup procedure for home users. Their needs are different from sys admins.
- If users are dedicating the machine to Linux, don't bother them with partitioning. If sharing with Windows, give them some reasonable defaults.
- APM, Sound cards, USB, scanners, printers, modems, dial-up ISP, email, web access, and GUI all have to work out of the box with minimal intervention on the part of the user.
- Installing new software can't put users in shared library hell.
When these things happen, Linux will become usable by the average user. Not before.
Maybe Lycoris has all this figured out. But I didn't see it on their web site the last time I looked. They're still showing off their GUI. Which, as far as I'm concerned, indicates they don't understand the real issue.
My other Slashdot ID is much lower.
Well, first off, this product is targetted at the relatives of people who like Linux. Is the average person going to wontonly switch to a totally foreign operating system based on ideals he or she may not care about? Probably not. But I've seen several posts today along the lines of, "this would be great for my mom..." That being the case, the only people who are really going to buy or download this product are the people who will be doing the actually installation, i.e. geeks.
So, a geek decides to free his mother from the oppressive hand of The Man. Given the choice of a $30 OS with 60 days support and a free OS with no support, which is he going to chose? If something breaks he knows he's going to be the one driving to his mother's place to fix it, so support be damned. How likely is he to buy the product? Even if he's fairly honest he's probably got it in his head that he is a contributing member of some altruistic community and this company owes him a free distribution.
So he downloads the ISO and burns it to disc, as will every other geek. Lycoris can no longer afford to pay its developers (who, in my opinion, have done a damn good job of integration), and they go under.
Or they can comply to the GPL only in the ways that they need to, and they can make you pay for the ease of having the product on a handy CD (as opposed to the hefty task of downloading the snapshots). They don't have to hand you the code; they just have to make it available. And technically it is.
This is the same tactic SuSE uses, and I'm 100% behind it. It allows companies to hire talent and addt some profit motive into the Linux industry, which results in better products and cooler jobs. There's a lot of free software developers scratching their own itches, but to get anyone to do anything revolutionary (as in complete, integrated, bug-free, and usable) you have to pay them (witness OS X).
Interesting... I am running KDE3 on the Redhat limbo beta. I seem to recall it was on 7.3 too, although I was still trying to use Gnome at that point. They don't seem to be downplaying KDE from my point of view, you get a choice of either or both.
Nautilus does most of what you'd expect, but little things like not self-updating if you copy files into the directory its looking at, the Konq preview-on-hover, and the sheer speed difference when you have a few windows open made KDE much better as it stands today IMHO.
I find it very interesting that people would declare Linux on the desktop dead when it seems it is just barely begun life.
Consider, for example, the difference between a person in a developing country (say Thailand for example) and a person in the inner-city in America.
The person in the inner-city has, on the surface, a hugely better life - easy access to clean water, health care, they probably own a TV, eat three meals a day (I won't go into the fat content of those meals...) and they might even own a car.
But, this person sees the wealth all around them. They have always been poorer than their SUV driving suburban neighbors and recognize that their quality of life has not changed much.
The Thai person grew up in a time when no one they knew owned anything more than a few water buffalo. Tap water (if they have a tap in the house) is undrinkable, electricity is still spotty and paved roads are still years away. This person may even have memories of famine when they were children. However, due to the rising economy, this person now lives in a nice house with a tin roof (thatched roofs, although pretty also make a great home for rats which carry the plague) and might even own a motorcycle. Compared to his childhood, he is styling .
Although our Thai friend's life is still much harder than the poor American's, it is much better than in the recent past and improving. He has never known or seen the wealth his American friend has.
Having never had dominance of the desktop and only now beginning to penetrate this market (much like our Thai friend discovering the thrill of racing his shiny new motorcycle), Linux has nowhere to go but up.
It is all in your point of view...
The most important thing about Lycoris is this: they are doing Linux for Newbies the right way. Everything Lycoris puts out has been released with source code. If you buy Lycoris from the Lycoris site or from Fry's or whatever you get a source code CD-ROM along with your installer CD. This is contrary to Lindows which does NOT release source.
Lycoris is not 100% polished yet. I tried to update a Build 44 install to Build 46, but it didn't entirely work...something has stepped on my TCP-IP stack and my connectivity is dead. Perhaps a fresh install of Build 46 from a burnt CD will do the trick.
Once they get Open Office as part of the install Lycoris will be the leader in easy distros. For geeks like me, it won't be the distro that is used on a daily basis (I really like RH 7.3) but for my Great Uncle who's never touched a PC it's great.
Knowledge is power. Knowledge shared is power multiplied.
But what's wrong with looking exactly like it? I don't see anything wrong with that, especially if it gets people to switch and slowly gets them acclimated to the Linux. So it looks the same, big deal! People who like that will use it, others will go with RH or Debian or something else that they'd rather use! I really don't think the look matters that much, it's the underlying pieces that matter.
If Lycoris was an OS X look-alike and not a Windows look-alike, Steve Jobs would be suing the hell outta this company. We all remember the themes stuff don't we?
Operating systems never are used.
Applications are.
NexuSys - Linux support by the best
Linux on the desktop is not dead by any means.
Clearly Microsoft wants to put out the phrase hoping that the weak of mind will believe it.
But, it is just getting started.
Lindows and Mandrake have just now shown up on the Wal-mart web site. Sure, DELL was beaten up by Gates and forced to beg off the market for now, but they will return. It may not be until the idiots at Microsoft are forced to comply with the appropriate laws, but it will happen.
How can you help?
Help distribute OpenOffice and even help promote StarOffice. Contact your local "beige box boys" and suggest they preload at least OpenOffice with every PC that goes out the door. They can even charge a few dollars extra to have it installed. Windows or linux, it does not matter. It is the benefit to the custom that will help alternative products and linux included.
If Wal-Mart can sell PCs preloaded with Mandrake and Lindows, then so can the rest of them. And, once competition knows what is expected of them, they will comply. What is gone are the days when an extra $700 of Microsoft software is bundled with each PC that sells. That is no longer necessary. And, the vendors who figure that out will get the business.
Have you compared Xandros or even the old Corel Linux with the windows explorer? Maybe you should.
Corel Linux (several years old by now) is just as easy to use as windows ever was. And, currently Xandros is taking it a bit farther. Even farther than Mandrake with its "switch screen" features. It allows the user to log on another screen without logging off the first one. And then, of course, switching back and forth between users.
Does it matter that Xandros puts out that kind of feature?
Yes, it does.
Linux will provide the platform for a whole series of very useful features. A single entity such as Microsoft simply can not and will not do so. Neither will just Mandrake. But, putting RedHat, Mandrake, Corel, eLx, Xandros, Lindows and others all into a highly competitive marketplace will greatly expand that marketplace and provide real benefits for all kinds of consumers.
Linux on the desktop is not dead. Microsoft might be.
NexuSys - Linux support by the best
Yeah but it's just too damn hard to squash them, there are still many Aqua themes. Microsoft is smart enough to know that they shouldn't play this stupid game.
Censorship is bad mmmmokay
And interesting enough, both of those software programs that you suggested work fine in Linux WITHOUT Windows. With the help of a really cool library called WINE, it works like a charm, as does most Windows software.
Oh well, /. takes another victim.
Simple. It is just more trolls try to spread fear, uncertainty, and doubt into the minds of other people. This prevents people from even attempting to use Linux on the desktop.
It is not pay-only. The mirrors just don't have it up yet.
However, if the said enhancments are any indication of what to expect of it after it has been installed, I feel that it is well worth the $30-$40 that it costs for them to mail you the disks.
I hope that more people try, and then buy it from them if they like it. It is a good distribution, and is great for desktop use.
- One camp of idiots in the linux community can't seem to understand how the basic file/folder/desktop paradigm works. They says things like "don't call what people put files into a 'folder'. That's too much like windows. Call it 'directory'."
That any HCI professional would say "folder keeps consistancy with the paradigm" is irrelevant to idiots such as these.
- Another camp of idiots, the polar opposite of the first, wants to blindly carbon-copy microsoft. They can't seem to understand that many designs that Microsoft came up with were dead wrong from a GUI design perspective and that Microsoft has been constantly criticized by the HCI community for implementing them in the first place. Multi-row tabs, window-in-window MDI, billions of tiny, cryptic, unlabeled toolbar buttons that are too small to have fast access time with a mouse are just some of the many skeletons in microsofts UI design closet. That an HCI professional would say "adaptive menus like the kind in office 2000 can be easily proven to be a stupid idea" is irrelevant to idiots such as these.
Clowns to the left of me, jokers to the right...Ergonomica Auctorita Illico!
Even the less auto-configured Slackware detects your network card nowadays.
Video cards are a bit different beast. Any video card that supports VESA will work in Linux (X Window system) with a framebuffer mode (That's like 99% of cards). If you want 3d graphics, then you can get drivers from most manufacturers that really actually matter. nVidia, ATi, PowerVR... Etc. If the rest don't work, then that is the manufacturer's problem. The Linux OpenGL implementations are *awesome*, and very fast. nVidia uses the exact same driver model for Linux that they use in Windows, so the drivers are always up to date. PowerVR will be doing this soon also.
USB mice (and other devices) work fine. USB mice use generic drivers, and are detected by the installers. USB 2.0 has been implemented into the kernel.
I don't know of any major sound chip that does not work in Linux. There are at least three types of sound drivers available. Kernel drivers, ALSA, and Commercial OSS. If someone doesn't like the kernel or ALSA implementations, they can always swing $15-$30 to opensound.com, and get EXCELLENT drivers that completely make use of the best features of a soundcard, including rear speaker support and a real-time software multi-channel mixer (like DirectX uses).
Linux distributions like Suse, Lycoris, Mandrake, and Red Hat do all of the guesswork for you.
Frankly, if you have to pick out your network card manually, then you have one jankie peice of hardware.
Nothing personal, but I attribute the "lack of driver" claims to people's continuing ignorance of the Linux OS.
Yes, but can she install all of the proper drivers without your help?
Video?
Sound?
VIA 4-in-1 drivers?
Patches and hotfixes (for Windows)?
Frankly, if she cannot, then she shouldn't be installing *ANY* OS. Without the right drivers, it won't be reliable, and will be more prone to problems.
Linux has these problems too, but generally the distributions ship with the best drivers available at the time, and with many of them, most of the installation is fairly automated.
OK, well we can disagree; either way, I personally don't care what it looks like as long as people aren't forced into Microsoft products.
Try this: Voila, two desktops running at the same time. Or: if you want to do it the other way. I'm sure Xandros has put a nice slick interface on this, but it's always been something you can do with X. I do it all the time, in fact I'm running with xfce + KDE right now.
Life's a bitch but somebody's gotta do it.
I looked around there website, and I feel kind of blind, but I can't find a free download of it.
There is no longer anything that can be done with computers that is nontrivial and clearly legal. -- Paul Phillips
My Linux desktop is alive and well. Near as I can tell, it's made of laminated particle board, and it supports my monitor and keyboard with admirable efficiency, which is most helpful when I'm working at my Linux commandline.
Oh sure, I know that's not for everyone, but I switched to Linux so I wouldn't have to do the same thing as everyone. Which is, I thought, the entire point of open source. It'll be a cold day in hell before I ever use Lycoris, but that's just me -- I might, however, install it for my wife and daughter, both of whom are quite bright, but totally disinterested in software development. And that's cool, too.
So congrats to the Lycoris folks for rolling out what looks like a polished product. More choice is always good.
Proud member of the Weirdo-American community.
excellent point. Paring back an install on Mandrake or Redhat is a pain in the ass. And yes I'm well aware of Mandrakes 70MB minimal install, but that's not a full featured desktop is it? I've been customizing Redhat Desktop installs since 5.0 and now I just give up and let it install all the crap. Sure put pine, exim,mutt, fetchmail and 20 other mail utilites I'll never use in the bse install. Meanwhile Kmail is all I have ever used for years.
That's why the reviewers raved over Corel's linux, it was desktop linux done right.
If you wanna get rich, you know that payback is a bitch
Check out the lindows.com web site.
NPR has a recorded interview with Michael on the Lindows deal.
NexuSys - Linux support by the best
Was that your point?
Illegal acts can nix a very fine competing product?
DR-Dos suffered from illegal Microsoft acts. Microsft even paid the money to settle the Caldera case.
Desqview suffered from the Window Manager being bundled with DOS even though Deskview did not sue. Perhaps they should have?
And, OS/2 was also subject to a number of illegal moves by Microsoft including many conduct right in the face of IBM.
And, most recently the idiot Gates took the baseball bat to DELL in order to force them to drop (for now) their support of linux on the desktop.
There is no doubt that Gates thinks he is better off conducting illegal acts to hold off competition. That is why he himself engages in those illegal acts.
NexuSys - Linux support by the best
Have to agree on this one. I've never had a piece of hardware which I needed to install drivers for under Linux which worked flawlessly under Windows. There WAS a few times where I installed a piece of hardware, and while linux just said "yeah. I've got that now. Press enter to continue.", Windows asked for driver disks(or, in more painful cases, didn't.)
It's been a long time.
I think you've got a decent grasp of some of Microsoft's past "foibles" but you jump to the erroneous conclusion that just because Microsoft does something dastardly that it's by definition illegal. Publicly-traded companies exist to build shareholder value at any cost. What you see as illegal is merely response to stimulus -- the cold, calculating efficiency of the predator/prey principle, but in a free market setting. For example:
DR-Dos suffered from illegal Microsoft acts.
How is that? DR-DOS suffered because they were reverse-engineering a product. This is why OS/2, Wine, and Mono couldn't / can't succeed. When someone else is setting the standard you will always be in catch-up mode and they will always be first to market.
Desqview suffered from the Window Manager being bundled with DOS even though Deskview did not sue.
DOS did not have a bundled window manager, what it had was a crummy, single-tasking quasi-GUI file manager. It was not a window manager in any sense of the word. By the time of Windows 95 and DOS/Win bundling, Desqview was many years dead. Desqview suffered because when people upgraded to DOS 6 they found that magically DV no longer ran and an obscure upgrade was needed. I'm not even sure this was illegal, just very underhanded. This offered enough time for Windows 3.0 to come out and the rest is history.
And, OS/2 was also subject to a number of illegal moves by Microsoft including many conduct right in the face of IBM.
How was anything they did illegal? OS/2 was an OS well ahead of its time but lacking any apps. Since IBM had only licensed Win3.x APIs they were again relegated to perpetually playing catch-up.
And, most recently the idiot Gates took the baseball bat to DELL in order to force them to drop (for now) their support of linux on the desktop.
How do you figure? When even John Carmack, one of the strongest Linux advocates in the world thinks there's no money in Linux (games) on the desktop, why-oh-why do you think Dell should support it out of pure-hearted good nature? While I share your frustration I think you need to take a strong dose of reality. We don't live in a world where being "good" wins the war.
IMHO Microsoft's greatest sins were in the early '90's when they would release a new DOS version and use the proceeds to fund their next Office upgrade which would fund their next DOS version ad infinitum. By leveraging these two products against each other they guaranteed nobody could win. Sadly no one else seems to remember this. Or what about the Office price wars when Office for Windows 2.0 was crap but it sold for a fraction the price of the competition? Microsoft could afford it by releasing new DOS versions and reaping the profits by the dumptruck-load. But Borland, Lotus, and Novell couldn't afford to match those price cuts and where are their office packages now? People always seem to focus on the wrong things. Penfield-Jackson had the penalty right, he was just a stupid ass who shot himself in the foot.
Microsoft paid Caldera $150 million to avoid a possible judgment on the matter.
And, yes, I am a lawyer so I can have a legal opinion that what Microsoft did was in fact a violation of the Federal antitrust laws.
The Microsoft windows manager, "Windows" was bundled with DOS to foreclose such products as Deskview. Windows was no more than KDE or GNOME is today. In fact, it still is.
Illegal bundling does in fact preclude competition from markets. That is "why" Microsoft engages in those acts.
And, yes, I am a lawyer and do have a legal opinion that bundling a windows manager is illegal tying. It is illegal tying just like the browser is illegal tying. Do we have the final court decision on the browser tying? No. Not yet. The AOL law suit is still pending.
Look, if Gates the idiot did not think that beating up on DELL was not necessary, why was he so stupid to engage in the act?
You can claim that you disagree with the need for Gates to do what he did, but Gates himself decided (at Ballmers suggestion) to get involved and stop DELL from promoting linux desktops.
You can create all the false ideas you want, but what they did is what matters. And, if your false stories were true, they would not have had to do anything at all. So, Gates and Baller disagree with you. Not me.
I only think what they did was illegal and stupid.
NexuSys - Linux support by the best
You are grossly misinformed and should be embarassed to post such poorly-researched comments.
The Microsoft windows manager, "Windows" was bundled with DOS to foreclose such products as Deskview.
Your recollection of history is blatently false. Windows and DOS were not bundled until many years after Desqview was dead and Windows had a monopoly of the "OS" market. The fact is that Desqview 2.0 was released in 1987 whereas Win95 (the bundling of DOS and Windows) didn't take place until 1995. Bundling the products was the only thing that made sense and was in a sense the means to discontinue DOS 6.
In fact, neither the DOJ nor the courts have ever found fault with Microsoft for "bundling" DOS and Windows, bundling didn't even become a factor until Netscape's demise. For example, the consent decree of 1994 makes no mention of bundling products and is completely devoted to licensing practises. While you're free to your own fiction, the facts, the DoJ, and the courts tend to disagree with you.
Gates himself decided (at Ballmers suggestion) to get involved and stop DELL from promoting linux desktops
References, please! I hope you work differently in court because I certainly make no judgements without some sort of evidence.
Oh, where are the mod points when you need them.
My good man, I agree with you SO entirely. I've been ranting about those points regularly since I switched my girlfriend to Linux (and more precisely, Mandrake) and analyzed her reactions to the system.
There's also one point you may have overlooked: if we want hardware makers to write device drivers, then we need to make writing drivers WAY easier. There are efforts underway (like the ALSA architecture for sound devices), but we're still not there yet. If you want to, say, write a driver for an USB tablet, then you'll need to 1) modify the HID kernel driver slightly, so that it won't get hold of the tablet and try to use it with the standard HID-mouse driver; 2) add the kernel module for your tablet; and 3) add the X driver for the XInput support of your tablet. And I leave out the hassle that is getting X configured right. How the heck is an USB tablet vendor supposed to write a generic Linux driver in those conditions?
This said, it might be that you don't give Lycoris enough credit. I haven't tested it (can you download the distro from their site, BTW?), but if you look at those screenshots, they've got 1) a hardware installer utility, 2) a software installer utility, and 3) a X configuration utility. So it might be that they have figured out the real issues after all. We can hope, anyway. I wish them good luck. We'll all need it.
-- B.
This sig does in fact not have the property it claims not to have.
Microsoft paid $150 million to avoid the DOS Windows bundling from getting to the judge.
Desqview did not sue. But, they could have. Suggesting Microsoft only illegally bundled the windows manager after Desqview was dead is your opinion. And, may not matter much. Besides, illegal acts are not excused simply because a competitor is on the way out. Rather illegal acts are then unnecessary.
It is just like the idiots who beat up on DELL. If the false claim that Gates and Ballmer did not need to beat on Dell were true, then they would not have to do so, would they? Do you really think a guy like Gates and Ballmer act needlessly? They do not think so. So, when you claim DELL was going to axe linux anyway, you make Gates and Ballmer look to be fools.
As for your suggestion that the courts disagree with my opionions, perhaps you should read the court decision more carefully. But, do not read the decisions that use faulty jurisprudance.
The consent degree you like to mention was designed to prevent IE from being a required purchase with the OS. Perhaps you would like to explain to others what you think it was supposed to do? If not that?
Microsoft was not convicted of violating it because that issue was never properly litigated. The large DOJ and States case replaced it.
As for the monopoly in the OS, that was true for a long time. And, whether Microsoft got the monopoly legally or not has not been litigated. The new monopoly in browers is being litigated in the AOL law suit.
As for DELL:
Microsoft documents apparently have something to reveal.
It does not sound like lack of demand had anything to do with it.
Sounds more and more like additional illegal activity.
The following is taken from the opening statement by the States.
1. Microsoft held a series of meetings with Dell in regard to linux
2. Meetings involved both Gates and Ballmer
3. Microsoft does not sell a linux distro
4. Microsoft needs to remind Dell why it is smart to partner with Microsoft
5. Dell feels a need to discuss linux with Microsoft? (does he need permission from the godfather?)
6. Ballmer is urged to make certain that Dell understands it is untenable for Dell to be marketing linux
7. Ballmer suggests that Gates give Dell somewhat of a hard time (Ballmer suggests that Gates brown nose Dell)
8. Dell in June of 2001 informs Microsoft (the crime family) that Dell has canceled their linux business unit
9. Does not smell like lack of market demand at all
Is this testimony? No, just statements from the States based upon Microsoft documents.
But, does this sound like a lack of marketing demand nixed Redhat on Dell desktops? Not to me it does not.
It sounds like Dell thinks that Microsoft Corporation has to approve any contracts that Dell might want to sign with others. (Or, they have to cancel if Microsoft does not approve.)
NexuSys - Linux support by the best
Yeah I hear ya, and I agree. OK, truce! :)
Actually, Microsoft employed individuals to use false identification to bad mouth OS/2 and favor Microsoft. That was in the early days.
More recently Microsoft charged IBM a higher price because they would not cease competing with their office products and OS/2.
The latter issue could form the basis for another major antitrust law suit brought by IBM against Microsoft. Will they file? I do not make that call.
But, I have been calling for AOL and SUN to file their private law suit for years. And, just recently they have done so. Both AOL and SUN will also win their respective law suits. As will BE.
Other law suits may include those from RedHat and other linux distributors. That law suit could actually be a class action law suit.
But, since you refuse to give your name your post is of little merit anyway. I would not use my name if I did not believe what I wrote either.
NexuSys - Linux support by the best
Not that anyone will read this, but just as an update:
We installed the Linux workstation and I configured a username and password that was the same as the employee had used on her Win2k box. I used SuSE 8.0 and selected Gnome as the default GUI. We took off most of the desktop icons, and took most of the launchers out of the launch panel. I made a new launcher for Galeon and gave it a "globe" Icon to make it more resemble what she's used to for a browser.
I also made a launcher for their major business application (a medical database) and gave it their normal description so that when she mouses over the panel the familiar name will show up. This was really a launcher to the Citrix client which was set up to automatically log her into the NT4 server and present a full-screen desktop of her own desktop (from her user profile in NT).
There was no printer attached to her workstation so I didn't configure that. I did configure sound but didn't put any icons or launchers for a cd player. In fact, she doesn't have speakers on her desk so that was not used, apparently, in her old environment.
This is an experiment to see whether a MS-centric operation can be moved to a Linux environment. We plan to slowly introduce the employees to Abiword and OpenOffice (I demonstrated both of these for them yesterday) and Evolution for email.
We had an intern with us during the install who had never seen a Linux box before (going to a local community college which is *only* MS). He was amazed that I could turn what he thought was only a server machine into such an effective and useful desktop. He was further amazed when I demonstrated some of the more arcane features of Linux to him (sending email using the local box smtp server without having to go to the ISP's mail server, for instance).
All in all, a most interesting experience for all of us.
No one ever had to evacuate a city because the solar panels broke!
Just to keep the record scrupulously accurate, I tried my Lycoris HD yesterday and had no further problems with connectivity. Lycoris does indeed rock. Scoff all you want about the "toy" nature of the distro...I strongly believe the folks who are building Lycoris are doing some important stuff which will trickle into more "mainstream" distributions and yield definite improvements.
Knowledge is power. Knowledge shared is power multiplied.