Posted by
timothy
on from the version-number-fever dept.
meisenst writes "Lindows 2.0.0 is out, and features, among other things, the ability to browse Windows network shares and map them as you would on a Windows machine. The ISO release notes are here(1), the announcement is here(2) (for now, anyway), and some screenshots are here(3). Looks good!"
Does anybody else realize how confusing buying a cheap 'lindows' PC might be for a non tech-savvy user? Their website alludes to running standard windows software, and hinting that software 'might' be compatible... but they never really come out and say:
This is what will run. Everything else will not.
I wonder how busy their 800 number is. If they are stupid enough to provide one.
I love the idea, but not educating new users about what exactly they are buying seems very misleading. I can see the mindless drones going:
"Windows computer, $899"
"Lindows computer, $399"
Lindows says it runs some "Microsoft Windows Compatible" software, and it is cheaper... I'll go for that one.
Only to find out that, two weeks later, their new version of The Sims just won't run.
I've been pretty bitterly disappointed with how Lindows has backed away from Windows compability. Early on, they was the big deal: That they were going to take Wine and expand it dramatically with the goal of having near-full Windows compatibility.
Apparently, they've decided that was too hard and/or expensive, and decided to market this ridiculous click-and-run as some "revolutionary" feature.
Sheesh, when will SOMEONE figure out that the key to HUGE fame and riches is to come out with an operating system that is FREAKING COMPATIBLE WITH WINDOWS. This is not rocket science. It just takes money and guts.
And just to head off the typical replies to this, let me deal with them:
1) But RM101! They APIS are undocumented!!!
True, in many cases. So what? Do what Wine does-- figure them out. And that only applies to Microsoft applications. There are a LOT of applications out there that use the standard ones.
2) But RM101! They'll just change the APIs!!!!
No, they can't, or they break everyone's software out there. Microsoft was built on backward compatbility.
3) But RM101! They'll just sue anyone who tries!!
First of all, Microsoft has ZERO history of suing companies in order to destroy them (See Apple for an example of a company that uses the lawsuit as a weapon). And even if they did, so what? Like I said, money and guts. They'll lose.
PLEASE!! SOMEONE OUT THERE GET A CLUE!!
I thought Lindows had one, but apparently not.
-- Sometimes it's best to just let stupid people be stupid.
OS/2 is the PERFECT example! Do you know what killed OS/2? No, it wasn't IBM's marketing. It was lack of Win32 compatibility, as well as lack of hardware compability. All the apps and drivers were being written for Windows, and IBM had to run around begging developers.
I mean, IBM used to ship OS/2 AND Windows 3.1 (3.1!!) on the same boxes. You had to go through a rigamorole to delete OS/2 and install Win 3.1. Yet everyone did, because the software selection and hardware select for OS/2 completely sucked.
Compability is everything! It's been proven time and time again.
-- Sometimes it's best to just let stupid people be stupid.
Re:Misleading?
by
pete-classic
·
· Score: 4, Funny
I've always wanted to see something like "Absolutely, positively 100% compatible. Only better."
*cough* OS/2 *cough*
And before that DR-DOS.
-Peter
Michael Robertson Is Cooperative
by
Bruce+Perens
·
· Score: 4, Informative
The last few times I've had an issue to bring to Michael Robertson's attention on the community's behalf, he's always fixed the problem, and he's done it promptly.
Re:Michael Robertson Is Cooperative
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 5, Insightful
Saying Michael Robertson is cooperative when Bruce Perens asks him to do something... is like saying the pope listens to people who happen to be cardinals...
Re:Michael Robertson Is Cooperative
by
Eloquence
·
· Score: 5, Interesting
1) What's your relationship with Michael Robertson, given that you are working together on the Sincere Choice project?
2) Have you talked to him about the "always running as root" issue? That's a big security risk that puts Lindows on the same level as Windows 95.
Seriously...the more we make a big fuss about things like this, the worse Linux looks. Anyone not familiar with Linux would think "So does this mean that Linux users couldn't see Windows shares until just now? What else does Linux not have?"
-- ...
Re:When did they release 1.0?
by
Oculus+Habent
·
· Score: 5, Funny
2.0 may seem like a big mark, but it isn't until it reached 3.1 that it will really be considered a productive business tool.
-- That what was all this school was for... to teach us how to solve our own problems. -- janeowit
predicted comments
by
asteinberg
·
· Score: 5, Funny
Okay, time to predict the responses. In this discussion, there will be:
13 posts about how it dumb it is that this looks so much like Windows.
5 of which will also predict the death of Linux on the desktop.
21 responses to those posts about how looking like Windows is a good thing.
18 posts suggesting alternate desktop-oriented distros, including Mandrake, Red Hat, Lycoris, and Xandros.
7 responses to those posts claiming that Debian is far better.
5 responses to the Debian posts about source based distributions like Gentoo and Source Mage being far more up-to-date and superior.
14 posts will praise Lindows for being easy-to-use and with plans (that will not actually happen) to install it for their parents.
8 of those will commend the new networking setup and resolution switcher and wonder why other distros haven't done these things yet.
5 people will explain that other distros HAVE done that.
3 posts will make fun of the name Lindows. 6 will ask about if the Windows emulation actually works (nobody will have a supported answer). 5 posts will question if this release is truly worthy of being called "version 2.0.0". 4 posts will point out that you can buy computers with Lindows preinstalled from Wal-mart. 6 posts will offer mirrors of the screenshots/article.
Of the 17 posts modded up to 4 or 5, at least 13 will begin with the phrase "I'll probably get modded down for this, but..."
And finally, there will be THIS post, which tries to redeem itself for being dumb with a self-deprecating final statement.
-- The first ever Ultimate Frisbee video game: here (now
We tested Lindows....
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 5, Interesting
...here at work. I work for a corporation that sells everything from distributed fax databasing software to cameras. The only Linux stuff around is the few servers that I have set up for rumedial intranet and inter-departmental data management tasks. So when Lindows came along I thought that maybe it could be used to demonstrate how easy Linux really is (thus gaining some support for driver writing and new software projects, et cetera).
Boy were we (me and the other two Linux users in this company of thousands) when we sat down with Lindows to set it up as a workstation running a few printers, a scanner, some software through Wine, etc. We quickly realized that it was nothing more then a really bad, ugly, poorly concieved, library lacking Linux distribution. It offerred nothing more then your conventional Mandrake or Redhat boxed sets (in fact far, far, far less) and innovated nothing. It was laughed at by the few managers that saw it. Lindows failed us, as it will hordes of other people.
Re:We tested Lindows....
by
rseuhs
·
· Score: 4, Insightful
Actually, Lindows has something that every other Linux distribution lacks:
Good marketing. Just the name "Lindows" attrackts a lot of users. Thousands of ex-RedHat users who have only seen GNOME will love Lindow's KDE desktop and will think that's the difference between Linux (which is KDE for them) and Lindows.
OEM contracts. Walmart sells those preinstalled. Many of the 200$ PCs will be used as web/email/simplewordprocessing computers, which can be done with any Linux distribution, also Lindows.
Of course many will upgrade to real Linux distributions, but as a bridge from Windows, Lindows seems quite nice for me.
Something else to consider...
by
ZxCv
·
· Score: 4, Interesting
...is that a good percentage, if not a majority, of the people that are the targets for these Lindows machines won't ever buy any software at all. Nearly all members of my extended family have bought a cheap machine like this in the past couple years, whether it is HP or Emachines or no-name, and not a single one has added on any software. They're using the web browser, email client, and word processing software that came with the computer. And when they want to play 'games', they're either playing solitaire on that PC, or they're out in the living room playing on the Xbox or PS2. And while I know my extended family isn't exactly a perfect cross-population on which to base any kind of decision, I still think they represent the majority of people that buy these cheap PCs.
Man, you are seriously bleeding edge, aren't you! I like to stick to the boring old 2.4.x stable tree, but each to his own, I guess. Is 4.x the kernel series that includes support for USB 3 and Firewire 6? I hear it also has Duke Nukem Forever available as a loadable module (try "modprobe duke" and let me know what comes up).
--
Today's Sesame Street was brought to you by the number e.
Re:Looks good... but where's the Windows support?
by
chill
·
· Score: 5, Insightful
The point is to stop using MS Office, as well as MS Windows.
For a large number of businesses, StarOffice or OpenOffice will handle what they need. Are they perfect? No, especially in converting documents with Macros.
Moving to a Linux desktop is a COST and CONTROL issue. Linux/OpenOffice for 10,000 desktops costs $0 -- or maybe $79 if you want to buy a disk and save the download time. A knowledgable admin can then create a custom "Kickstart" for the install, and image the drives using "dd" -- saving money on Norton Ghost in the process.
A bit of effort on the part of company admins, coders and you can save a LOT of cash on licenses. Not to mention the $$ involved with keeping the licenses current, on file and in compliance.
But, you're right in the SOME Windows support should be offered. Maybe a partnership with the CrossOver or WineX people so people who *NEED* a Windows app have an option.
--
Learning HOW to think is more important than learning WHAT to think.
Re:User vs Root
by
Minstrel78
·
· Score: 5, Insightful
Lindows "solves" the problem by simply having the user run as root all the time. I frankly can't see how Lindows is anything but the worst of both worlds.
Re:should i?
by
DavidLeblond
·
· Score: 4, Informative
If you want to check out Linux without potentially killing your computer (and if you're a linux newbie this is very possible) either download Knoppix or something like Suse LiveCD. These run directly off the CD and do not require you to repartition your hard drive and the like. If you don't like them, take out the CD, delete the temp files (if you choose to make any), and go back to Windows.
Just an addendum, a lot of older CD-writers (like mine) will not burn Knoppix since it is 700MB.
Or try the new Gentoo and play some UT2003 while you're at it.
Did they release the source this time? I remember earlier there were complaints that Lindows had taken GPL code and said they would only release the modified code after it came out of beta. And here we are at 2.0.
Some things to consider
by
lordcorusa
·
· Score: 5, Informative
i'm a Microsoft(tm) user, could i use lindow [sic] with my ms experience without too much trouble? how different are they?
I'm assuming when you say you are a Microsoft user you mean that you have only ever used Microsoft products. At this stage, any Unix-based operating system, be it a Linux distribution, Lindows (I do not personally count Lindows as a true Linux distribution), FreeBSD, or whatever, will be like jumping into a cold swimming pool. That is to say, it will be a shock at first, but if you are reasonably intelligent and you have picked a newbie distribution (Mandrake, Lycoris, Lindows, ELX), you should be able to adjust.
Some things to keep in mind:
1. You will not have perfect compatibility with Windows apps like MSOffice. You can use OpenOffice and most of your docs will look fine, but some will have visible display glitches (although I have never seen one that was unreadable). You can also download browser plugins for Mozilla (the best Linux web browser) which give it virtually all the worthwhile functionality of IE. Ximian Evolution is an excellent replacement for Outlook. OpenOffice, Mozilla, and Evolution all come with most new Linux distributions today. Another solution is Codeweavers Crossover Office and Crossover Plugin, which let you use Windows office apps and browser plugins. However, this option requires a subscription fee.
2. Many/most Windows games will not work at all, or without a good deal of tinkering. If you are a hardcore gamer, check out Transgaming WineX which can let you play some of the most popular Windows games with a minimum of glitches. This option also requires a subscription fee.
3. A Linux installation needs either its own hard drive, a free partition of space on a Windows drive (at least a few gigabytes) or its own machine. If you have only one machine with one partition on one hard drive, and that is for Windows, then you *might* damage your Windows installation installing Linux. Your best bet if you don't know what I am talking about is to ask a friend who knows more for some help in the installation.
4. While most hardware I have ever purchased is supported, some things just don't have support yet. One example is the "winmodem". Most modems sold today are sneakily designed to work only with Microsoft Windows. Yes, this is a conspiracy between Microsoft and the manufacturers of those modems. If your modem doesnt work, you will probably have to buy a new modem which specifically says it is a "hardware modem". As someone in [your local computer/electronics store] for help.
**Aside from all that, a tonne of things are different in the actual underlying operating system, but if you aren't a developer, you proably won't be intersted in those details. (Feel free to continue this thread if you are, I will be happy to answer more questions.)
With all this, I was trying to provide full disclosure of pitfalls to migrating, not to discourage you. I definately think the switch to Linux is worthwhile in the long term.
If as you implied you have only ever used Microsoft products, the best path you could take is to switch to OpenOffice and Mozilla running on Windows, then if you are comfortable with them, try to dual-boot with a newbie distribution like the ones mentioned above.
-- The preceding comments reflect the author's personal opinion and are public domain, unless explicitly stated otherwise.
Re:Another step in the wrong direction
by
FooBarWidget
·
· Score: 5, Insightful
Here comes the "X sucks" post again. What is wrong with X? Why break all compatibility just to ditch X? Why ditch X at all?
1) There are no good alternatives. Period. DirectFB doesn't support nearly as many cards, and Berlin isn't even ready.
2) Network transparency. Some people claim that it's useless today but that's just false. It's still being used in corporate environments and it's becoming more and more important in the embedded market. If you want to create an alternative, it better be network transparent.
3) X is proven. It's more than 15 years old now. Don't think X sucks just because XFree86 isn't the best implementation.
4) X is extensible. Nearly all shortcomings can be worked around using extensions. Take a look at XRender for example. Or DRI. Or DGA. And in the near future: translucent windows, screen resizing and rotation (RandR or something).
5) X is fast enough. No X isn't slow. Moving windows doesn't seem to be smooth, but that's because of the communication between the window manager and the window, not because X is slow. When I switched to Metacity, moving windows suddenly became *a lot* smoother. Yes, X communicates through sockets. But locally, pixmaps (95% of all traffic) are transferred through shared memory (at least XFree86 does). CPUs are becoming faster and faster, so socket overhead should become smaller and smaller. Of course, assuming that the driver is good and fast.
6) XFree86 configuration is currently complicated. But that won't stay that way. Why ditch XFree86 and replace it with something new and incompatible when you can just improve XFree86? The developers are already planning on getting rid of XF86Config completely and go for hardware autodetection.
Lindows surpassing Debian?
by
timeOday
·
· Score: 4, Funny
Wow, version 2.0 after just a few months. Debian only just made it to 3.0 after, what, 5 years? So I predict Debian will soon be rendered obsolete by Lindows:)
Slashdot Mirror
Being able to easily mount share drives is a big plus.
I hope someone pulls all this into the free distributions.
User space mounting would be very nice, as it is mounting my digital camera and various nfs/samba directories makes quite a mess of my fstab
Does anybody else realize how confusing buying a cheap 'lindows' PC might be for a non tech-savvy user? Their website alludes to running standard windows software, and hinting that software 'might' be compatible... but they never really come out and say:
This is what will run.
Everything else will not.
I wonder how busy their 800 number is. If they are stupid enough to provide one.
I love the idea, but not educating new users about what exactly they are buying seems very misleading. I can see the mindless drones going:
"Windows computer, $899"
"Lindows computer, $399"
Lindows says it runs some "Microsoft Windows Compatible" software, and it is cheaper... I'll go for that one.
Only to find out that, two weeks later, their new version of The Sims just won't run.
I wonder if they get a lot of returns?
-S
We Apprentice Developers and Designers
Bruce
Bruce Perens.
Lindows discovers Samba. Amazing.
Seriously...the more we make a big fuss about things like this, the worse Linux looks. Anyone not familiar with Linux would think "So does this mean that Linux users couldn't see Windows shares until just now? What else does Linux not have?"
...
2.0 may seem like a big mark, but it isn't until it reached 3.1 that it will really be considered a productive business tool.
That what was all this school was for... to teach us how to solve our own problems. -- janeowit
Okay, time to predict the responses.
In this discussion, there will be:
13 posts about how it dumb it is that this looks so much like Windows.
5 of which will also predict the death of Linux on the desktop.
21 responses to those posts about how looking like Windows is a good thing.
18 posts suggesting alternate desktop-oriented distros, including Mandrake, Red Hat, Lycoris, and Xandros.
7 responses to those posts claiming that Debian is far better.
5 responses to the Debian posts about source based distributions like Gentoo and Source Mage being far more up-to-date and superior.
14 posts will praise Lindows for being easy-to-use and with plans (that will not actually happen) to install it for their parents.
8 of those will commend the new networking setup and resolution switcher and wonder why other distros haven't done these things yet.
5 people will explain that other distros HAVE done that.
3 posts will make fun of the name Lindows.
6 will ask about if the Windows emulation actually works (nobody will have a supported answer).
5 posts will question if this release is truly worthy of being called "version 2.0.0".
4 posts will point out that you can buy computers with Lindows preinstalled from Wal-mart.
6 posts will offer mirrors of the screenshots/article.
Of the 17 posts modded up to 4 or 5, at least 13 will begin with the phrase "I'll probably get modded down for this, but..."
And finally, there will be THIS post, which tries to redeem itself for being dumb with a self-deprecating final statement.
The first ever Ultimate Frisbee video game: here (now
...here at work. I work for a corporation that sells everything from distributed fax databasing software to cameras. The only Linux stuff around is the few servers that I have set up for rumedial intranet and inter-departmental data management tasks. So when Lindows came along I thought that maybe it could be used to demonstrate how easy Linux really is (thus gaining some support for driver writing and new software projects, et cetera).
Boy were we (me and the other two Linux users in this company of thousands) when we sat down with Lindows to set it up as a workstation running a few printers, a scanner, some software through Wine, etc. We quickly realized that it was nothing more then a really bad, ugly, poorly concieved, library lacking Linux distribution. It offerred nothing more then your conventional Mandrake or Redhat boxed sets (in fact far, far, far less) and innovated nothing. It was laughed at by the few managers that saw it. Lindows failed us, as it will hordes of other people.
...is that a good percentage, if not a majority, of the people that are the targets for these Lindows machines won't ever buy any software at all. Nearly all members of my extended family have bought a cheap machine like this in the past couple years, whether it is HP or Emachines or no-name, and not a single one has added on any software. They're using the web browser, email client, and word processing software that came with the computer. And when they want to play 'games', they're either playing solitaire on that PC, or they're out in the living room playing on the Xbox or PS2. And while I know my extended family isn't exactly a perfect cross-population on which to base any kind of decision, I still think they represent the majority of people that buy these cheap PCs.
Perl - $Just @when->$you ${thought} s/yn/tax/ &couldn\'t %get $worse;
Today's Sesame Street was brought to you by the number e.
The point is to stop using MS Office, as well as MS Windows.
For a large number of businesses, StarOffice or OpenOffice will handle what they need. Are they perfect? No, especially in converting documents with Macros.
Moving to a Linux desktop is a COST and CONTROL issue. Linux/OpenOffice for 10,000 desktops costs $0 -- or maybe $79 if you want to buy a disk and save the download time. A knowledgable admin can then create a custom "Kickstart" for the install, and image the drives using "dd" -- saving money on Norton Ghost in the process.
A bit of effort on the part of company admins, coders and you can save a LOT of cash on licenses. Not to mention the $$ involved with keeping the licenses current, on file and in compliance.
But, you're right in the SOME Windows support should be offered. Maybe a partnership with the CrossOver or WineX people so people who *NEED* a Windows app have an option.
Learning HOW to think is more important than learning WHAT to think.
Lindows "solves" the problem by simply having the user run as root all the time. I frankly can't see how Lindows is anything but the worst of both worlds.
If you want to check out Linux without potentially killing your computer (and if you're a linux newbie this is very possible) either download Knoppix or something like Suse LiveCD. These run directly off the CD and do not require you to repartition your hard drive and the like. If you don't like them, take out the CD, delete the temp files (if you choose to make any), and go back to Windows.
Just an addendum, a lot of older CD-writers (like mine) will not burn Knoppix since it is 700MB.
Or try the new Gentoo and play some UT2003 while you're at it.
Did they release the source this time? I remember earlier there were complaints that Lindows had taken GPL code and said they would only release the modified code after it came out of beta. And here we are at 2.0.
Remember "Bring 'em on"? *sigh
I'm assuming when you say you are a Microsoft user you mean that you have only ever used Microsoft products. At this stage, any Unix-based operating system, be it a Linux distribution, Lindows (I do not personally count Lindows as a true Linux distribution), FreeBSD, or whatever, will be like jumping into a cold swimming pool. That is to say, it will be a shock at first, but if you are reasonably intelligent and you have picked a newbie distribution (Mandrake, Lycoris, Lindows, ELX), you should be able to adjust.
Some things to keep in mind:
1. You will not have perfect compatibility with Windows apps like MSOffice. You can use OpenOffice and most of your docs will look fine, but some will have visible display glitches (although I have never seen one that was unreadable). You can also download browser plugins for Mozilla (the best Linux web browser) which give it virtually all the worthwhile functionality of IE. Ximian Evolution is an excellent replacement for Outlook. OpenOffice, Mozilla, and Evolution all come with most new Linux distributions today. Another solution is Codeweavers Crossover Office and Crossover Plugin, which let you use Windows office apps and browser plugins. However, this option requires a subscription fee.
2. Many/most Windows games will not work at all, or without a good deal of tinkering. If you are a hardcore gamer, check out Transgaming WineX which can let you play some of the most popular Windows games with a minimum of glitches. This option also requires a subscription fee.
3. A Linux installation needs either its own hard drive, a free partition of space on a Windows drive (at least a few gigabytes) or its own machine. If you have only one machine with one partition on one hard drive, and that is for Windows, then you *might* damage your Windows installation installing Linux. Your best bet if you don't know what I am talking about is to ask a friend who knows more for some help in the installation.
4. While most hardware I have ever purchased is supported, some things just don't have support yet. One example is the "winmodem". Most modems sold today are sneakily designed to work only with Microsoft Windows. Yes, this is a conspiracy between Microsoft and the manufacturers of those modems. If your modem doesnt work, you will probably have to buy a new modem which specifically says it is a "hardware modem". As someone in [your local computer/electronics store] for help.
**Aside from all that, a tonne of things are different in the actual underlying operating system, but if you aren't a developer, you proably won't be intersted in those details. (Feel free to continue this thread if you are, I will be happy to answer more questions.)
With all this, I was trying to provide full disclosure of pitfalls to migrating, not to discourage you. I definately think the switch to Linux is worthwhile in the long term.
If as you implied you have only ever used Microsoft products, the best path you could take is to switch to OpenOffice and Mozilla running on Windows, then if you are comfortable with them, try to dual-boot with a newbie distribution like the ones mentioned above.
The preceding comments reflect the author's personal opinion and are public domain, unless explicitly stated otherwise.
Here comes the "X sucks" post again. What is wrong with X? Why break all compatibility just to ditch X? Why ditch X at all?
1) There are no good alternatives. Period. DirectFB doesn't support nearly as many cards, and Berlin isn't even ready.
2) Network transparency. Some people claim that it's useless today but that's just false. It's still being used in corporate environments and it's becoming more and more important in the embedded market. If you want to create an alternative, it better be network transparent.
3) X is proven. It's more than 15 years old now. Don't think X sucks just because XFree86 isn't the best implementation.
4) X is extensible. Nearly all shortcomings can be worked around using extensions. Take a look at XRender for example. Or DRI. Or DGA. And in the near future: translucent windows, screen resizing and rotation (RandR or something).
5) X is fast enough. No X isn't slow. Moving windows doesn't seem to be smooth, but that's because of the communication between the window manager and the window, not because X is slow. When I switched to Metacity, moving windows suddenly became *a lot* smoother.
Yes, X communicates through sockets. But locally, pixmaps (95% of all traffic) are transferred through shared memory (at least XFree86 does). CPUs are becoming faster and faster, so socket overhead should become smaller and smaller.
Of course, assuming that the driver is good and fast.
6) XFree86 configuration is currently complicated. But that won't stay that way. Why ditch XFree86 and replace it with something new and incompatible when you can just improve XFree86? The developers are already planning on getting rid of XF86Config completely and go for hardware autodetection.
Wow, version 2.0 after just a few months. Debian only just made it to 3.0 after, what, 5 years? So I predict Debian will soon be rendered obsolete by Lindows :)