AOL's new Linux PC

minus_273 writes " MSNBC (of all places ) has an intersting article about AOLs new PC. We have already heard of Lindows , WALMART PC and there was speculation of AOL Red Hat. Well, it looks like this is what AOL decided to do. All 3 are mixed into one. AOL now has a beta 7.0 client that is distributed with Lindows along with AIM and Netscape. I wonder if this stuff will work on normal Linux without WINE."

Comments

The problem

[phorm]

Most people with proficiency in Linux hopefully aren't dumb enough to use AOL.

Re:The problem

[cide1]

I use linux and have had an AOL account since 1994. AOL had some troubles when they launched unlimited service, but they are now quite reliable, and nationwide. With linux, they will support the 3 major platforms. I dont like time warner, but they give us Netscape / Mozilla, Winamp and ICQ for free. For the average American to use Linux, we need an isp like AOL that is nationwide, and supports linux.

Re:The problem

[FunkyELF]

True that, btw, i love those new juno and net zero commertials rippin on GayOL

Re:The problem

[mojotek]

Most people with proficiency in Linux hopefully aren't dumb enough to use AOL.

Most people with proficiency in AOL have no idea what Linux is.

Re:The problem

[freeze128]

...No, but many AOL users are dumb enough to buy a Linux PC which they are not proficient at.

If they're dumb enough to buy one, then AOL wins.

Re:The problem

[allism]

Um, ICQ was free long before AOLTimeWarner ever got their hands on it. ICQ has turned into ugly, ad-filled bloatware since it was bought out. I miss the streamlined design the interface had seven years ago.

Re:The problem

[Flabby Boohoo]

AOL has solid nationwide, and world-wide coverage.

I found (the hard way) that when I am in mainland China, the AOL dialups always work, the UUNET and AT&T accounts are problematic. Of course this is due to the fact that AOL bought out Compuserve and got all the POPs.

Actually, AT&T's service was better when it was IBM.

Re:The problem

[PhoenixFlare]

"I dont like time warner, but they give us Netscape / Mozilla, Winamp and ICQ for free. "

You do realize you can get these four programs without relying on Time Warner at all?

How are you set up that you would have to pay for them in the first place? They're all free for anyone to have, and have been for months/years.

Re:The problem

[SirSlud]

The question is, would they still be free had AOL not stepped in and funded their continued development thanks to their subscribers' revenue?

Maybe. Maybe not. :)

Re:The problem

[Anonymous Coward]

Earthlink is nationwide and they resell time warner's
cable modem service at a cheaper price than time
warner! Best of all you don't get the stigma attached
of having an @aol.com address which implies you are an
idiot. They also actively promote popup blocking
software, something that AOL would never do since
they depend on popups for ad revenue.

Re:The problem

[Anonymous Coward]

All four of those websites are owned and run by AOL Time Warner moron.

Re:The problem

[phorm]

I still see people having some issues using various online programs/games with AOL, but if it works for your account then it suits your means. A lot of us were just turned off by AOL a long time ago, and found solutions which better suited our needs. I should have rephrased this that it that AOL may help lead some windows users down the linux road (despite how many of us hate them, AOL does manage to gather customers), but probably won't see many linux users going to their product.

A few kudos to AOL though

• AOL floppies were formattable (free blank disks)
• AOL CD's became coasters, the new cases are rugged and nice for DVD's/etc
• As you mentioned, they support Netscape/Winamp/ICQ.

I reserve the right to apply a -1 to AOL for ICQ adware. I use trillian so it doesn't matter to me, I use their network so they still provide me with a decent service. The needs suit the audience. If AOL can help people get online and on linux, I really don't mind them - so long as they're not lagging up my battle.net games.

3: Somebody's lagging, who's your ISP?
2: What's an ISP?
1: The company that provides your internet connection
2: Oh, I'm using AOL
1: Kill player 2 first, he's AOL, that'll clear the lag
Yes, I often saw this on b-net - phorm

Re:The problem

[splume]

And the entire phone support community at AOL, RedHat, Mandrake (and every other Linux distro with an 800 number) cries at once "Oh shit!"

Re:The problem

[f97tosc]

Most people who use AOL don't need to proficient in the OS they are using. They send email, surf, and (maybe) use a word processor. Putting up big icons for those things is all that is necessary.

Tor

Re:The problem

[EvanED]

Or would they even be around today? Netscape was doing poorly to say the least when it was bought by AOL.

Re:The problem

[zapfie]

Um.. all four of those programs are owned by AOL Time Warner.

Re:The problem

[jbottero]

Mozilla.org is run by AOL Time Warner? Really?

Re:The problem

[Anonymous Coward]

The expeption to prove the rule. Mozilla.org may not be run by AOLTW but the project wouldn't exist without them. I stand my statement of moron.

Re:The problem

[reallocate]

You know, choice of OS or ISP isn't a measure of intelligence. The idea is to make computers easier to use, not more difficult.

Re:The problem

[Anonymous Coward]

I worked on ICQ for AOL for some time, trust me, AOL's intent was to make it a less-ugly less-bloatware app. They just never got it. All ICQ's are equally shitty.

Re:The problem

[landaker]

Wow, an "Anonymous Coward" has the courage to stand by his statement. Am I the only one who senses a bit of irony? =)

Re:The problem

[Anonymous Coward]

Who do you think owns Netscape, ICQ, and Winamp, pays the developers and then releases them for free you dumb fuckwad zealot?

Re:The problem

[PhoenixFlare]

That may be true, but do you realize the scale of the uproar that would occur if they decided to charge for these programs? Kinda makes it a moot point....

Winamp (for example) has had over 57 million downloads....If TW wanted to have any real influence on it, such as forcing design decisions or charging for downloads, they're far too late, IMHO. Winamp doesn't even include embedded ads or anything, as far as I know.

Re:The problem

[Anonymous Coward]

"Anonymous Coward" is just the default name that Slashdot inserts when someone posts without creating a login, and then logging in. While it is true that years ago alot of trolls didn't bother to log in, these days, it's more likely that a troll has a +1 bonus and an anonymous coward is someone who has something insightful to say, but doesn't want to be bothered with logging in.

Re:The problem

[Anonymous Coward]

Not necessarily an exception. Most of the Moz developers work for Netscape. I agree with your statement of moron.

Re:The problem

[Anonymous Coward]

Um... no.

Mozilla is not owned by AOL. AOL owns Netscape. Mozilla is a entirely separate browser which was built on the GPL'd code from Netscape Navigator buy people who had no connectionn to AOL.

You're probably one of those idiots that thinks Apple is now owned by Microsoft, too.

Re:The problem

[LoRider]

"For the average American to use Linux, we need an isp like AOL that is nationwide, and supports linux."

I have said this time and time again, "Who cares if the average American uses Linux."

Linux is a great OS right now and is successful. We don't need the average moron running Linux. In order for that to happen the OS needs to be dumby-proof, which will in turn make Linux just as lame as Windows.

Why don't these so-called Linux users understand that Linux is successful and doesn't need the mass of morons in the world to use it. How many things have become mainstream and remained cool? Just be careful what you wish for you just might get it.

Re:The problem

[PhoenixFlare]

Quite the intelligent response....

And I as I said in my first post, they were all free for months/years before AOL+TW got their hands on them :P

Think about that before you post again, or at least log in.

Re:The problem

[thomas.galvin]

You know, choice of OS or ISP isn't a measure of intelligence. The idea is to make computers easier to use, not more difficult.

No, at least not necessarily. I am sure some very intelligent people use AOL, or WinME, etc.

Still, it is a sign of how proficient you are with a computer, and this may have a more direct correlation to intelligence. Intelligent people usually like to play, and the more they play with the internet, the more likely they are to realize that there is more out there than what AOL is pushing at them. The more proficient they are with their computer, the more they are likely to want things there way, not AOL's way.

My first home connection was AOL; I minimized it and ran explorer anyway, because I didn't like the AOL interface. Soon, I had dropped AOL altogether. I imagine that just about any average-to-above-average computer user would have the same reaction.

Re:The problem

[Anonymous Coward]

lol, how clueless can you be? Not only was the code for the original netscape never GPL'd when it was released, but most Mozilla development IS in fact done by people paid by AOL. In the future I'd advise you know what you're talking about before you call someone an "idiot".

Re:The problem

[Drachemorder]

I'd agree with you, except for one thing. A lot of software I want/need to run is not available on Linux. If Linux develops to the point where "average morons" use it --- even if it's not a particularly overwhelming percentage --- more software companies will find it worth their while to port their products to Linux. Therefore I do have a significant interest in seeing widespread adoption of Linux by average users.

Re:The problem

[Eccles]

That may be true, but do you realize the scale of the uproar that would occur if they decided to charge for these programs?

It's not the charging or lack thereof, it's that they spend on development. If they stopped funding the Mozilla team, I believe the progress on that project would grind nearly to a halt. So effectively they are giving me Mozilla, because the Big Mo today still isn't quite all there.

Re:The problem

[lynx_user_abroad]

Just to make sure we're all clear on this:

3: Somebody's lagging, who's your ISP?

2: What's an ISP?

1: The company that provides your internet connection

2: Oh, I'm using AOL

An ISP (Internet Service Provider) is different than an IAP (Internet Access Provider). Email, USENET news, DNS name resolution, etc. are all examples of services which would be provided by an Internet Service Provider. The Amazon.com ecommerce site, Slashdot.org website and Battle.net are also Internet services, provided by Internet Service Providers, although since most people don't write a check to the providers of these Internet services, most people wouldn't consider them to be Internet Service Providers.

If you're in a game on Battle.net, you probably aren't also checking mail, reading news, or looking up IP addresses for web sites. The mail server, News server, DNS server, etc run by the company you purchase access through could all go belly-up, and you wouldn't notice a thing. Things like network lag, etc, are a function of who your IAP is, rather than who your ISP is, although many people purchase vital internet services like DNS name resolution, etc through the same company they purchase their access, and so consider their IAP to be "their ISP" as well.

If you access the Internet through your college campus network, and get your email off of HotMail, then your college is your IAP and your email ISP is Microsoft. If (like me) you never do anything but read slashdot from Starbucks, then Starbucks is your IAP and slashdot is your ISP.

Clear as mud, huh?

It's just too bad we can't explain this to the lamers you meet on Battle.net.

Re:The problem

[Dakkus]

Ever heard of MacOS X?
It's dumby-proof but still not as lame as windows.

In fact it's actually been said to be the best OS around. Many linux-users have converted to OSX-users when they've tried it for a while.

Re:The problem

[fault0]

yup, icq99 was great.
and 98 was even better.

Re:The problem

[Arnold_Crenshaw]

I was always under the impression, never having heard of "IAP," that the "Service" in ISP mean the service of receiving access to the internet, not the services on the internet. In AOL's case, they started by providing their own services, and _then_ introduced connections to the internet; so from their point of view, your definition may make sense. But for an ISP (IAP) who connects you to the internet for ten bucks a month, their main services include mail, dns, and the actual connectivity.

Re:The problem

[fault0]

> Mozilla is not owned by AOL.

AFAIK, much of Mozilla would be copyrighted by AOLtw since they pay many of the full time hackers who work on Mozilla.

> Mozilla is a entirely separate browser which was built on the GPL'd code from Netscape Navigator buy people who had no connectionn to AOL.

Uh, the source released wasn't GPL'd at all. I beleive it was originally NPL'd. And it was released with people with definite connections to AOL: Netscape employees who work on Mozilla for *gasp* AOL!

> You're probably one of those idiots that thinks Apple is now owned by Microsoft, too.

Congratualations, you're now an idiot who knows nothing about Mozilla's history.

In January 1998, the Netscape Browser source code will be made available for free on the Internet. In November 1998, NS was bought by AOL. Most of the current Mozilla was written after that, under AOL. AOL is actually quite supportive of Mozilla. Check out an email sent by Steve Case after AOL bought Netscape.

Re:The problem

[Anonymous Coward]

Cocksmoker.

Re:The problem

[octalc0de]

Or would they even be around today? Netscape was doing poorly to say the least when it was bought by AOL.

They were doing poorly because Microsoft reduced it's IE pricing down to $0... effectively driving Netscape out of business. What do you want, IE for $0, or NS for $30?

Re:The problem

[EvanED]

At the time when NS was bought up, I would have taken IE for $0 over NS for $0. (Before then, and recently I've taken a $0 NS over IE for the most part.)

But *why* they were almost bankrupt is immaterial; the point is that they were. I'd say the chance they'd still be around today had AOL not eatten them would be slim to none. Thus we likely have AOL-TW to thank for their continued existance.

Re:The problem

[zapfie]

I don't think TW WANTS to charge for downloads, or put banner ads in it. To large corporations, the only thing that matters more than money is control, IMO. The more people that download and use their products, the more control they have. Also, Nullsoft's parent company most certainly does have a say over their products.. for example, where did Aimazing and the original Gnutella go?

Re:The problem

[Anonymous Coward]

Actually since IP banning was instituted the trolls all prefer to be logged in and have a -1 account so they are not moderated down and banned.

Re:The problem

[N3WBI3]

That piss porr attitude is what keeps Linux in the 0.5% range. I would lvoe to move my father off of windows and I can except he loves AOL, and for **HIM** its the right solution, maybe not for you. Point is this will make it easier for those of us with friends and fam who we would like off of windows to use something else..

Re:The problem

[Anonymous Coward]

Read the freaking post you're responding to! Sheesh!

He said he will "stand his statement", not "stand by his statement".

No, I have no idea what that might mean either.

Back to you.

Re:The problem

[Sj0]

From what I understand of AOL, you're still an not that bright. Am I to understand that you get charged twice the price of other ISPs, yet are inundated by advertising sent by the ISP, DESPITE the higher charges?

Sorry freind, you've been had.

Re:The problem

[zapfie]

Yep, really. Do a WHOIS on mozilla.org. You will get:

Mozilla Dot Org (MOZILLA2-DOM)
501 East Middlefield Road
Mountain View, CA 94043

Now do netscape.com. You will get:

Netscape Communications Corp.
501 East Middlefield Rd
Mountain View, CA 94043

Same address! And guess who the registrar is for netscape.com? Let's check the WHOIS record:
Registrar...............: America Online, Inc.

Doesn't take much connecting the dots to figure that out.

Re:The problem

[puddytat]

Well the lite version of icq seems to work quite nicely without a lot of bloat. It's not perfect but it's a lot better then the full version imho.

Re:The problem

[Anonymous Coward]

"For the average American to use Linux, we need an isp like AOL that is nationwide, and supports linux."

No ya don't. A local access point is all you need. Ever. In fact, that's all you get from any ISP. AOL isn't an ISP, it's a subscription BBS -- always has been.

I'm not anti-AOL ... up until I started using Linux, I used AOL ... but you are making it sound as if AOL has been keeping Linux from widespread adoption and that simply isn't true ... just ask Steve Ballmer or review Bill Gates sworn testimony.

I haven't had AOL on this machine in about 3 years. My wife of two years has never had it on her computer at all and, trust me, she is not a computer geek. She still uses Win98.

AOL yes or AOL no ... using AOL is more a matter of personal choice than any technical reason, but don't let the lack of AOL keep you from trying Linux. One of the nice little surprises about switching to Linux is that dial-up speeds basically treble in speed. Simply switching away from Windows changed me from about 3kb/s to 12kb/s or more. 12kb/s may not sound like much to some folks ... but it is a very useful jump from the 3kb/s I was getting with Win98.

Re:The problem

[c1pher]

"For the average American to use Linux, we need an isp like AOL that is nationwide, and supports linux. "

The average american that uses Linux has also always had many choices of nation-wide ISP's, and been able to connect to them (which you couldn't at the time with AOL, you'd be required to use their proprietary client. on Windows/Mac.)

Re:The problem

[Bedouin X]

Winamp wasn't free before AOL took over. It was $10. Which I thought was fair for the quality software that it was.

Re:The problem

[Your Average Joe]

Most people who use AOL do not know what AOL is.

One manager from our southern office thought the Internet WAS AOL. He proceeded to argue with me on another occasion that us IT guys had made his CD-ROM drive READ-ONLY. Man the nerve of us guys in IT.

Then most of the time he would preface a stupid problem with "Either I am a COMPLETE IDIOT or you IT guys are screwing me up." That was cool, each time we used WinVNC to show him that he was his worst enemy. God do I LOVE to be a sys admin!

Re:The problem

[Anonymous Coward]

Just a hint -- learn how to type before embarassing yourself in a public forum.

Re:The problem

[jmccay]

It may not be a mater of dumb enough, but rather be a mater of money. Like someone getting the service free through a family member or a friend? If it's free to you, then I don't think you'd care.

Re:The problem

[Anonymous Coward]

Stfu nitpicker, people who go after others typos are the lamest people on earth...

Lousy title

[tomhudson]

The article's title says AOL PC, but it's just a bundling of AOL's linux software on a lindows box.

Well, must be a slow friday.

Re:Lousy title

[kevinank]

The article's title says AOL PC, but it's just a bundling of AOL's linux software on a lindows box.

Reread the tail end of the article. The writer spends a bit of time describing his experience with the early access release of AOL7.0 for Lindows. Pretty broken right now, but he believes that it will rapidly improve. (Hmm. If you have to have network access to download software through Click-N-Run, and AOL7.0 for Lindows is on Click-N-Run, then that is a bit of a catch 22 to using AOL for new owners of these machines.)

Re:Lousy title

[Anonymous Coward]

i assume the aol client will come preinstalled on lindows. how else can u get to the CNR warehouse!

Great...

[Gorm the DBA]

Just what we need...the number one leader in dumbing down the Internet coming out with a PC...

It's going to be like that Dilbert Cartoon

"All it has is one button, and we press it for you before it leaves the factory."

"But what's the button do?"

"Don't ask me all these techie questions"

Except in this case, the punch line is likely "Submit your credit card numbers to the central server so that we can deduct money from you at will".

So where do I sign?

Re:Great...

[Myco]

Just to nitpick, the original punchline was approximately "Whoa, I'm in over my head."

Re:Great...

[saider]

"Whoa, I'm in over my head. Here's the number to tech-support."

Re:AOL is on drugs

[Raskolnk]

Hey! Not stupid communists -- moderately intelligent socialists.

very cool

[loomis]

I would imagine that this just might be the ticket--a major stepping stone toward widespread Linux acceptance. Surely it won't be long before there is a Linux AOL client that will be ported over to all sorts of Linux platforms, if the one discussed doesn't technically run on different flavors of Linux upon release.

Progress!

Loomis

Re:very cool

[SlayerX335]

I don't know that this will help bring any further acceptance for Linux. It brings a "common people's" ISP to Linux, yes, but it probably isn't enough to get your average PC AOL user to switch over, not without more Linux program development geared towards your typical PC user.

Re:very cool

[rseuhs]

Why?

I don't see any reason why somebody using AOL and not much more on a Pentium1 on Win95 should not buy this 200$ PC when his old PC breaks.

He saves at least 100$ and it does what he needs.

This is a great step for Linux on the desktop. This will give pressure to peripheral-builders to release Linux-drivers.

But I guess whining about "probably isn't enough" is probably more l33t, I guess.

eek!

[MikeeX]

And you thought it couldn't get any worse!

Re:AOL is on drugs

[intermodal]

no...not true. people with either no reason other than email to have a comptuer buy a computer just for aol, or people who just use it for chat. Most people however use the computer for other things too, as do the people who bought the computers just for AOL, who end up also learning to play Solitaire.

CPU

[truesaer]

I'm a bit interested in this Via 800Mhz CPU. It seems very strange to see a new player in the x86 CPU field, and I wonder if this chip is based on a licensed AMD or Intel design? Or is the reason they can make it because it is only 800Mhz and therefore easier to produce than a whole line including bleeding edge chips?

First generation silicon are known to be less reliable than later designs. Can a chip made by Via be trusted in terms of reliability? (I realize they make lots of chips, but generally not this kind)

Oh well, just general questions...

Re:CPU

[Dancin_Santa]

It's Cyrix.

Re:CPU

[T-Punkt]

No, it's based on Cyrix. VIA bought cyrix some time ago.

Re:CPU

[SonicBurst]

IIRC, this isn't really a new player. I believe VIA bought this architecture from Cyrix. I think it used to be called the C3 (or could be M3).

Re:CPU

[Anonymous Coward]

It's not 1st-generation. Remember Cyrix? That's what VIA's chips are. Yes, they still suck performance-wise, but at least they've been around a while. The only advantage is super=low power consumption/heat dissipation.

Re:CPU

[Anonymous Coward]

The VIA C3's been out for ages. Dunno why they use an 800MHz part - they use crap, older cores. Don't be surprised if the article is rubbish, as he seems to think a C3-800 is faster than a Duron-850! As if! The C3 even has half-speed FPU! But, even if it's nasty, it is cheap.

Re:CPU

[ShavenYak]

As if! The C3 even has half-speed FPU!

And we all know how important the FPU is in web surfing. For general purpose, non-gaming use, I doubt that you can tell the difference between a C3-800 and a Duron-850 without running a benchmark. On the other hand, there's probably not a whole lot of price difference between the two.

Re:CPU

[Thud457]

Geeze, I was looking forward to a I-Opener 2002! Then I see they're still paying to ship ginormous honking vacuum tubes to people!

As far as the C3, I had just recently been considering one of these cute little boxes for my home entertaintment system. I had read some review somewhere comparing the performance of a C3/800 to a 400mhz Celeron, so they're not speed demons. But damn, these itty bitty ITX boards have everything but TV capture and a modem on them.

Re:CPU

[TandyMasterControl]

Like others say, it's not new.
I think the Cyrix C3 started out at 500Mhz --like a year and half a ago or so. Maybe 2 years now...
The neat thing about C3s is the temperature: an X86 compatible chip that costs peanuts, runs in common inexpensive socket 370 boards and the little f*ers run so cool they can actually dispense with FANS. (especially when mildly underclocked)

They are the perfect thinclient CPU, given the need for X86 compatibility out there in the world.

Re:CPU

[Anonymous Coward]

This new player is the remnants of Cyrix, and mostly Centaur, which has been across the road from me in Austin for about 5 years. Is that new? The Iopener was powered by their Winchip. Another new IA device I hear.

Re:CPU

[Anonymous Coward]

True enough, except that these boxes are being touted as running some Windows software. And how long before someone tries to run their (3d) games on it. Or do something multimedia oriented - hell, even decoding web JPEG images usually uses the FPU. I suspect people will eventually come away thinking it's slow computer, and this Linux thing is crap because it can't run their (Windows!) software/games properly. I know I wouldn't want to run Office2K/XP with 128MB and 800MHz.

Re:CPU

[questionlp]

As the other posters have stated, the C3 processor used in the AOL/Lindows/Microtel desktop is based on the Cyrix processor (x86 compatible, et al) which was purchased by Via a while back. The problem with the Cyrix processors is that the FPU is what holds back the processor dramatically. If you check out some of the reviews on the web (Tom's, Anand, etc.) the older processors had the FPU operating at half of the processor's speed. I don't remember if the newer versions of the processors still have that handicap or not. Otherwise, the processor does run cool compared to any desktop processor made by Intel or AMD.

The bit about the article that kind of tweaked me out was:

Via's new C3 processor is cool -- literally. Not only is it faster than the AMD in the older Lindows, but Via claims that it's very, very, very energy efficient.

My question is how can a 800Mhz C3 actually be faster than an 850Mhz AMD Duron. Although the C3 has more L2 cache (256 or 512KB compared to 64KB on the Duron) but the Duron does have a larger L1 cache (128KB... I don't remember the exact L1 size for the C3). Unless if they used a crappy chipset and video chipset in the Duron setup and improved it in the C3... an AMD Duron should be able to whip the C3... primarily in FPU intensive operations.

Re:CPU

[Anonymous Coward]

It's not a Cyrix cpu, its the Centaur core.
Via bought Cyrix and Centaur at the same time.
They shut down Cyrix and used their name with
the Centaur core.

- anon.

Re:CPU

[SageLikeFool]

AFAIK, VIA bought out Cyrix a few years back, so the C3 chip may be based on some stuff Cyrix was developing at the time.

Re:CPU

[Thag]

My question is how can a 800Mhz C3 actually be faster than an 850Mhz AMD Duron.

From everything I've read, it's not faster. The 1ghz C3 is about the equivalent of the 800mhz Durons, at least for things like DVD playback. Could the reviewer be making this mistake because the newer Lindows/AOL software is faster?

Jon Acheson

Re:CPU

[T5]

The big problems with the Cyrix chips are (1) poor FPU and (2) no out-of-order execution in the core. AFAIK, no OOE on these makes them stand alone in the current x86 marketplace. Alone, and in the dark.

We've got some of these at 550MHz in the Spacewalker SV25s we put out in meteorological monitoring stations across the US. They're reliable, and in the desert southwest, it's a good thing to be low heat generating!

Re:CPU

[fault0]

> But, even if it's nasty, it is cheap.

They are cheap and the run extremely cool. I have a friend who has an older C3 with a micro-ATX mobo and case. There is not even any heatsink, just a small exhaust fan in the back. He uses it as a mp3 player/server/shoutcast station.

Re:CPU

[Anonymous Coward]

C3 Performance - Direct Experience

I recently built a new system to get my feet wet in Linux (SuSE 8.0) using a 900 M C3.

My son's system is a 1 Ghz Atlon with 100 M FSB, VIA chip set MB and, until recently a GeForce 2 graphics card. When he upgraded, I scavenged the video card.

The new system uses a C3 at 900 M with a 133 M FSB. I used old memory, however, so the RAM only runs at 100M. The Mb has the same VIA chipset but is built by another manufacturer. RAM size and hard disks are the same in both systems. All in all, the systems should be pretty close to each other except for the processor.

So far I've seen the following:
1. 3Dmark2000 graphics benchmark gave about half the score of the Atlon 1G to the C3 900.
2. In spite of the poorer graphics score, my son says games run comparably fast on the 2 machines.
3. The machine runs acceptably quick on both win98SE and SuSE 8.0. Applications are fast and responsive in both and I would have no problem getting real work done on this machine.
4. And, yeah, it runs cool! With a simple cooling fan and heatsink (nothing like the monstroksity on the Athlon), the chip never even feels warm to the touch. I ran it fanless for 1/2 a day (I forgot to plug the fan back in) and then the heatsink felt warm but definitely not too hot to touch. This definitely would have toasted the Athlon.

Just my experience with this chip; not an exhaustive benchmark test. You results may vary.

Re:CPU

[fault0]

It's a centaur core, cyrix name. Cyrix had more brand recognition and centaur had slightly better chips (although cyrix came out with some cool stuff too).

Re:CPU

[kcbrown]

The neat thing about C3s is the temperature: an X86 compatible chip that costs peanuts, runs in common inexpensive socket 370 boards and the little f*ers run so cool they can actually dispense with FANS. (especially when mildly underclocked)

This is true: it makes them a good choice for building a silent PC.

You can do the same thing with a P4 as well, since it'll automatically underclock itself to keep itself from overheating. You'll typically get about half the rated speed (based on my tests with a 1.5GHz CPU) from a P4 when it's got the heatsink on but the fan off.

But the P4 is quite a bit more expensive...

Re:CPU

[AVryhof]

Via bought Cyrix...

Re:CPU

[Anonymous Coward]

I was going to observe that I run my webserver / mailserver on a P-II 233mhz with 192 m of antique ram and it has yet to struggle. 800mhz is actually overkill for a LOT of purposes. Under Linux, that would be a nice departmental file server for perhaps 20 workstations or overkill firewall for 50 workstations.

There are just a lot of computing situations where a FPU isn't needed at all because the overall load is so light that the CPU has plenty of time to emulate one.

Re:CPU

[Anonymous Coward]

It's a good CPU. I use it on several servers.

The C3 isn't based on the Cyrix CPU, but on the IDT cpu.

A C3 800 is as fast as a Celeron 800, if you don't use its FPU (because its FPU runs only at 400MHz).

And yes, it can run without any fan, just with a good heatsink.

HOORAY!

[RailGunner]

As I've said before on numerous occasions, for Linux to truly give MS a run for the money on Home user desktops, two things need to happen:

1. AOL client for Linux
2. Native game support

Now, as much as I tend to mock AOL users, being that AOL is not a convicted monopolist, they're the lesser of two evils by far. But now that #1 on my list looks like it's happening, MS better be very nervous. There's millions of AOL users who own a computer and do nothing but connect to AOL on it. There's now NO compelling reason for them to use Microsoft software.

This news has made my day. I'm being optimistic and hopeful here, but could this day signal the beginning of the end of Microsoft? (Especially since some games are coming out with native Linux support.. like Unreal Tournament 2003)

Re:HOORAY!

[Anonymous Coward]

Agreed. I think most people in this thread are missing the point. Of course nobody here is going to use AOL on Linux. Nobody here buys their computer at Walmart. But a lot more people buy their computers at walmart than assemble custom ones themselves (as I assume many others in the group have).

AOL on Linux is very good. Not because AOL is a good ISP for technically literate people, but because technically illiterate people buy the vast majority of PCs. If Walmart can make inroads with dirt-cheap PCs running Linux, this is good for all Linux lovers.

Re:HOORAY!

[daeley]

While I'm normally gung-ho for anything challenging the behmoth (see sig for ref), and while I'm in agreement with you, I am still leery of trading one enormous, controlling software giant for a enormous, controlling media conglomerate. I don't want to be a naysayer, but extrapolating into the future produces a need to keep one eye on this bunch, too.

Re:HOORAY!

[Anonymous Coward]

well... those two would increase linux's reach, but it isn't going to increase linux's marketshare or mindshare, because people are dumb and will keep buying/pirating windows. So let's rather concentrate on reproducing all the functionalities we need in an os and then start duplicating things from windows as they're needed. Linux isn't going anywhere, so why bring linux to the masses? fuck them and let them suffer.

Re:HOORAY!

[Anonymous Coward]

Time Warner is not a monopoly?

Pass the crack pipe!

Re:HOORAY!

[Anonymous Coward]

Exactly what are they a monopoly in? US courts have not found them to be a monopoly.

Re:HOORAY!

[naelurec]

.. somewhere around Redmond Wa...Steve Ballmer cries out "The apocalypse is coming! #1 on RailGunner's list is coming true!! AHHH!!!!"

Re:HOORAY!

[rseuhs]

I agree.

If the 200$ PC takes off (and I don't see a reason it shouldn't - it *IS* the cheapest PC available by a large margin), this could even pressure game companies to do Linux-ports.

Re:HOORAY!

[TheWickedKingJeremy]

... I am still leery of trading one enormous, controlling software giant for a enormous, controlling media conglomerate. I don't want to be a naysayer, but extrapolating into the future produces a need to keep one eye on this bunch, too.

Because AOL would not own the OS, and hence would be in no position to jockey into other markets at will. AOL being popular on Linux is not nearly as dangerous as MS is now - and as other posters have mentioned, might go a long way towards convincing users that they dont *need* Windows.

Re:HOORAY!

[Col. Panic]

I was actually hoping AOL would throw some money at the Linux gaming community that has already been established.

Re:HOORAY!

[mrseth]

Hey, AOL is not so bad in some ways...They helped fund the Mozilla project and also created the open source AOLServer, which I've not used, but have heard many nice things about it.

Re:HOORAY!

[Jonny Ringo]

YES!
I am holding a candlelight visual for the remorse of Microsoft going into immediate bankruptcy. Please join me at West lake Mall in downtown Seattle at 7pm. :-)

Just joken, I do think this is good news fro the Linux desktop.

Re:HOORAY!

[WNight]

Because the more it strangles MS, the less money they have to put into Palladium and strangle the industry.

Re:HOORAY!

[qurob]

Integrated Trident Blade 3D/Pro Media AGP 4x graphics
Up to 8 MB shared video memory

I think I'll stick with my

Re:HOORAY!

[alcmena]

No they not, and sometimes I wish they were. Their service was a whole lot better, and cheaper, than Insight's service. Unfortunately, due to the lack of Time Warner monopoly (and due to some wheeling and dealing by my landloards), my only option is Insight.

Re:HOORAY!

[Anonymous Coward]

Do people who purchase a PC for the sole reason of connecting to AOL have the technical skills (or desire) to run linux instead of Windows? I think not. These are probably the people whose VCR clocks still flash "12:00".

Re:HOORAY!

[truesaer]

This news has made my day. I'm being optimistic and hopeful here, but could this day signal the beginning of the end of Microsoft?

There will never be the "end" of microsoft if the current model of software and hardware remains the same. There can only be meaningful competition. If you think that eventually everyone will just choose Linux instead, you're crazy. An example....toyotas are much higher in quality than Fords. And yet, ford still sells millions of cars each year.

There are a lot of things that influence people to buy things. Features, cost, style, familiarity, etc. You can't come up with one product that serves everyone's needs all the time.

Re:HOORAY!

[swillden]

Do people who purchase a PC for the sole reason of connecting to AOL have the technical skills (or desire) to run linux instead of Windows?

Do they have the technical skills to turn the computer on, click the AOL icon and type their password? Nothing more need be required.

My nearly 80-year old grandparents use Linux and find it much easier to handle than Windows was. Mainly, they like that it just works.

Re:HOORAY!

[RailGunner]

You're right, and I've said before that I don't think MS will ever go away completely.

However, I do think this could be the beginning of the end of Microsoft as it exisits today, an illegal monopoly with 95+% market share.

Re:HOORAY!

[SN74S181]

The game companies would then produce games to run on specifically that $200 PC's flavor of Linux. Since there's no formal Binary Interface (ABI) for Linux, one will be defacto established by the AOL.

Are we all excited, and highly enthused, with the idea of AOL establishing the defacto binary interface for Linux? That would, by necessity, happen, you know. Games vendors aren't going to support 60 different variants of the C Library, nor should they be expected to.

Re:HOORAY!

[theCoder]

Kind of like how MS doesn't own the processor and is hence in no position to dictate their "features" like Pallidum?

Now, I'm the first to cheer at Linux's success, but I also think that AOL is going to be the next MS (in the same way the MS was the next IBM). Hell, in some day, we (the tech community) may even be cheering for MS the same way we cheer for IBM.

I don't know what's going to happen in the future, but I'm always leery of large companies who think they know better then their customers.

Re:HOORAY!

[Requiem]

A computer without a Microsoft operating system is like a dog without bricks tied to its head.

Harder to kick?

Re:HOORAY!

[Hard_Code]

"candlelight visual"

If you use this phrase in spoken conversation, be sure to pronounce it: "candlelight vi-gil"

Re:HOORAY!

[Bert64]

AOL are by no means comparable to ms. They may have a large share of the home dialup market, but it is by no means a monopoly. No-one is discriminated against because they dont use aol, infact it would have to be the opposite... many irc networks place restrictions on aol users. And no work places force their users to use aol, atleast none that i know of.

Re:HOORAY!

[Bert64]

8mb *shared* memory? so what is the point of agp4x... considering the displaycard will be competing with the cpu for memory bandwidth, and memory bandwidth is already one of the largest bottlenecks for todays computers.
Yes, i really hate displaycards which use shared video memory.

Re:HOORAY!

[TheWickedKingJeremy]

Dont know if its too late to reply - will try anyways...

As one Slashdot reader once posted (sorry, was a long time ago and I forget who) - AOL is like a pair of rosy glasses that a user can put over their eyes to look at the Web with... It dumbs things down, but some think it makes things a heck of a lot easier and makes the Web a lot more useful. (to each their own)

But no matter what AOL does, I will *never* have to use their service... The worst thing that they can possibly do to me is to secure the next LOTR trailer a week before it goes public. Thats it. AOL is, and always has been, a choice, and that is why I hold no ill-will towards them.

Contrast this with MS... When I want to play the latest game, I need to use a product from a company I do not like (Windows). That sucks. If at some point the latest game requires AOL, then I will be the first to admit that you were right - but I dont see that happening anytime soon.

In the meantime, if AOL can convince John Q. Public that he does not need Windows anymore - more power to them! I am in their corner!

Re:HOORAY!

[theCoder]

But no matter what AOL does, I will *never* have to use their service...

Don't be to sure. AOL owns Time-Warner, so right now, I'm paying them $90/month (cable TV + cable Internet). Since both are monopolies, I don't have much of a choice (except go without, but that's a lousy choice if I do want the product). Anyway, there may come a time when you become an AOL customer.

Re:HOORAY!

[TheWickedKingJeremy]

Yeah I hear you on the whole cable issue... In my case its AT&T, not Time Warner, that "owns" the cable in our city... However, I think that is a seperate issue because in order for there to be competition, the industry would have to be nationalized... After all, you cant have rival companies all laying their own cables all over the place - that would be a fiasco. This is a tough question - one that I dont have a ready answer to.

However, I am still am not convinced that AOL on the desktop is dangerous in this same regard, because the customer retains their right to make choices... There is no reason why you *have* to run AOL on the desktop. Lumping Time-Warner's cable monopoly in your area is not a valid reason to think AOL is a monopoly on the desktop. In order for you to make this claim, you will have to explain why you are compelled to sign up to AOL even though you do not wish to.

Dear AOL: misleading product name

[GMontag]

The proper name for this system is GNU/AOL.

Please change it before the Hurd tramples you.

Re:Dear AOL: misleading product name

[Anonymous Coward]

dood. STFU. you didnt even read the FAQ. if you did you wouldn't try to crack stupid ass jokes. Linux is basically a flavor of GNU, deal with it ladies.

Re:Dear AOL: misleading product name

[Anonymous Coward]

if you were not on crack you would have gotten the joke ;-)

Re:Dear AOL: misleading product name

[Anonymous Coward]

But my Linux desktop doesn't use GNU software. Nor do any of the embedded distributions.

Re:Dear AOL: misleading product name

[Anonymous Coward]

GNU is just a set of utilities, NOT the OS. Linux is the OS. I guess anyone with CygWin loaded on a Win2k box should call it GNU/Microsoft Windows.

Re:Dear AOL: misleading product name

[someguysomewhere]

one word comes to mind:
FORMAT

remember all those floppies that they sent? I, like almost every other geek I know, would format them give them some pratical use.

Re:Dear AOL: misleading product name

[someguysomewhere]

oops this was supposed to go under:
Computer Junk Mail ( next comment )

Re:Dear AOL: misleading product name

[balamw]

ObGNURecursiveAcronym: AOL = AOL On Linux!

Re:Dear AOL: misleading product name

[Anonymous Coward]

Gnuaol? That's hard to pronounce!

Re:Dear AOL: misleading product name

[FooBarWidget]

No, Linux is a kernel, not an OS. An OS is a kernel plus system components, or in case of Unix, system utilities. GNU and Linux together form an operating system.

And no, Win2k + Cygwin isn't GNU/MSWindows, since the *essential* system components are already provided by Windows, not Cygwin. And Cygwin isn't even installed on Windows by default.

Re:Dear AOL: misleading product name

[Anonymous Coward]

Well, not if you are from the "real" USA (the country part)
GNU/AOL= GunY'all

Re:Dear AOL: misleading product name

[Dave2 Wickham]

I recently got a few DVD-style AOL cases... Of course I removed the CD and used it for a proper CD case... Shame it doesn't come on CD-RWs ;).

Re:Dear AOL: misleading product name

[Anonymous Coward]

But my Linux desktop doesn't use GNU software. Nor do any of the embedded distributions.

That's right, some people have systems with Linux in them that don't have any GNU software and some people have GNU systems without Linux in them. Nobody's suggesting that those are called GNU/Linux.

How STUPID do you have to be to think that any of that has anything to do with whether GNU/Linux is a suitable name for systems that include GNU and Linux?

"GNU/Linux" is an awkward name, and just doesn't have the widespread recognition of the plain "Linux" name. Those are good reasons not to use it. Mindlessly babbling about how your system doesn't include any GNU, doesn't include Linux or doesn't include either is obviously irrelevant to the question of what you call a system with both.

Re:Dear AOL: misleading product name

[Anonymous Coward]

It on commercials all the time, "Gnu Aol, version 7.0"

So what's it called now? AOLinux?

[Gldm]

So how long before we see AOL make their own distribution with all the "harmful" features (i.e. any type of user system control, the ability to not boot into a GUI, etc) stripped?

I'm surprised they didn't buy Corel a few years ago and try this already. "Here's a free OS on our free 1000 hour CDs! Oh, your office apps won't run now? Buy ours for only $49.95 each!"

Re:So what's it called now? AOLinux?

[tomhudson]

Hey, maybe they'll bundle both their linux client software and oppenoffice. Kick Micro$oft in the balls twice as hard.

Re:So what's it called now? AOLinux?

[Anonymous Coward]

hmm . . . AOLinux = America On Linux?

Re:So what's it called now? AOLinux?

[Anonymous Coward]

hmm . . . AOLinux = America On Linux?

In this case, Linux *is* pronounced "line-ux".

Re:So what's it called now? AOLinux?

[Anonymous Coward]

" So how long before we see AOL make their own distribution with all the "harmful" features (i.e. any type of user system control, the ability to not boot into a GUI, etc) stripped?"

Sounds good to me. Better two crappy companies fighting one another than a free ride for either.

Maybe people will smarten up and actually give (regular) Linux+Star/Open Office a go.

Re:So what's it called now? AOLinux?

[Anonymous Coward]

oh, the horror!
yes, i too will be very upset when i'm forced to buy it

sarcasm, if you didn't notice

Re:So what's it called now? AOLinux?

[Reziac]

Tho it might not be all that bad an idea. And as much as I dislike AOL's interface, they do seem to have pretty good coders and sometimes really sensible policies.

Frex, AIM (really a pretty good little messaging client -- works very well, quite configurable, and doesn't eat much). I recall a while back when some security hole was found, rather than expect every AIM user to hear about it and download a fix, AOL chose to plug the hole at the server level. I thought this showed remarkable good sense.

I'd hazard a guess that if AOLinux ever becomes reality, it'll be a highly USABLE linux right out of the box, even for the most rank beginner who's never touched a computer before. And that is not a bad thing if the object is to increase the truly viable choices available to consumers.

Computer Junk Mail

[Anonymous Coward]

Just wait until it becomes cheap enough for AOL to ship you free computers. Imagine all the junk you'll have then!

Re:Computer Junk Mail

[Anonymous Coward]

ROTFL

Re:Computer Junk Mail

[Anonymous Coward]

The best humour always has some truth.

This is fuuunnnnnnnnn---ie!

Re:Computer Junk Mail

[reallocate]

That's not that farfetched. More than a year ago, MicroCenter was selling $399 eMachines packaged with a rebatable $400 commitment to MSN. Get the rebate, and you made one buck on the deal.

Companies "give away" or sell below cost things to entice you to spend even more money with them. E.g. game consoles.

Re:Computer Junk Mail

[Zebbers]

ummm no, you had to subscribe to msn and pay them.
so, if you didnt have an exsisting isp, wanted to switch and wanted to make a 2 year agreement with one then it is an ok deal.

2 years is a long time...alot of people i know how opted for the rebate in buying a new pc recently regret it now.

Re:Computer Junk Mail

[Derleth]

Just wait until it becomes cheap enough for AOL to ship you free computers.

I'm just waiting for the look on Gates' face when AOL sends whole distros through the mails.

Three CDs? Cheap to crap out, easy to install, and the nail in Microsoft's coffin.

Gives you the warm fuzzies, don't it?

Re:Computer Junk Mail

[reallocate]

>> ummm no, you had to subscribe to msn and pay them.

Ummm, that's what I said, I think. :-) Buy a $399 computer, sign a deal with MSN, and get the $400 rebate. I remember seeing lines stretching around the inside of the store and out onto the sidewalk when my local MicroCenter advertised this deal.

Re:Computer Junk Mail

[Anonymous Coward]

Imagine a beowulf cluster of free AOL-supplied computers!

(sorry)

Re:Computer Junk Mail

[Anonymous Coward]

Yeah, the nail in their coffin! Those evil guys who committed antitrust violations and won the browser war by shipping free.... Hey. Wait a minute...

Re:Computer Junk Mail

[teslatug]

No man, I don't have space for coasters that big :)

Re:Computer Junk Mail

[Ed Avis]

They could send you a computer with one month's free AOL, and after that time period come to collect it back.

Or you might rent a PC as part of your AOL subscription - for $6 / month extra this is certainly possible, if the hardware costs $150 to manufacture and lasts a couple of years. It might even save AOL money by reducing support costs.

All that's needed is some way of getting a usable display on a TV screen... (I'm not optimistic).

Re:Computer Junk Mail

[scm]

All that's needed is some way of getting a usable display on a TV screen... (I'm not optimistic).

Don't be. TV just doesn't have the resolution for reading text. I have a computer plugged in to my TV and the text is blown up really big, but it's still almost impossible to read.

Maybe with HDTV, it will start being usable as a computer display, but I assume that you think TV display is needed to keep costs down... and HDTVs sure aren't cheap.

Re:Computer Junk Mail

[johnnyb]

In addition, for people who don't want to install Linux, they can simply include all of the Microsoft-replacement software in Windows versions. OpenOffice, Dia, Gimp, and maybe even throw in a Windows port of Evolution.

Wouldn't that be great? Windows being nailed into the ground by their own tactic. I like it.

Re:Computer Junk Mail

[Ed Avis]

I think TV text reading depends on the particular font and not just enlarging ordinary fonts. With a bitmapped font at say 80x30 screen size it should be usable.

What's needed is for somebody to go through and rip out all the effete X11 bitmap fonts, replacing them with nice chunky typefaces which have bitmaps for 80 columns on a TV screen (so one em would be about ten pixels wide). One of the tactics used by some 'home computers' was to make each vertical line two pixels wide rather than just one.

Stuff like wordprocessing is harder to do; even with really good anti-aliasing you're unlikely to get a pleasant WYSIWYG display. Again, you should rely on ready-made bitmaps for common sizes (as already happens sometimes) but these bitmaps could be anti-aliased and optimized for the horizontal blurring caused by TV screens.

Re:Computer Junk Mail

[CronoCloud]

I think WebTV does something like this to make it's fonts legible on TV. Amazing how clear most text is with a WebTV. Also the default font size is 18, I believe. Which is a little big, but you can make it smaller. I also use X and KDE on my Playstation 2 Linux kit. The console is fine on a TV, I think it's 80x30, very legible. In X on a TV I'm stuck with a 640x448 display, which is better than the default 640x404. (there's a tweak that removes the black borders around the PS2 Linux X screen) My default font is Helvetica 12, which is OK but I wouldn't want anything much smaller. I'm tempted to knock it up to size 13, which would help with legibility a bit. Anyways, modern TV screens have display quality than the screens we all hooked up our Atari's and Commodores to, so I think a modern home computer in the spirit of the old 8-bits is feasible. Heck, more than feasible, my PS2 IS a home computer.

On MSNBC?

[Bilbo]

When MSNBC publishes a glowing article like this, you have to start thinking it's going to take off. It still doesn't sound like a computer that I'd be interested in buying, but I know a LOT of non-technical people for whom this would be a perfectly acceptable solution.

I know now what I'm going to start suggesting to people who are looking for a "simple" setup. Sure, I'll probably end up giving them free support and doing a lot of hand-holding when things break, but I guess that's the price of being on the front lines, fighting for what you believe in.

Re:On MSNBC?

[GregWebb]

And people don't do that with Windows already?

Before I moved, I was Windows support for a _lot_ of people. Part of what helps Windows is that there's already the network of friendly computer literate people that know it.

Now, I'm not saying that Linux is just as easy as Windows. Not looked in for a little while but it certainly wasn't then and information I've heard since hasn't suggested that's changed. But, it remains that Windows is already beyond many users, so Linux being so isn't as much of a problem as some people think.

Re:On MSNBC?

[Anonymous Coward]

You sir are a true hero. I'm surprised no one has responded to your message with words of hope and confidence. Free support?!?!?! My God man! You, Sir, are the reason I sleep easy at night. God speed, god speed, good nerd.

Re:On MSNBC?

[jvmatthe]

Or you could be a conspiracy theorist. Hey, the Microsoft Press Puppet (MSNBC) is using their connection with the public to encourage people to go get Linux computers when they know good and well that that very same public will be outraged when everything doesn't work as advertised. Then the backlash against using Linux on the desktop sets us back another 5 years from getting a measly 1% of the desktop market, by which time we've all had our federally mandated Microsoft borg implants sent to us along with our tax forms.

Hey, it could happen! :^)

Re:On MSNBC?

[ShavenYak]

Sure, I'll probably end up giving them free support and doing a lot of hand-holding when things break

Yeah, but I'd rather support Linux systems than Windows systems! What I wouldn't give for a /var/log/messages to look at when my mother's computer crashes... and no, C:\BOOTLOG.TXT isn't even close.

Re:On MSNBC?

[richie2000]

that very same public will be outraged when everything doesn't work as advertised

Oh, like Windows XP works as advertised? I have been using it for months now and I still haven't been able to fly, not to mention that I had very high hopes that the enlargement of my skull resulting from using Office XP would draw attention away from my fat ass, but my hopes have been shattered. If anything, my head has shrunk! I am outraged!

Re:On MSNBC?

[rseuhs]

If you would actually start to read some details about MS, you would realize that Microsoft are not the evil geniuses Slashdotters and MSFT-shareholders like to see them, they are a rather incompetent company that just got lucky getting to make the OS for IBM.

I'm so sick of people seeing MSFT-conspiracies in everything.

The AOL-PC is great news for desktop-Linux, why do so many people have problems accepting something positive about Linux?

Re:On MSNBC?

[katre]

It still doesn't sound like a computer that I'd be interested in buying

What? I'm very interested in buying. $200 for a machine that'll be a kickass firewall, web server, DNS machine, and UT2K3 server? Where can I get one?

:-)

Re:On MSNBC?

[Golias]

I used to set up newbies on PC's, but I got really tired of getting phone calls all the damned time.

"I can't get my scanner drivers to work"
"My modem keeps disconnecting"
"What does 'registry error' mean?"
"The PC says it was not shut down properly every time I boot it up, even though I used that shut-down command like you said."

Now I set newbie friends and family members up on the Mac. I spend a few minutes setting it up with them, and about a half hour showing them how to use it, and they are off to the races. Not only the the Mac-using newbies have fewer problems than the ones I helped get PC's, but instead of calling me with a question, they use e-mail. It's like the Mac has actually made them smarter users.

[logo]

My name is David, and I am a perl hacker.

Re:On MSNBC?

[HiThere]

If you would actually start to read some details about MS, you would realize that Microsoft are not the evil geniuses Slashdotters and MSFT-shareholders like to see them, they are a rather incompetent company that just got lucky getting to make the OS for IBM.

You didn't address the "evil" assertion. I never thought that they were geniuses, no more than I thought that Al Capone was a genuius. But I defy you to challenge the assertion that it's evil.

Re:On MSNBC?

[afidel]

Luck had nothing to do with it, Bill's mom sat on the IBM board of directors.

Re:On MSNBC?

[afidel]

hate to reply to myself but the previous comment was wron, aparantly my memory is faulty. The actual relationship was this "Mary Gates - Bill's mom - had served on the national board of United Way with one of the involved IBM senior executives "

Re:On MSNBC?

[Anonymous Coward]

MOD PARENT UP!

Re:On MSNBC?

[rseuhs]

Excuse me, but how is that not luck?

Re:On MSNBC?

[Anonymous Coward]

It's because you agreed to EULA, which basically sell your soul to the devil... :-)

Internet Made Easier

[QEDog]

"Now i can check my email, IM my friends, surf the internet, all that in the AOL computer. It is so simple!"

Re:Internet Made Easier

[DickBreath]

"Now i can check my email, IM my friends, surf the internet, all that in the AOL computer. It is so simple!"

So braindead to use, no wonder it's number 1!

Re:AOL is on drugs

[gotvim]

Please don't leave out us Capitalists! We like to use Linux too. As for games, I play Tribes 2, quake3, unreal tourney, strike force, and many others successfully on my debian distro. I see no reason to run AOL myself, but it sure would be cool to visit mom's house someday and see her launching her AOL apps from Gnome on Mandrake!

i knew it!!!

[xo0m]

i'm not surprised that aol would make this move after the turbulent waters betw aolTW and microsoft. im sure a lot of end users wouldnt mind getting a lindows pc for like 300 bucks at walmart (of course most end users only know how to use aol anyway)

Good review, mostly

[danger42]

The KDE desktop looks and feels like Windows, with a few exceptions. You have to double-click an icon on the desktop to get it to open...

Last time I checked, I had to double-click on the icons, too, and I am running Win2k.

Re:Good review, mostly

[LMCBoy]

Eevn more ironic is the fact that the default KDE behavior is to single-click on desktop icons...so this is a feature they've changed to be more like Windows, yet it gets cited as a difference :)

Re:Good review, mostly

[ccady]

I *do not* have to double-click on icons, and I am running Win2K. If want to change that setting, go to a Windows Explorer window, click on the Tools/Folder Options menu item, go the the General tab, and choose the "Single click to open an item" option.

Re:Good review, mostly

[Suppafly]

although if you turn on active desktop and change some settings you can make windows more kde like and have it be single click to launch programs.

Re:Good review, mostly

[tycage]

The KDE desktop looks and feels like Windows, with a few exceptions. You have to double-click an icon on the desktop to get it to open...

Maybe you should read the whole sentence.

but only single-click an icon in the toolbar to get the same result.

I assume he's refering to the systray, where I have to double click on many of the icons there to get a response.

It does tend to depend on the application though.

--Ty

Re:Good review, mostly

[PainKilleR-CE]

but only single-click an icon in the toolbar to get the same result.

I assume he's refering to the systray, where I have to double click on many of the icons there to get a response.


But at the same time, if he's referring to anything like the Quick Launch bar in Windows, you do single-click that area, just like the start menu. I had to go to a meeting a couple days ago and it drove me nuts watching the person doing the presentation double-clicking things in IE and the IE icon on the quick launch bar, and she couldn't seem to figure out why things launched twice or links took a little longer than they should to open. I think MS had the right idea when they put in the option to single-click desktop items, because it makes things more consistent, yet at the same time I can't stand it, and have never used it.

Re:Good review, mostly

[Dog and Pony]

Why would you assume that he means the systray when there actually is a toolbar in Windows that takes a one-click as opposed to the desktop?

By default: Look to the immideate right of the Start button - that is the toolbar. To the far right is the systray. Toolbar takes single click. Desktop takes double. Systray applications behave like whoever programmed them wants to, which is sometimes single, sometimes double, often right-click only and also often combinations. All this by default, which means it is changeable.

Desktop shortcuts and toolbar shortcuts launch programs, systray contains running programs.

And yes, the guy is wrong... I assume he a long time ago configured his desktop to take single-clicks and forgot that he did.

Re:Good review, mostly

[Jaysyn]

The reporter probably has his desktop set up in WebView (or whatever) where the icons are like hypertext links. It was setup by the IT department of course, so he might just not know any better.

Jaysyn

Re:Good review, mostly

[eggcozy]

> I assume he's refering to the systray, where I have to double click on many of the icons there to get a response.

Nope. you can drag shortcuts to the left side of the toolbar just right of Start(IE and other MS stuff are there by default). Clicking those once will start them.

I think

Re:Good review, mostly

[Anonymous Coward]

I don't think anybody should have to double-click on icons to open something. I changed that setting a long time ago on my Windows box and have experienced less strained wrists as a result. For someone like me who plays a lot of mouse-driven games like Dungeon Siege or Diablo, single-click is the more rational setting. Too bad most newbies keep the default mouse setting and end up with wrist disorders as a result.

Re:Good review, mostly

[tycage]

Why would you assume that he means the systray when there actually is a toolbar in Windows that takes a one-click as opposed to the desktop?

The way I read it was that the single-click was the strange thing. Since, as you point out, a single click does launch things on the quick launch bar, I assumed that he must mean the systray, where there are often things that require a double click.

It's possible I gave him too much credit. I dunno.

--Ty

Re:Good review, mostly

[dohcvtec]

Look to the immideate right of the Start button - that is the toolbar

Nope, that's the "quick launch" bar. And it's astounding how few people even acknowledge its existence. Ever since the quick launch bar was introduced, I've used it. No more minimizing to the desktop or rifling through the start menu, your shortcuts are right there. Same thing with the "documents" flyout of the start menu. Most people don't even know it's there; instead, they go through a 10-level directory hierarchy to find the file they were just editing, and open it from there. They could've just gone to the documents flyout and clicked on it. And just so I'm not offtopic, I'd like to hook up many of these people with AOL's Linux software.

Re:Good review, mostly

[Reziac]

Systray can also include launchers that in turn run other programs (frex, Corel's DAD).

And I think you're right that the reviewer must be using XP and has it configured to single-click. (Which would drive me insane with all the closing up of stuff I didn't mean to run! :)

AOL and Linux?

[RobFrontier]

Why would a Linux user want to use AOL? Most if not all desktop linux users are way more proficient than that. I shudder to think of the help desk they would have to set up for Linus/AOL PC users.

Re:AOL and Linux?

[Salsaman]

How would a Linux/AOL helpdesk be any worse than a Windows/AOL helpdesk ? Besides, this is presumably not aimed at current Linux users, but rather current AOL users who want to buy a new PC.

Really, I think AOL had no choice, they could either continue to use MS software, and likely go bankrupt in 2 or 3 years when they lose all their customers to MSN, or strike out and try and distance themselves from MS.

Re:AOL and Linux?

[Anonymous Coward]

Here is a hint for you. AOL is part of AOL Time Warner and is not about to go bankrupt anytime in your lifetime.

Re:AOL and Linux?

[Anonymous Coward]

Reverse that question, and it makes much more sense.
For the impaired, that's:
Why would an AOL user want to use Linux?
The obvious reason is because they can save $100 by doing so.

Re:AOL and Linux?

[Drakonite]

1. AOL is the cheapest dialup connection available in my town (tied with two others)
2. When not root, linux is more difficult to accidentally break than windows. And from my experience, teaching someone who had never used a computer to use Linux/KDE to check email and surf the web is as easy (if not easier in some cases) than teaching to do the same on windows. YMMV.
3. The average Linux user likes Linux and wants it to become more mainstream. Having a corporation the size of AOL/TW supporting Linux is a very good thing, and will definatly serve to make it more mainstream.
4. If AOL/TW supports AOL on Linux, then they will be more likely to support other products in terms of Linux.

And what if it gets to the point AOL/TW makes it company policy to use Linux boxes whereever possibly and to no longer buy Microsoft products? You now have millions and millions of employees who are going to buy linux boxes instead of windows boxes, just so they dont' have to try to use something different at home and at work.

Re:AOL and Linux?

[jbottero]

Here's a hint for you. AOL is a part of AOL Tima Warner. What the guy said is that if AOL loses all it's customer to MSN, it will have to go bankrupt. Now, can we think of any other major corps that have gone tits up?

Re:AOL and Linux?

[PurpleHigh]

The one thing AOL has that no other service on Earth has is this: a gigantic user base to chat with. There are lots of other smaller niche chat sites out there, but nowhere can you find such a wide assortment of chat rooms. And the one thing that chat requires...people...is the one thing AOL can definitely provide.

That's why anyone...Linux user, Windows user, whoever...might use AOL. That's why this (Linux user) has an AOL account.

Re:AOL and Linux?

[pjrc]

Why would a Linux user want to use AOL?

Wrong question. The right one is....

Why would someone finally decide to buy a computer??

Re:AOL and Linux?

[JstSumSchmuck]

Many linux users would refuse to use AOL. But an AOL user WOULDN'T refuse to use linux(if correctly packaged). Why? Because a typical AOL user doesn't want to know what OS they're using. They want to check their mail, look at web pages and maybe use a word processor. Any OS that can allow them to do those things easily will satisfy them. So if Lindows makes it easy to setup and get online, and easy to start the aol interface the users already know and (somehow manage to) love, and easy to do simple word processing, and significantly cheaper than a windows pc, maybe it'll take off.
So I say more power to them. If 10% of aol users (that's 3.5 million people by the article's numbers) got set up with one of these, it would be a very good thing for the internet and standards. It will make that much more disincentive for sites and services to go microsoft only. Rip on AOL all you like, but they've got enough users to make some noise. What business wants to alienate that many people? I'd like to see a few million additional linux users, especially from a hard-to-reach demographic like that.
It's hard to convince non-technical people to do the right thing on technical issues. This way they'll be doing the right thing without really knowing it.
I just wish aol would give the pc away with the service, for maybe $10 per month more for 20 months or something.

Re:AOL and Linux?

[rseuhs]

And why should an AOL-user who is not into games *NOT* save over 100$ when buying a computer next time?

Re:AOL and Linux?

[Derleth]

Most if not all desktop linux users are way more proficient than that.

For the time being, sadly true.

But the glory of this deal is that Linux is slowly coming to the Mass Market. Billy Joe-Bob Windoze User will have the option of something as idiot-proof as AOL and as cheap as Linux. If Billy Joe-Bob decides that knocking $100 off the price of his next email machine is worth it for the 'store-brand' OS, he'll do it, and Linux has just swept another sale right out from under Microsoft.

This is how Linux finally meets Microsoft on Redmond's own ground.

Re:AOL and Linux?

[fault0]

Perhaps it's for new Linux or computer users. This is what Lindows is geared for anyways.

They probably used Lindows/Linux so they wouldn't have to pay Microsoft for a windows license in a 200$ PC :x

Anyways, this proves a point, Linux can be made so it's not just for geeks.

Re:AOL and Linux?

[Anonymous Coward]

Anyways, this proves a point, Linux can be made so it's not just for geeks.

Of course anyone in their right mind already knew this--it's just that few geeks care enough to do anything about it. This is changing and will continue to do so--it simply doesn't have the momentum that other areas of development do. :)

Re:AOL and Linux?

[Anonymous Coward]

Windoze

Oh well

A step in the right direction

[Joe Jordan]

This goes a long way towards bringing Linux desktop to the masses. Once grandma can check her AOL mail with the "you've got mail" sound and can read the Steve Case community updates, she'll be happy with her PC since it does everything that she expects.

WhINE

[Anonymous Coward]

Every time you run an app using WINE, you take one more incentive away from app makers to move away from Windows.

It's great that you can get a piece of shit computer for about 200 bucks, but is that really what you want? Does it really suit any market segment?

Re:WhINE

[allism]

Too bad they can't charge the software developers a buck every time WINE is used to run their software (yes, yes, wishful thinking spurred by the article about Kazaa hijacking charitable donations...)

Re:WhINE

[ShavenYak]

No, no, it's...

Every time you run an app using WINE, you make Baby Jesus cry.

Re:WhINE

[tomhudson]

Except that it will run faster, smoother natively, and everyone wants their apps to look the best. This is a compromise ... such is life (sigh).

Mind you, that "piece of shit computer" is better than almost anything sold on the planet 5 years ago.

And it comes without the Micro$oft tax. When someone can buy 4 complete computers for the price of 1 wintel box, Micro$oft Windows and Micro$oft Office, this really puts the Micro$oft tax in perspective.

Sick and tired

[rw2]

I am so sick and tired of people making snide comments like "of all places" when MSNBC reports on a non-windows happening in the world.

People, it's becoming cliche so many of you are making comments like that. For crying out loud, doesn't that mean that maybe your assumptions should be questioned!

Re:Sick and tired

[jbottero]

I'm sick and tired of tools like you bitching about little nothings like spelling, and shit like this. You are a tard. Please take a bath, I can smell you through my monitor.

Re:Sick and tired

[Anonymous Coward]

I am so sick and tired of people complaining about posts on Slashdot. It's becoming cliche to rant about attitudes and quick judgements. Wait a minute....

Re:Sick and tired

[greenhide]

I think that all good, right thinking people in this country are sick and tired of being told that all good, right thinking people in this country are fed up with being told that all good, right thinking people in this country are fed up with being sick and tired. I'm certainly not, and I'm sick and tired of being told that I am.

Re:Sick and tired

[ceejayoz]

MSNBC actually publishes pro-Linux articles quite often... so it's doubly annoying to hear the slashbots' mock surprise.

Re:Sick and tired

[Anonymous Coward]

Thank you! I was about to log on and post the same comment - seriously, folks, MSNBC has had a pretty good track record in that area, and the "always a surprise" reaction is getting old.

white trash...

[danger42]

I am not sure of $199 is a cheap enough price point to overcome the shame of walking past a WalMart greeter with a brand new computer. That is soooooooooooooo white trash.

Re:white trash...

[homer_ca]

Don't have to worry about that. It's only sold online, not in the stores.

Re:white trash...

[Anonymous Coward]

Guess what? Walmart is worth more than Microsoft. Don't underestimate the power of white trash.

Re:white trash...

[damiam]

Get it off walmart.com.

Re:white trash...

[Anonymous Coward]

It's true. There are a lot more stereotypical fat, white, slovenly geeks who would buy their computer at Wal-Mart for $200 than smart, skilled people who work for Microsoft.

It's like fighting the Chinese. Sure you've got better weapons, but you'll be out of ammo long before they are out of soldiers.

Re:white trash...

[Anonymous Coward]

That is soooooooooooooo white trash.

Well, we can't all be hard-arse rich black mofos like you, now can we?

Re:white trash...

[NewbieSpaz]

If that is the only thing holding you back, (the embarassement of being thought of as white trash), you can order it online: Here

Re:white trash...

[Anonymous Coward]

Yeah, I always thought they should use cute girls like the Japanese do.

Old man/woman: Good morning.

Cute Japanese girl: Ohayo Gozaimasu.

I'd sure go to Walmart more.

Re:white trash...

[freeefalln]

get off your fucking high horse. realize that America is white trash. Oh I forgot, you must be in the IT industry, that makes you better than everyone else. grow the hell up.

Re:white trash...

[Anonymous Coward]

Good point.

Why Lindows?

[Anonymous Coward]

What is so special about Lindows that AOL has chosen them in particular, rather than designing a general client for all Linux platforms?

Well...

[netphilter]

As much as I would never use this thing, I'm definitely going to pitch it to my boss. She's relatively technical, sucked into a contract with Prodigy that ends at the end of the month, and can't afford even $500 for a new PC. She likes have an international provider because she travels a lot, so having AOL would be all right with her. Overall, if the goal is to get widespread adoption for Linux on the desktop, this could be a good thing.

Re:Well...

[nmaeone]

I'm not sure as to the internal workings of the AOL client, but you could use this as a way to connect to the AOL service reliably and use NAT to share your connection? Hell, throw bochs on it, run two instances with 2 AOL accounts and get double the bandwidth (somehow implimenting bandwidth loadbalancing through the ethernet interface?). I know this may be relatively expensive, but I have lots of friends who have roomies, who each have their own AOL accounts, and two phone lines in their residence! This could be useful for those who are too far away from their CO to get DSL, don't want to the (sometimes) astonomical fees for cable, or are otherwise broadband impared. Implications can apply to business environments as well. [Shrug].

Walmart.com page

[TheSHAD0W]

Just FYI, here's Walmart's page on Lindows OS PCs.

Re:Walmart.com page

[Anonymous Coward]

Don't forget their Mandrake pcs. They're more expensive, but the hardware is better.

MSNBC article not about MS is surprising?

[ndogg]

MSNBC (of all places ) has an intersting article about AOLs new PC.

Why is this surprising? Microsoft wants MSNBC to be a good news agency. They can't rightly do that if Microsoft is telling them what to right. Microsoft has done a very good job of staying out of their way.

Microsoft does some iffy things, but there is no reason to brand them a completely evil entity. It's very large, and when you have an entity as large as that, there is no way to track what all the pieces do.

Re:MSNBC article not about MS is surprising?

[Snowgen]

I find it suprising not because of the "MS" part of MSNBC, but because AOL/TIME/WARNER generally tends to promote in-house before releasing out of house. Thus I would have expected this story to first run on CNN or Time or someother AOL-owned news outlet before being picked-up by MSNBC.

I don't see it as a slam on MS/MSNBC in anyway--just suprise that AOL didn't run it in-house first.

Buh Bye Microsoft!

[Anonymous Coward]

About time AOL is made for another OS. Mac OSX is a bit too pricey and well upgrading to XP is a no no. So we can all rejoice when Microsoft slips into extinction. Yeeee Haw!!

Here's some VIA C3 info

[qurob]

It hit 1GHz back in June

Tom's Hardware

Monitor must be extra

[breadbot]

I don't see a mention of a monitor in the article -- it must be sold separately (even though one was included in the picture). Has anyone been down to Wal-Mart to check on the monitor situation?

Re:Monitor must be extra

[Anonymous Coward]

Yes. Wal*Mart sells monitors, both in stores and presumably on the 'net. So if you must get all of your computing supplies from one source, er, you can. You can even make the monitor and PC part of the same order - all you have to do is, BEFORE CHECKING OUT after "adding" the PC to your "shopping cart" is find a monitor you like and "add" that to your "shopping cart". Then you can check out, and Wal*Mart will try to ship them both at once.

AOL CD Sleuth

[_Sambo]

Where is the most unlikely spot you've found and AOL CD dispenser. It seems logical to find them at CompUSA, Walmart, maybe even Albertsons or another large grocery store.

Last week I saw an AOL CD case at the carwash and at a gas station.

Where is the oddest place you've found "1,000 hours free" CDs?

Re:AOL CD Sleuth

[Anonymous Coward]

I saw one at the post office. I didn't know that the government favored certain corporations over others.

Re:AOL CD Sleuth

[Anonymous Coward]

Blockbuster
McDonalds
In a box of cereal
in a magazine
Never..
in my CD-Rom Drive

Re:AOL CD Sleuth

[EvlOvrLrd]

Right next to the coin actuator for the vibrating bed at a seedy 'pay-by-the-hour' hotel where I took my..... Ummmmm.... date. Actually, there is one sitting right under my coffee cup on my desk. Makes for a nice coaster. I only wished that they distributed the media on CD-RW, so I could burn my own data on the disk. Much like when I needed a blank floppy...

Re:AOL CD Sleuth

[tomhudson]

Canadian Tire

The problem is you NEED an account

[simpl3x]

if you design websites just so you can watch AOL butcher your pages! since we develop educational materials, something like 40% of our clients traffic is through AOL. wouldn't be nice if an open-source linux platform which could be rebranded by AOL (similar to mozilla), were to be developed in conjunction with mini-beast? the platform could be a minimum install sort of solution with necessary applications...

Single click toolbar?

[SheepHead]

The KDE desktop looks and feels like Windows, with a few exceptions. You have to double-click an icon on the desktop to get it to open, but only single-click an icon in the toolbar to get the same result.

Umm.. has he used Windows? Lemme check real quick... yup, double-click an icon on the desktop, but only single-click an icon in the toolbar to get the same result. Does anyone double-click the Start menu? Quicklaunch bar? How about the Save button in the toolbar of any application?

What in the world was he expecting?

More generally, this is very neat news. I know many people's parents and grandparents who would love a new machine for $200, as long as they can run AOL.

sheephead

Re:Single click toolbar?

[Anonymous Coward]

I happen to know alot of new 'users' who double click everything, startmenu, quicklaunch, hyperlinks, icons that only need to be clicked once, etc. I tell them they only need to click once but they persist.

Low price is good...

[Anonymous Coward]

...this ought to make it cheap to set up a beowulf cluster of AOL linux pc's

Re:Low price is good...

[EricWright]

Dude, at $200 a head, wipe Lindows and install a real linux distro. Get a decent switch, a RAID controller and several large HDs, and voila, a (pseudo-)real beowulf cluster.

Eric

Well, of course

[Anonymous Coward]

MSNBC (of all places )...

Of course they're going to give a good review to a microtel pc running Lindows. This way, people will go out and buy it, realize it's crap, and from then on think Linux is crap.

It looks like Wine to me

[bogie]

Although its hard to tell, it looks like the AOL client is running on Wine. If that's the case whoopdee f**kin doo. Also I guess since the AOL client runs on windows that makes windows "AOL's" PC as well. The author of the article is clueless, he basically says that for the first time you don't need the windows or mac OS and how great this is. Well no you don't moron, but you still nee the Linux OS. Its not like AOL boots from a Cdrom and an underlying OS isn't necessary. THAT would be an AOL PC.

Lindows PR strikes again. Redhat et al sure as hell have alot to learn from them. I bet more consumers know about Lindows then Redhat which is just mindblowing.

Re:It looks like Wine to me

[Salsaman]

It doesn't necessarily run under Wine, it could be just a rebranded NS7.

Re:It looks like Wine to me

[dontkillme]

The Lindows preview release of AOL runs in wine, Netscape 7 (the default browser) allows access to many aol functions such as their messenger and email via the mail client. You can get Netscape 7 in any distro, but as far as I know, AOL doesn't run in standard wine. Also, as far as I know, the AOL client is not being ported by AOL but by the Lindows staff. The preview release of AOL7 is definately in the early stages of being "ported" via wine.

Re:It looks like Wine to me

[bbqBrain]

I think the idea is that AOL (and, possibly, Wal-Mart) will soon begin advertising the hell out of these things as "AOL PCs", so this term could make its way into the vernacular.

I think this is a great idea. AOL can distribute these machines with no software license fees built in, but they don't have to do loads and loads of custom work. An AOL OS wouldn't make sense--why would anyone want to write an entirely new OS to provide a *subset* of the features one can get for free from Linux, FreeBSD, etc? Whether the AOL client uses WINE is irrelevant. It (allegedly) works. 99% of AOL's users would never consider installing Linux. They wouldn't even want to install a new version of Windows. In the mindset that they have created, AOL is the Internet. The PC is an appliance. If they can pull an "AOL PC" out of the box and it Just Works (tm), that's a big selling point...especially if it only costs $200 + their old monitor.

In summary, I think this is a big deal.

Re:It looks like Wine to me

[Anonymous Coward]

I hope that you're not claiming the "Just Works" trademark. AFAIK, that belongs to my friend Brian.

A bit misleading...

[Dareth]

The operating system is called Lindows. One of its original marketing ploys was trumpeting that you could run some programs on it that only run on Microsoft Windows -- hence the name. As you might imagine, this did not make Microsoft happy. They sued. Lindows no longer touts those qualities, although the capabilities are still built inside.

And I thought Lindows won the lawsuit...
oh well, MSNBC must know best.

Re:A bit misleading...

[An Onerous Coward]

I think -- and don't quote me on this -- is that, as the lawsuit progressed, Lindows realized that the less it touted the "Windowsiness" of its operating system, the less of a case Microsoft had.

Just my theory. I didn't follow the case very closely. I'm not even sure who won.

all the isps already support linux

[zrodney]

I've still never seen an ISP that doesn't support
linux. Sometimes they don't understand that they
do, but it's just DHCP or pppoe.

also, aol is a terribly expensive isp with lots
of unneeded extra baggage

Re:all the isps already support linux

[FunkyELF]

Extra baggage?
Call it what you will. A year ago the apartment complex I lived in provided free ethernet. Problem was that nobody could use it because everything was getting jammed in each building before it even went out to the main dish. They were useing hubs without switches. Anyway, nobody could do anything at all except for the AOL users because their packets are smaller and more effecient than http packets.
Don't get me wrong, i hate aol with a passion, and have come to the conclusion that anyone who pays $10 more a month to be able to type in a a keyword (like imadumbaoluser instead of www.imadumbaoluser.com) is a moron. But still there was that point in my life where I would have to put clothes on, get in my car, drive to campus, and use their computers to download notes, and assignments, and upload homework,that I saw a positive thing about AOL.

Re:all the isps already support linux

[Anonymous Coward]

Next time set you MTU size, ad keep on with a sane ISP

Re:all the isps already support linux

[Anonymous Coward]

A year ago the apartment complex I lived in provided free ethernet. Problem was that nobody could use it because everything was getting jammed in each building before it even went out to the main dish. They were useing hubs without switches. Anyway, nobody could do anything at all except for the AOL users because their packets are smaller and more effecient than http packets.

I'm sorry, but you just don't know a thing about networking. Reconsider revealing how off base you are, next time.

Re:all the isps already support linux

[MentlFlos]

I've still never seen an ISP that doesn't support linux. Sometimes they don't understand that they do, but it's just DHCP or pppoe.

You have this backwards... You have yet to find an ISP that Linux does not support. Just because you can make it work does not mean it is supported in any way. -paul

Re:all the isps already support linux

[class_A]

Sometimes they don't understand that they do, but it's just DHCP or pppoe.

Unfortunately in the world of ISP's, "supported" doesn't mean "it is possible for your computer to connect." It means when Grandma calls and she has problems checking her mail in Outlook, we'll look at a flip chart and talk her through it. Connecting using Linux is possible in the vast majority of cases, but it is usually an unsupported option.

Re:all the isps already support linux

[zrodney]

all you need to do is ifconfig your MTU down
so it will pass through the hubs.

the fact that AOL happens to be pre-broken that
way doesn't make it better than a real ISP, just lucky

Re:all the isps already support linux

[zrodney]

well, paul. I really don't see the difference.

It's not like the ISP comes to my house and helps
me run Windows or something.

I said the ISP supports linux, not the ISP's help
desk does. Most of them don't have a clue what
that would mean, but don't want a million questions
about linux when they don't really know how windows
works either.

Re:all the isps already support linux

[FunkyELF]

hmm, The computer that I was using there last year was configured for broadband with all realivent tweaks from speedguide.net some of which may have messed with the MTU, but maybe in the other direction
I remember I couldn't even ping the router, so i don't know how AOL got through but tiny pings wouldn't. That network was pretty messed up to begin with. Also it was kinda funny when I did a little test, how less than 15 seconds after I share a folder without a password I got a .eml file with nimda in each sub-dir of the folder. I'm not saying setting my MTU lower wouldn't do anything, but I know the kids using AOL could load web pages and I couldn't even ping the router
Ok, maybe all i've established is that AOL's default browser is better configured than M$'s.

Re:all the isps already support linux

[mahmud]

Well, you see, network problems are there to be troubleshooted:P

AOL has been looking for Linux engineers lately

[tshoppa]

Here in the DC area AOL has been looking for a large number of Linux software engineers as of late. I always thought that these were for "back-office" applications (account management etc., heavy desire for Perl and database experience) maybe some other positions seem to be oriented towards end-user applications.

MSNBC

[starling]

It's time to lose the "MSNBC (of all places)" type comments. They consistently put out interesting tech stories with no bias towards or against Microsoft, and I they seem take their journalistic impartiality seriously.

No, I don't work for them.

Re:MSNBC

[nagora]

It's still pretty ironic, though.

TWW

Re:MSNBC

[FortKnox]

They consistently put out interesting tech stories with no bias towards or against Microsoft, and I they seem take their journalistic impartiality seriously

The issue, though, is Slashdot IS biased, and always writes against MS (even if its something good MS does, its written with a slander tone).

What do I think of /.'s bias? I think its immature.

Re:MSNBC

[JordoCrouse]

It's still pretty ironic, though.

Is it still ironic if:

* ABC News does a report on the new Warner Brothers movie? (ABC is owned by Disney)

* Dateline NBC interviews the president of Sony? (NBC is owned by GE)

* CBS does an piece on Fox's American Idol?

And so on.... the original poster had the right idea. Its about journalistic integrity, not pandering to the owners. Providing stories of general interest is the main mission of the MSNBC group, and as long as they are making money, I am sure that NBC and Microsoft could care less if they happen to post stories that highlight their competitors or put themselves in a lesser light. Hell, if it increases readership, they might even do it more.

Re:MSNBC

[Anonymous Coward]

Anybody else think the MSNBC columnist looks like he pissed? Wouldn't want to date his daughter...

Re:MSNBC

[geekd]

What do I think of /.'s bias?

I think if /. was *not* biased, they would be a much less fun and much less popular web site. /.'s anti-MS, pro-Linux stance is what makes it.

If you want un-biased reporting, go to MSNBC (apparently). I'll stay here where the fun is.

Re:MSNBC

[FortKnox]

Being pro-Linux does not require you to be anti-MS.

Look at Linus Torvalds. I think he's a pretty big supporter of linux, don't you?
What's his thoughts on MS?

Re:MSNBC

[Anonymous Coward]

So what would fucking please you then? If the Ed's didn't pick the stories that show any bias in their wording? Or maybe if the Ed's smoothed out every submission and re-wrote it to say 'Well this seems to be another IE exploit this week but we think MS deserves a fair chance to fix this bug'?

I mean, FFS, 9/10 stories are Ed selections, not written by the Ed's. If there is a bias showing, it's showing from the /. readers/submitters. And if that's what fucking bothers you then you're obviously in the wrong place, because that bias isn't going anywhere and it permeates the stories, the polls and the comments.

Also, it's all well and good to point fingers and say who's immature. The door swings both ways.

Re:MSNBC

[Anonymous Coward]

What's ironic is that you think that NBC/ABC/CBS or any other network knows what journalistic integrity is.

Re:MSNBC

[Anonymous Coward]

No it should be more like "IE bug exploited, if you run IE (which most of you do), then go out and get the patch!"

Speaking of immature, trolling is the lowest form.

Re:MSNBC

[Anonymous Coward]

Meanwhile, subdimension.com is owned by Microsoft.com.

Re:MSNBC

[Anonymous Coward]

LOL. You're right. I didn't even pay attention to his pic until you pointed it out. Scary.

Re:MSNBC

[LMCBoy]

What's his thoughts on MS?

see my .sig :)

Re:MSNBC

[GigsVT]

Being pro-Linux does not require you to be anti-MS.

Sorry, it does now. Ballmer wants to crush Linux. "The GPL is a cancer... Open source leads to security problems...." etc...

At one time you could be pro-Linux and not anti-MS, but MS has made that impossible now. If you support MS, you hurt Linux and open source. It is not us who made it that way, it is MS.

Re:MSNBC

[miffo.swe]

Ofcourse slashdot is biased! Im here for linux, freebsd, techs and funny stories about how MS succeds in fscking up in such wonderful ways. If i want to read sweet stories about Microsoft i just pop over to winmag or zdnet.

Do you run around MCSE forums and rant about them being biased against linux? I have read some pretty horrid lies over there and nothing on slashdot comes even close.

Re:MSNBC

[FortKnox]

So let me get this straight...
I have a Windows machine for my gaming needs (and work, if its Windows-centric), and a Linux box that is my coding/server.

So it looks like I'm an enemy to Linux, then.

I'm guessing that'd make a lot of people that run AND support Linux an enemy of Linux.

Sorry, but if that's the case, Linux isn't going to win. And its your philosophy that will kill it.

Re:MSNBC

[teslatug]

and I they seem take their journalistic impartiality seriously.

No, I don't work for them.

Freudian slip? j/k

Re:MSNBC

[Dalcius]

Using Microsoft isn't supporting them [philisophically], IMO. Sometimes you just have to use things you don't like to get by.

However, I find it hard to believe that you can honestly support Linux's free and open philosophy but support MS (not as in using it). If you can like Microsoft overall and you still follow the ideals of OSS, it is my opinion that you are ignorant of the entirety of Microsoft's history, actions and motives.

I'm all up for being fair to MS. They're not all bad (it's hard for anyone to be). But given the overall picture, I think they deserve most of what they get.

However, I'd still agree that there is a lot of immature MS bashing on Slashdot. Chalk it up to trolls and move on.

Re:MSNBC

[Fred Ferrigno]

Uh huh. In CBS' piece on American Idol, did they happen to mention when it was on? How many pieces did they do on Survivor when it was popular?

Re:MSNBC

[Anonymous Coward]

But where do you draw the line between bias and common sense? If someone makes fun of someone else who keeps hitting themself in the head with a hammer, does that indicate an "immature" bias against head-hammerers?

Microsoft is evil and destructive, and does use ad revenue as payola to influence publishers. You might have been able to credibly argue against that, maybe 10 or 15 years ago. But nowdays? Not really. It would be pro-Microsoft bias to pretend to be blind to them. So is /. supposed to ignore the obvious and keep reporting about Microsoft with a straight face? Or can they call a duck a duck?

Re:MSNBC

[glh]

Just wanted to add my 2c...

I've submitted several articles that paint MS in a neutral (non-negative) light. Such as, releasing a BSD version of .NET. Or even DotGnu, who is a competitor to .NET.

I've never seen a POSITIVE article (or really, even non-negative) on MS posted by slashdot. It'd be different if there was a good mix. But to say that /. readers/submitters are ALL anti-ms is just not true.

However, I don't really mind if /. is anti-MS. It's freedom of speech, after all. I can choose not to read here if I don't like it, so it really isn't something worth complaining about. But it IS true- slashdot, its editors, and a large percentage of its readers are anti-ms. And my guess is, not much will change about this in the near future.

Re:MSNBC

[starling]

:) No, wondering whether to be humble and say "I think they take[...]".

I nearly decided on humility...

Re:MSNBC

[starling]

What do I think of /.'s bias? I think its immature.

It can be sometimes, and there is an unfortunate tendency towards mob thinking in the comments. On the other hand, Slashdot consists almost entirely of editorial and user comment and so can't realistically pretend to be impartial. All it has to do is be interesting and lively.

MSNBC and Slashdot are in a different businesses and I judge them by different standards.

Re:MSNBC

[nagora]

Is it still ironic if:
* ABC News does a report on the new Warner Brothers movie? (ABC is owned by Disney)

If Disney constantly went around saying that they were going to crush WB and that WB couldn't hold a candle to Disney then, yes, it would be ironic if ABC carried news of a possibly important new support for Disney.

TWW

Re:MSNBC

[Anonymous Coward]

Well, ABC News doesn't cover WB movies very much, even though Disney has a large stake in it. But you can bet the next film from Mirimax will have a segment on Good Morning America. And there will be a half hour "making of" special for the next animated Disney feature on Sunday evening too.

You wanna talk about GE? Did you see the crap they pulled with Enron? What's the difference between Enron and every other company in America? They went head to head against General Elecric in California two years ago. What does Sony have to do with anything?

CBS sure spent alot of time with their MTV pre-game special on Super Bowl Sunday last year. Back when Westinghouse owned them, there was a competition between CBS and NBC as to who could expose the most government contract abuse/environmental abuse about their competitor. They would actually use stories to leverage the other network into not showing a story exposing each others parent company.

Re:MSNBC

[Anonymous Coward]

Look at Linus Torvalds. I think he's a pretty big supporter of linux, don't you?
What's his thoughts on MS?

Oh, I know this one.

He thinks something like "I never really think about them at all, I don't pay any attention to anything they do, I don't have any opinion, but here's a rant about how crap they are and how right I am...".

That's what he thinks about pretty much everyone First disclaimer about how he has no opinion or any interest followed by trashing them.

Re:MSNBC

[JordoCrouse]

Well, ABC News doesn't cover WB movies very much, even though Disney has a large stake in it. But you can bet the next film from Mirimax will have a segment on Good Morning America. And there will be a half hour "making of" special for the next animated Disney feature on Sunday evening too.

Notice that I didn't say they wouldn't be self serving. Thats all too obvious. What I said is that it might be wrong to put too much emphasis on an AOL story from MSNBC.

You wanna talk about GE? Did you see the crap they pulled with Enron? What's the difference between Enron and every other company in America? They went head to head against General Elecric in California two years ago. What does Sony have to do with anything?

Well, I said Sony because I couldn't pull any direct GE competitors out of my ass at that point in time (I was thinking of using Pratt and Whitney, but I didn't think too many people would get the airplane engine reference).

But once again, I didn't say squat about GE, or even their corporate morals. I just pointed out that simply, if Katie Curic interviewed the CEO of competitor X, nobody would think that it is ironic. Yet, an MSNBC story about anything *not* Microsoft related is wildly attacked. Care to comment about that?

CBS sure spent alot of time with their MTV pre-game special on Super Bowl Sunday last year. Back when Westinghouse owned them, there was a competition between CBS and NBC as to who could expose the most government contract abuse/environmental abuse about their competitor. They would actually use stories to leverage the other network into not showing a story exposing each others parent company.

Well, I did say something about integrity, and it was a mistake, and you did a great job of pointing that out. But you failed to get my main point, which is that it is OK for MSNBC (or any news corporation) to print or show glowing reports of their competitors, when that is in the spirit of general interest to the viewing public.

Re:MSNBC

[Malcontent]

There are a lot of pro MS, anti linux/open source sites out there. Why not go hang out there? Honestly why do you hang out here if you hate it? Seems silly.

Re:MSNBC

[Malcontent]

No you are an enemy of Microsoft. Ballmer officially want to find a way to make sure you will never install linux or run linux programs. Every PC without windows costs him money.

Be it palladium or bought legislation Ballmer will eventually make it impossible for you to ever run linux or open source. You will be lucky if you don't end up in jail for doing it.

Let me repeat.

If you use linux you are an enemy of microft. Ms has declared war on you. Ballmer has already called you vile and evil things like communist or terrorist and compared you to cancer.

You may choose to ignore these attacks and continue to use windows, you may choose to just be a bystander or whatever. It's a free country. Some people are fighting back though.

Re:MSNBC

[benjamindees]

What do I think of /.'s bias? I think its immature.

I think it's acceptable for a generation that's grown up using MS' shitty products instead of writing them.

Re:MSNBC

[FortKnox]

I DO NOT HATE LINUX NOR OPEN SOURCE.

Why do you assume I do? I'm one of those guys that thinks Linux isn't the best for everything, and windows isn't the worst for everything.

I, personally, run SuSE7.2 at home. I also have an XP box. I just don't like being told that if I run windows, I'm an enemy to open source.

I, honestly, think that there is no need to fight MS at all to support Linux and Open Source. Use what you like, no need to fling poo. MS HAS to fight Linux because they live in capitalism. Linux doesn't (RedHat, et al, live in capitalism for support). So linux has no need to fight back.

Zealotry only makes you blind with rage.

Re:MSNBC

[Malcontent]

Like I said you may stay on the sidelines like the most of the people in the world. It's your right.

For me when I hear Ballmer, gates and their mafioso call me a communist and a cancer I intend to fight back in whatever small way I can. If it means using linux, calling them names, encouraging other to boycott them, or whatever else it takes.

All it takes for evil to win is for good people to do nothing. In this case evil is winning because too many people are doing nothing.

You've got Root!!

[Anonymous Coward]

The h4x0rz are gonna love this.

Another source....

[bziman]

MSNBC seems to be responding somewhat slowly, so here's an article on the same topic from ZDNet UK.

Enjoy...

-brian

Re:Great... -- Overrated --didn't read the article

[Anonymous Coward]

Did you read the article you overrated clod. It is software not a PC. Please at least read the link before you submit your totally inaccurate posting.

AOL as ISP and AOL s/w As Client

[frodo from middle ea]

If you break donw AOL Internet Service in to
two distinct componets.
1) AOL as an ISP,
This makes sense as USA is very slow in adopting
broadband internet. But if you have DSL in your
area and dont mind an extra 30-40$ , Then no dial-up
service can match DSL or cable.

2) The AOL s/w.
Now this i find totally redundant .
The IM chat client can be installed seperately, and I frankly don't see any advantage of keyword look-up over URL.
So what is porting AOL over to linux going to acchieve ? Surely you don't think ppl, would switch to linux just becaus AOL have a clinet for linux. AOL can not afford to ignore the Win users so they will have client for Windows too.

Re:AOL as ISP and AOL s/w As Client

[LowellPorter]

? Surely you don't think ppl, would switch to linux just becaus AOL have a clinet for linux.
I would. I do currently use Linux a little. I want to move to it full time except it doesn't have an AOL client. I use AOL because I travel some, and it's one of the few nationwide ISPs. I have been on AOL for 6 years, and I would have to contact too many people with a new email if I switched to something else. I don't like MS at all, and want to switch to Linux full time.

Re:AOL as ISP and AOL s/w As Client

[frodo from middle ea]

but switching from dual boot to linux boot is not switching to linux. you already switched to linux when u installed it in the first place, and i am sure you have accquired enough proficiency with the OS to use it full time except your ISP won't allow it. what i am talking about is average computer user, do u really belive that they really care what OS runs on their PCs, as long as they can do what they want to do. and if windows allows them to do so, why bother to switch ?

AOL Isn't So Bad After All

[RAMMS EIN]

This thought just crossed my mind. AOL brought Internet to the masses. This results in gazillions of lusers eating up the Net's bandwidth, but it also means that now gazillions of people care about Internet. This is precisely what we need to increase Internet coverage all over the world: a large corporation with millions of users behind it (read: hard cash). AOL's success will encourage others in other places to attempt the same thing.

Then there is AOL Instant Messenger, AKA AIM. A reliable source of "Me too" conversations, but also a way for people to communicate with each other without paying huge costs for telephone calls. It arguably sucks less than ICQ (what's that UIN again?) or MSN (Passport), and third parties are offered access to the network via TOC. True enough, AOL blocks people who try to access their network with reverse-engineered Oscar clients, and TOC doesn't offer all the features we've come to expect from instant messaging, but that can be seen as a reaction to others downright ignoring TOC and using Oscar instead, which obviously goes against the rules laid out by AOL.

Another Good Thing of AOL is that they're still sponsoring Netscape and Mozilla. This means that we owe thanks to them for what may be the best browser around at the moment. They are also using Gecko in their new software, which means that a significant number of people will be using it, which makes cross-browser compatibility of websites an issue and promotes open standards, to the benefit of all who don't use M$IE for Windows.

AOL offers people freedom of choice in that their software works on Windows, Mac OS, and, apparently, Linux. This sets an example for other companies, and possibly even the OSS movement (after all, many OSS is tied to UNIX-like systems).

Not all about AOL is good, but I do think that, on the whole, they are doing a lot that makes the world a better place, or at least insofar as computers are concerned.

Re:AOL Isn't So Bad After All

[AlienWorker]

AOLServer - an open source, production quality and high performance web server.

Re:AOL Isn't So Bad After All

[DoctorFrog]

This results in gazillions of lusers eating up the Net's bandwidth

which in turn results in gazillions being spent upgrading the infrastructure.

Microsoft helped popularize cheap PCs, AOL helped popularize cheap Internet, Walmart may well popularize cheap Linux PCs. Every silver lining has a cloud, or something like that! ;)

specs

[danger42]

- VIA C3 800 MHz processor offers comparable performance to the 800 MHz Celeron processor
- 133 MHz frontside bus
- 128 MB SDRAM, expandable to 1 GB
- 133 MHz memory speed
- 10 GB Ultra-ATA 100 hard drive, 5400 rpm (total accessible capacity varies depending on operating environment)
- 52x CD-ROM drive
- Integrated Trident Blade 3D/Pro Media AGP 4x graphics
- Up to 8 MB shared video memory
- Integrated AC '97 Audio with 3D enhanced sound
- Integrated 10/100 Ethernet connection
- Micro ATX tower case (14"D x 7"W x 14"H)
- Available drive bays: one 5.25-inch external, one 3.5-inch external, one 3.5-inch internal
- 2 PCI slots
- 1 ISA slot
- High-speed serial port
- Parallel port
- 2 front and 2 rear USB ports
- Game port
- 104-key keyboard
- 2-button mouse with wheel
- Audio port (line-in, line-out, mic-in)
- Stereo speakers
- LindowsOS operating system (pre-installed)
- Software includes mail, word processor, Web browser/file manager, address book, calculator, CD player, MP3 Player, PowerPoint viewer, Word viewer, Excel viewer and Image viewer
Games include Tron, Battleship, Poker, Minesweeper, Potato Guy
- Special Offer - Select up to 10 software applications at no charge from the Lindows.com Click-N-Run Warehouse
- 1-year warranty, return to Microtel

Re:specs

[Anonymous Coward]

It comes with Potato Guy? Awesome!

Re:specs

[Anonymous Coward]

I have one of these machines. I just bought it. NO WAY is it comparable to an 800 mhz Celeron.

My 458 Mhz Celeron outperforms it in every int and float test. It is close to a 400 mhz Celeron.

Re:specs

[Anonymous Coward]

And interestingly, NO FLOPPY drive...

http://www.walmart.com/catalog/product.gsp?produ ct _id=1957333&cat=3951&type=19&dept=3944&path=0%3A39 44%3A3951

Re:specs

[fault0]

Not sure about 800mhz part, but a 1ghz C3 is about equivalent to a 800mhz celeron in int tests, and vastly worse in float tests.

It seems that it has a horrible FPU, and fairly decent ALU. Hey, it's 200$ for the whole machine, not bad if all you want to do is web browse, play 2d games, check email and go on AOL chat rooms :p

But I agree, this is not good avertising to call it similiar to a 800mhz celeron (or 850mhz duron, which is even more far fetched).

Re:specs

[Anonymous Coward]

Just got one of these. Will buy another for client next week and one more after. A good machine for beginners, very old updaters, and with a cdrw+display enough to get ppl to learn. Why not learn on NON-MS! These are cheap enough to keep in the cars we live in.

Re:specs

[Reziac]

Yes, but the target market has no real use for the FPU and wouldn't miss it even if it were entirely absent. The closest they'll come to exercising the CPU might be cropping their kids' birthday photos and mailing 'em to grandma.

As to specs vs price, this is comparable to the usual in a low-end (well, what's low-end now) barebones system at a computer swap meet -- so a pretty good deal for the target market, being mainly people who aren't so sure they need a computer at all for $500 and up, but at "only $199" it sounds a lot more attractive to these folks.

Best part - REAL cost of Windows being exposed

[WarpedMind]

It only got one line of play in the article but that fact that Wal-Mart is selling the same computer for a $100 more that includes windows is significant.

Never before has the public been offered such clear presentation of the real cost of Windows. (At least not in such a large forum.)

Always before MS has been able to hide the cost the consumer is paying. Now that Wal-Mart draws it out in black and white, users will finally have a REAL choice about what OS they want to use on their PC.

Re:Best part - REAL cost of Windows being exposed

[philipkd]

Man, I never thought of it this way. But the price of windows is 50% the price of the whole Lindows machine. Shows the considerable disparity between the value of hardware and software.

Re:Best part - REAL cost of Windows being exposed

[pjrc]

... that fact that Wal-Mart is selling the same computer for a $100 more that includes windows is significant.

Don't forget that the REAL cost of Lindows is $99/year OR learning to download and install software the "linux way" (or perhaps Debian or Redhat way would be more accurate). It can only be good for the free software community if people who opted for a cheap $199 computer also opt for the cheaper way of obtaining free software.

And the $100 extra includes the $30 modem not present in the $199 computer, so in truth you're paying $70 for 'doze. Still, that's 35% of the cost of the basic machine.

Re:Best part - REAL cost of Windows being exposed

[good-n-nappy]

Hey, I hadn't noticed that. WTF do you do with AOL without a modem ;)

I'm very skeptical of any company that wants me to "subscribe" to anything. I think Lindows is destined for failure if they stick to that model. People like to feel a sense of ownership. They need a way to give people a fixed cost on their service and a sense of ownership over what they've downloaded. It also seems like their assuming a broadband connection for all the Chick 'N Run downloads. How many $200 computer owners have a broadband connection? I think they would be better off selling a collection of Linux application CDs on their web site. That would solve the ownership problem and the distribution problem - though of course, not the renewable income problem.

Anyway, I noticed Lindows is up from 3 free downloads to 10 with the purchase of a Lindows PC. That was definitely a good move on their part.

Re:Best part - REAL cost of Windows being exposed

[teslatug]

Don't get your hopes too high, those with enough wit already know the cost of Windows...Wallmart customers will just think the PC with Windows is just "better" somehow (everyone knows yo get what you pay for).

Re:Best part - REAL cost of Windows being exposed

[Anonymous Coward]

Right. As if the real cost of Windows is only $100.

It's a step toward exposing it. It's still not the actual exposure itself.

Re:Best part - REAL cost of Windows being exposed

[Anonymous Coward]

No Modem? And after Microtel fixed the softmodem issue in their Mandrake Version? This makes no sense.

Re:Best part - REAL cost of Windows being exposed

[pjrc]

No Modem? And after Microtel fixed the softmodem issue in their Mandrake Version? This makes no sense.

According to the article, and Walmart's site, the computer is $230 if you want it with a modem.

Makes perfect sense... attract attention with the $200 price tag, and then "up sell" to a better one. If you look at the walmart site, you'll see they have many similar machines in steps from $200 to $500... but the next jump is $230 to $300.

What doesn't make so much sense, is that Walmart's site suggests buying a $350 flat panel monitor. How smart is that suggestion, pairs with a bargain-basement PC ?? They ought to be suggesting the cheapest monitor. Oh well.

Re:Best part - REAL cost of Windows being exposed

[Rhinobird]

your confusing MS's subcription model with Lindow's subscription model. MS's charges you a subscription and you get to keep using your software. Don't pay and your software turns off. Thier updates are free (for the moment).

Lindows charges a subcription and you get updates. (I believe you can do this with FreeBSD, too) Don't pay and...no more easy, painless updates, but you can continue to use you're system.

Hell, even I, being an uber cheap ass, would pay $99/year to keep my system up to date if it's as painless as the article says it is.

No...you've got it all wrong

[qurob]

People buy the computers they have to use at work.

Why do you think the IBM PC exploded at home, when it SUCKED at Games/Graphics/Sound up until the mid-late 90s??

So office workers could drag their lotus 1-2-3 and related shit home and work on it after watching Wheel of Fortune.

The Amigas and Apples had capabilites that SHAMED the IBM PC when it came to games.

Big, slow, ugly PC.

Granted, if they got KOffice/StarOffice/OpenOffice working on these machines, it'd be a much better start.

Re:No...you've got it all wrong

[Samari711]

A Click-N-Run subscription also allows you to download Sun's StarOffice suite, a cheaper alternative to Microsoft Office. StarOffice usually retails for $75, so its inclusion in the Click-N-Run Warehouse is a bargain. It actually runs well on Lindows 2.0; the interface is much improved over earlier versions.

good job reading the article

Re:No...you've got it all wrong

[scrytch]

Why do you think the IBM PC exploded at home, when it SUCKED at Games/Graphics/Sound up until the mid-late 90s??

Because the market was radically different then, and the games basically sucked, appealing only to the same intellectual professionals who bought them in the first place. PC's are largely bought as entertainment devices these days, a fact that you ignore at your peril.

Re:No...you've got it all wrong

[Tony-A]

PC's are largely bought as entertainment devices these days, a fact that you ignore at your peril.
Yep, you're right. But a $2000 PC is still a poor replacement for a $200 TV.

No, it's not the same.

[FreeLinux]

The ZDNet article is simply talking about Netscape 7 being included with Lindows. The MSNBC article goes into far greater detail about Lindows and is talking about the AOL client rather than just Netscape.

Re:No, it's not the same.

[bziman]

You're right of course... my mistake. A little trigger happy on the submit button.

Beowulf

[Anonymous Coward]

Imagine a beowulf cluster of these!

Sorry, ... had to be said.

Comments about Lindows?

[mach-5]

I was just wondering if anyone has actually experienced Lindows? Can anyone comment about stability, useability, installation, boot-up time, configurability and system management?

Re:Comments about Lindows?

[dontkillme]

Lindows is debian woody with additional commercial software accessible via their apt frontend called "Click-n-Run". Their latest "2.0" release is quite stable in my experience, and takes very little time to install. The default is to run as root, but multiple users *are* supported, and work fine...more integration of multiple users into their scheme of things is being planned for future revisions which you can upgrade to non-destructively at no additional cost for the duration of your subscription. I'd say the thing that makes this stand out from other easy-to-use distros is that it gets rid of the "I could install it but then what do I do" part of linux. Installing software is very easy, and dependencies resolve themselves thanks to apt... I'd say it's worth a try, if you don't like it you can always get a refund.

Re:Comments about Lindows?

[Reziac]

Thanks for the info. BTW that was exactly my stumbling block on my first foray into linux -- "Okay, it's installed, and You've Got Desktop. NOW what??"

Man, imagine that scenario -- AOLinux boots up and that suave voice announces, "You've got Desktop!"

SNL Joke

[Anonymous Coward]

Jennifer Aniston: "I know about computers. I have the internet at home."
Jimmy Falon (as Nick Burns, your company's computer guy): "Let me guess -- AOL??"
Jennifer Aniston: "Yeah...what's wrong with that?"
Jimmy Falon: "Nothing. Except that it doesn't understand javascript."
Falon laughs under his breath, then says: "If someone here knew about computers, that would have definately gotten a laugh."

I never understood

[nizo]

why AOL didn't do this much sooner. I figured once they bought Netscape, the first thing they would do is start offering their "AOL" PCs. Imagine a PC where if the user has problems, you can debug their machine remotely, via a recovery CD that lets the machine dial in to AOL and a tech logs in and checks out the problem. If only I could find my post from ages ago about this... :-)

Re:I never understood

[Reziac]

My understanding was that AOL bought Netscape for the NS server technology, not for the NS browser.

But I think the main reason they didn't do it sooner was that the cost of PC hardware simply hadn't dropped enough to make it attractive to the newbie market who isn't sure they need a computer in the first place. NOW, you can build a whole PC for under $200 and still make a buck on it.
Obviously an AOL OS is not going to be taken seriously in the experienced-user nor enterprise markets (at least not at first), but it would be very marketable to newbies -- IF it were cheap enough and IF they didn't have to do more than plug it in and turn it on. That is a MUCH larger market than the geek crowd realises -- probably half of all users.

DRM finally comes to Linux NEW AOL Linux 12.0 !

[MrCaseyB]

New AOL Linux 12.0, the easiest to mis-use just got easier.

From the same people who brought you god-awful email, closed IM protocols, Dropped connections and spam spam spam... Now for the first time ever, Digital Rights Management comes to the linux platform. Yes its true, no longer do you have to live in envy of all your windows using friends who know the joys of DRM.

Have you ever wanted to pay $5 for the right to download one song? NOW YOU CAN!!

Have you ever wanted to listen to that one song on that one PC and nowhere else? NOW YOU CAN!!

Does the thought of having flexibility and listening to your music anytime, anywhere frighten you to death? FEAR NO MORE!!

Have you always wanted people to assume you are a criminal and treat you likewise? NOW YOU ARE!!

Yes indeed, AOL linux is the talk of the town. Check out this video of Steve Case III showing how easy AOL linux is.. (video will download, your CC will be charged $8, video will only play if you are a 15yr old white male with acne and no friends. Sorry but thats our target demographic today)

Call today for 4 trillion free trial hours or 1 month, whichever comes first.

Brought to you by AOL Time Warner, we are your friends, Really.

Not that this article mentioned anything about DRM but you have to wonder if Time Warner is going to want their precious content being accessed on these damn linux machines that only hackers use. I wonder what methods they will take to enforce DRM.

I bought a $200 walmart lindows box

[Anonymous Coward]

It is a POS. They say that the via CPU is equiv to a celeron... RIGHT - it is equiv to a 400 mhz Celeron.

The 10Gb hard drive is also extremely slow. My Redhat 7.3 full install from CD took TWO hours. It has been many years since I have heard slow disk drive seeks like that..

I plan on posting a detailed review with lots of benchmarks soon.

It isn't a bad box - just Really Slow. And nothing touches the price.

Re:I bought a $200 walmart lindows box

[Anonymous Coward]

Nice try.

The price point makes the box attractive for many potential uses. In my case, as a load generator for product testing. And 800 mhz Celeron level performance would have been fine for that, but not 400 mhz.

Re:Great... -- Overrated --didn't read the article

[Gorm the DBA]

Hmmm....gee...

" MSNBC (of all places ) has an intersting article about AOLs new PC. "

Yeah, okay, it's software not hardware, but hardware is just a pile of neatly organized sand and plastic, software is what makes it a PC. They appear to be providing an OS, a browser, and other apps...close enough to me.

Or are you requiring them to manufacture the hardware? If so...guess noone other than Intel or the others in the chip market make PC's...probably news to Dell.

And I can't believe I just spent this much time on a anonymous coward...

yes it does run on wine

[neowintermute]

I send all my patches back to the public wine tree, and in fact, our wine is just the public tree, with any obvious bugs fixed (which we also send back).

So, if you pick up wine from cvs, it will run AOL7.

See wine-patches and wine-devel for discussion.

Re:Click-N-Run

[tomhudson]

There have been a few articles this past week at various sites re: Lindows and its' limitations.

Mind you, there's nothing to keep someone from installing Mandrake 9.0 (Dolphin) from CD, and re-installing AOL 7.0 for Linux.

Why the plug for mandrake? - Just finished installing it on one of the office boxes, and it looks sweet.

Boycott Lindows

[Eloquence]

Lindows is dangerous and should be boycotted by all security-conscious users. The reason is simple: Users run as "root" by default, with all rights -- a single wrong click or command and the whole system is made unusable. Or turned into a full-powered skript kiddie battle station.

This kind of philosophy has been the main cause of many destructive worms and viruses on the Windows platform. To repeat this error endangers the Internet ecosystem as a whole and gives Linux a bad name. Furthermore, it gives people a justification to run as root -- this practice should be discouraged. Any operating system that is insecure by default should be boycotted.

Lindows.com is currently stating that they are doing this in the name of convenience, a stupid argument (how hard can it be to ask for an administration password?). As long as they do not reverse their stance in this matter, Lindows should be boycotted by all technically competent users. I'm getting enough e-mail worms per day as it is.

Re:Boycott Lindows

[generalpf]

That argument doesn't make much sense.

The only people that will actually use Lindows are the ex-Windows users, and they've already been running as root, so what's changed?

If anything, they won't participate any longer in the Great Windows Virus Network.

Re:Boycott Lindows

[Anonymous Coward]

The only people that will actually use Lindows are the ex-Windows users, and they've already been running as root, so what's changed?

Exactly the point -- nothing has changed. And that's why Lindows should be boycotted (just like Windows, of course).

Re:Boycott Lindows

[timeOday]

I disagree. I think people use accounts on single-user linux systems mostly just because they're there.

On a system with many users, limiting the damage caused to a single user to himself is a necessity. On a system with one user/administrator, it's meaningless.

Besides, can you really think of any single click that can render the system unusable? In any case, if the user is persuaded to enter a command or install a trojan, forcing them to type the root password first makes no difference.

Having users and accounts also doesn't help Internet security much. Email worms aren't affected at all, and many important servers (like sshd) have to run as root anyways. And a server running as a lesser user can still cause just as much harm to the Internet, for instance by participating in a denial of service attack, or relaying spam.

Re:Boycott Lindows

[Anonymous Coward]

I have heard that there is internal debate inside Lindows about this 'feature' of the operating system. I'm pretty sure they will come up with something better in the near future. But for now, you can add users to the system if you want anyhow. But I do agree that root by default isn't the best idea in the world.

Re:Boycott Lindows

[Tim Doran]

Besides, can you really think of any single click that can render the system unusable?

Oh c'mon... happens all the time... drop your coke on the keyboard, hitting the following keys: "rm -rf / [enter]"

Whew, thank god I wasn't running as root! ;)

Re:Boycott Lindows

[atrus]

If you want a good example of what you're suggesting (ask for admin password), look at Mac OS X. Need to make system changes? Click the lock, enter your password, and the control panel app now runs as root.

Re:Boycott Lindows

[dpilot]

Perhaps we need "constructive engagement" with the Lindows people, and help them improve the security of their machines. At this point, it's in all of our best interest to not see Linux responsible for a net security fiasco.

There are ways to take care of this, beginning with establishing a default non-root id and enough sudo or setuid configuration tools to do what needs to be done. Remember these boxes are for non-Linux users, so the configuration needs should be simpler, as well.

Re:Boycott Lindows

[Gaetano]

Anyone know how OSX handles "root" access separately from other users? I'm just curious.

Re:Boycott Lindows

[Eloquence]

On a system with one user/administrator, it's meaningless.

Bullshit. My system is set up in such a way that all data I no longer work on frequently is moved into a non-writable archive. That also includes all media files like MP3s, movies etc. If a malicious executable should wreck havoc, it can delete a few days of work at most. (Backups are nice, but even nicer if you don't need them.) I see no reason why this shouldn't be wrapped into a nice GUI and made standard behavior.

As for possible damage, SuSE's example for the damage root can cause has always been a user who typed "ls > /dev/hdb1" (he wanted to redirect it to the sound device to see what would happen). Similar accidents can happen easily with drag & drop, and Unix is a lot better at deleting files that are in use than Windows. Trust tech support wisdom: users do stupid things. It's irresponsible to put them in an environment where they can cause a lot of harm, especially when we're trying so hard to teach newbies that they can experiment freely without being afraid of computers. If you're root, better be afraid.

You're right that non-root users can still cause damage to others (although they can't listen on low ports, for example), but the infection is much easier to fix. Getting rid of a kernel-based rootkit and cleaning infected system binaries is hard, removing something from .xinitrc or .kde/Autostart is not. It's really not that difficult: There's a difference in having write access to 2 megs of files versus the entire system.

Re:Boycott Lindows

[Ninja Programmer]

Go look into the NSA's "Security Enhanced Linux". After investigating and understanding what they did with that, you should understand one thing -- Linux and UNIX in general as it currently stands, have a very insufficient security model.

The need to be able to install software and access device features may be legitimate things for any user to be doing in certain situations. Trying to impose the age-old Linux/UNIX method of security is not going to do anything but piss end users off, because they can't do things which are trivial under Windows.

In the last two Linux kernel summit conferences it is clear that they are taking this very seriously and are working towards some kind of "correct solution". But that means, of course, that they are not there yet. So I don't see the rationale of pushing the old model that's going to be obsolete, in maybe about 6 months to a year.

Re:Boycott Lindows

[the big v]

When OSX needs root privs, it asks for an administrator's password (just like running sudo).

Sometimes control panels are locked to prevent changes other than by root, so you click on the lock icon and it asks for the password, and then lets you make the changes.

Re:Boycott Lindows

[iceT]

Users run as "root" by default, with all rights

My first thought is: Just like Windows.

Even XP Home, by default, let's you run as administrator...

Granted, a SUID wrapper around key functions would probably be better than running as root.. Maybe in V3.0....

Re:Boycott Lindows

[rizzy]

Anyone know how OSX handles "root" access separately from other users? I'm just curious.

the user created when you install os x is an 'administrator'. so you run around as a normal user, but when you have to install a system update or something root-like, a dialog box pops up.

Kinda like this: the response to the gui-equivalent of install -m 755 foobinary /usr/bin isn't "permission denied", it's "this operation requires an administrator password: enter it here"

Re:Boycott Lindows

[sardonic2]

I disagree on this. Boycotting Lindows, why? All they are doing is trying it help, maybe its not the perfect but its a step in the right direction. Running default as root is pretty dangerous, but then again this is a altenative to windows, you have to give the users a "similar" experience. A lot of Windows users that might buy a WalMart Lindows PC might not know whats going on when they get prompted for a password, might think its broke or get scared. I know its a sad truth but the majority of the markey still aren't very tech savvy. I also believe AOL for Lindows will hopefully get the word out that Linux is also for the desktop not for those enormus expensive servers.

Re:Boycott Lindows

[dr-suess-fan]

I couldn't agree more.

I've always thought that for Linux to be successful
in the consumer market, they need to make the concept of 'su-ing to root' easier.

What I thought would be a good answer to this is to somehow tie a key on the front of the PC (could be the familiar BIOS-key) to administrative mode.
"You are about to install kword, please turn key
to administrative mode".

In a way, redhat and other vendors have made good
progress in this area. You can run up2date as a joe user and it just asks for the password. Some of the package management tools in KDE do this too I believe ?

Part of getting Linux on the desktop Is accepting
the fact that being 'just like windows' is not the
best goal in mind.

My two cents.

Re:Boycott Lindows

[Fred Ferrigno]

In any case, if the user is persuaded to enter a command or install a trojan, forcing them to type the root password first makes no difference.

In Windows land, if you run one of the "relatively secure" OS's (NT, 2k, XP) and limit use of the Administrator account, many applications which have no business with admin rights and don't need them require you to run them with full access. They're just poorly written -- the exact kind of thing you don't want to run with root powers. But users get tired of doing Windows' version of su so often they might as well be running root. That's always been Windows' real stability problem; it's not the OS so much as the stupid applications people install.

Re:Boycott Lindows

[Valar]

If I had mod points, I'd rate you funny. If you don't get it (and I don't think the writer did) just think about users not having the permissions to alter files on their own systems. Ask yourself how many users want to protect their files from themselves.

Re:Boycott Lindows

[scm]

Lindows.com is currently stating [lindows.com] that they are doing this in the name of convenience, a stupid argument (how hard can it be to ask for an administration password?).

From what I've seen of Mac OS X, it does this right. They use sudo for things that require root, and prompt for the password when necessary. Very slick.

Re:Boycott Lindows

[scm]

That damn lock. Too many people couldn't figure that out without being told.

Fortunately, they fixed it up a bit in 10.2

Re:Boycott Lindows

[Anonymous Coward]

If I had mod points, I'd rate you ignorant.

What makes you think a non-root user can't modify files?

As to protecting files from your own modification, you may not have created enough files of any value to see the use in it, but others have. Even windows lets you change files to read-only with the explorer -- or didn't you realize that?

Re:Boycott Lindows

[archen]

Are you seriously going to tell me that win9x has anywhere near the functionality and power of Linux (when remotely administered)? Really that's the only thing that's changed, but that is certainly dangerous enough.

Re:Boycott Lindows

[Paul Komarek]

The idea of a "single user computer" is a little strange, unless you're referring to a palmtop or live alone. If you have a girlfriend, spouse, or kids, or have family and other guests visiting, it seems unlikely only one person will use the computer.

When guests come, I open an account for them and let them know that they can't do anything to hurt the system (except hit the power button). I think it helps them feel more comfortable.

Completely unrelated: when I see guests using Mozilla to check their outlook mail from my GNU/Linux machines, I realize just how dangerous Netscape might have been to Microsoft. A few minutes after logging in, they appear to have forgotten they're not running Windows.

-Paul Komarek

Re:Boycott Lindows

[mjh]

On a system with many users, limiting the damage caused to a single user to himself is a necessity. On a system with one user/administrator, it's meaningless.

No it isn't. It's the single thing that keeps virii from propagating on linux. I don't mean worms like slapper, I mean things that attach themselves to executable code. The fact that almost all binaries under linux are not installed writable by the average user, limits the effectiveness of classic virii, if not completely irradicating them.

Now, I'll grant that this is not a particularly populer form of malware anymore. But running as non-root makes you virtually impervius to it. There are LOTS of other advantages to not running as root, but to be able to completely eliminate one form of malware is something that can't be ignored.

$.02

Re:Boycott Lindows

[warGod3]

I was told this thing doesn't even come come with a modem.

Re:Boycott Lindows

[atrus]

yeah, I admit, it wasn't painfuly obvious to click it (even though it usualy said "click the lock to make changes")... but whatever :) Its better than running as root all the time.

Re:Boycott Lindows

[bigdavex]

Were you planning on buying Lindows otherwise? Are you sure you're boycotting, or just not buying it?

Re:Boycott Lindows

[generalpf]

I didn't mean the OSen were functionally equivalent. All I was pointing out was this:

Before switching to Lindows, the Windows user is running as root.
After switching to Lindows, the user is running as root.

Hence, the "boycott Lindows because it runs as root" argument is silly, because it didn't make things any worse.

Re:Boycott Lindows

[anshil]

And? What if it is dangerous to run? For singleuser systems for non geeks, it's okay enough. Afterall this is not a server, or a "serious" workstation.

Maybe try to not see lindows as a linux derivate, just see it as a new windows that pesters microsoft. As a geek you're not going to run it at home anyway. However it's existence if successful hurts microsoft, isn't that good enough for you taste?

Re:Boycott Lindows

[Valar]

Hm, flinging insults will do you no good. The point is, non-root users can't modify ALL of their files (I know I know, root users can't even alter files if the permissions are wrong). And yes, I do have important files. The solution with those is to make back ups, not to change the perms so you have to change them back everytime you wish to make an edit.

Another step towards the desktop...

[j_kenpo]

Good for AOL, with more and more of the big boys supporting Linux, even if they arent making the PC and just bundling their software with Lindows, the familiar name should bring the everyday average Joe Schmoe who likes the comfort of what he already knows, but wants to try something a little different. Of course, we will have our typical Linux Elitists who will say ignorant things like "I dont think real Linux users would be dumb enough to use AOL" and crap along those lines. But you know what, if the target audience were Linux geeks, they wouldnt distribute it with Lindows. Besides, if you like using Lynx and Pine, then thats your option, after all, it is open source and free so your not tied down to anything. I think this is a good step towards bringing Linux one step closer to the desktop, after all, if Grandma knows her AOL interface, shell be more inclined to buy the $200 dollar PC that has AOLs name on it, since she only uses it for that anyway. This is exactly what Linux was lacking to get average people to think again about switching.

Windows Now 33% of PC Cost

[dgenr8]

A little further down, the article points out that Wal-Mart sells the exact same hardware with Windows (not sure which version) for $299 instead of $199 -- the difference is the cost of a Windows license.

So now Windows is 33% of the cost of a PC. This is the situation that Nick Petreley predicts will change the economics of the PC industry enough to unseat Microsoft.

Re:Windows Now 33% of PC Cost

[freeefalln]

you cant say that windows is 33% of the cost. That is in terms of the price of the Mircotel version of the Windows PC. If the PC was $2000, Windows would be 5% of the total cost. Sorry, but you're wrong

Re:Windows Now 33% of PC Cost

[An Onerous Coward]

The downside is that people might look at the difference in the pricetags, and think, "Hmm. . . I must be getting SOMETHING for that extra cash. Windows must be better." Then they'll buy the cheaper system anyways, because hey, this is Wal-Mart.

If Linux can benefit from the spreading of the mega-corporate cheap-crap lovefest, more power to it. :)

3 signs of Armaggedon....

[Capt. Beyond]

1) Ozzy Osborne at the Buckingham Palace.
2) Ozzy Ozborne at the White House
3) AOL client on linux

Full-powered skript kiddie battle station

[FreeLinux]

That's really funny. I like it.

Just to be devil's advocate here, Root by default is simply a page from Microsoft's very successful history.

Re:Full-powered skript kiddie battle station

[Derleth]

Root by default is simply a page from Microsoft's very successful history.

No, it's simply an example of people not caring about security until they're forced to. People always think 'Worms happen to other people' and 'Script kiddies won't notice me, I'm nobody!' or, the most insidious (and stupidest), 'I've got nothing to hide' until, one fine day, they're running BackOrifice, CodeRed, and the latest DDoS zombie program.

Microsoft knows this. It simply hasn't been forced to care.

Re:Full-powered skript kiddie battle station

[sukottoX]

microsoft has historically been very successful yes, but also very insecure... this is one thing that probably should not be copied

yes!

[geekoid]

Now when I say 'you should try Linux' to my non-technical friends and family that can't argue 'it doesn't run AOL arguement'
I know several people, and everything they do online is through AOL, like it or not, thats true for millions of people.
Next time they're looking at a forced MS upgrade, I will probably get them to try it Linux, since it will save them 100 bucks.

I can probablt get 4 people to switch as soon as they get a stable release.

KDE click

[Anonymous Coward]

The KDE desktop looks and feels like Windows, with a few exceptions. You have to double-click an icon on the desktop to get it to open, but only single-click an icon in the toolbar to get the same result.

On my Windows XP box, the default is the exact same as the Lindow's KDE default. What is he talking about? Maybe a comparison to the Mac?

Re:DRM finally comes to Linux NEW AOL Linux 12.0 !

[Anonymous Coward]

Gawd I wish I had moderation points right now!

Red Hat?

[brettlbecker]

What's this talk about AOL Red Hat? I heard something about this awhile ago, but as far as I know, this new Wal Mart PC running Lindows doesn't contain any Red Hat Linux at all... Lindows itself is based, according to their FAQ (at lindows.com) on Debian Linux... so what's the deal?

do you have a link to the cartoon?

[Numeric]

i'd like to see it.

Actions in China count heavily against them

[sam_handelman]

They're not bad in all respects. However, they cooperate with the PRC in censoring their own citizens. Information on this topic is readily available from Google.

I'm not saying Microsoft wouldn't do the same if they had the chance (may have the chance and may be doing the same), and I acknowledge that AOL/TW has as many employees as the entire human race 1,000 years ago, so they're going to be doing something I'm not happy with, and that there is something to be said for "engaging" China under whatever terms are possible - which seems to mean at least some censorship.

But to say that AOL is making the world a better place, at least insofar as computers are concerned, I'm not so sure about that. Censorship is the #1 threat to the vitality of the net, and since AOL promotes that in various ways, there's not many ways I could think of them as a net good.

Also - AOL supplied the internet to the masses, but the masses really wanted it. Without AOL, I think we'd have seen more or less the same landscape with more business for compuserve.

Re:Actions in China count heavily against them

[Planesdragon]

However, they cooperate with the PRC in censoring their own citizens.

So what? They're a business, not a charity.

I do think it's better to support a government and encorage that government to be good, than to blacklist that government and leave them no way to save face and back down at the same time...

Hey, wait, that's the USA's national policy towards China! And AOL Time Warner's an American Company... hey, wow, we can hate companies just for helping the government! It's 1962 all over again!

[Hey, and I'm -18... sweet! No taxes for 34 years!]

Good all around...

[Omega]

This is the sort of thing that's Good For Everyone(TM).

It's good for AOL because they don't have to kowtow to Microsoft for placement on the desktop (though they shouldn't anyway, but MS frequently abuses it's monopoly power to prevent OEMs from making custom changes to the desktop). AOL can advance subscribership by promoting an easy to use Internet/Bulletin Board service on a low cost, easy to use computer. If they want custom modifications to better support their online service, they don't have to "ask permission," they can just make them on their own.

It's good for consumers because now they have a real choice for low cost computer systems. I'm not saying that Lindows is the high holy of operating systems, but it's geared toward ease of use for non-technical desktop users (people who don't want to recompile a kernel). Before, there never really was a choice for low cost systems -- you had to go with Windows. Sure you could buy a Mac, but you had to shell out an extra thousand bucks. While many people like how user friendly Macs are, they can't justify that much a price difference. Lindows gives consumers a low cost alternative.

It's good for Linux because it increases the Linux user base. Obviously, the people using these systems aren't going to go out and start coding custom kernel modules, but the software manufacturers are going to start noticing the increasing presence of Linux in the marketplace. This means there will start to be more consumer applications available for Linux as an untapped consumer market like this cannot be ignored. This means more games, more office software, more of the general desktop software that many people say is missing from Linux.

And lastly, this is good for technology (obviously). For the same reasons that Eric S. Raymond penned (or typed I guess ;) in his editorial on "Total World Domination." Total world domination by Linux means no domination by anyone. Linux can be modified by anyone, it can be modified to suit your purposes (whatever they may be) and you will always have the freedom to make those changes because no one can own Linux. No one can lock it up and keep you from looking inside. Coders will still be able to code and make custom changes to their system, and consumers can still click away not knowing what's going on behind the scenes. It's good for technology because by giving consumers a choice, it promotes consumer freedom.

Re:Good all around...

[Papineau]

This means more games, more office software, more of the general desktop software that many people say is missing from Linux.

Have you checked the specs of the box? Not much current games will run smoothly on that, Windows or Linux. It's a box designed to do basic things: power on, get on AOL, power down.

Linux on AOL free CDs

[usurper_ii]

What I think would really help Linux is an AOL version of something like Lindows. This would be an easy to install CD that would be given away with computer magazines and mailed out for free, and, unlike Lindows, it is all free. AOL gets to benefit because it boots up ready to log on to AOL...but it is not a requirement to use the system, so everyone benefits.

Imagine how easy it would be to get people to at least try Linux if they already had a CD-ROM of it attached to some magazine they just bought. Heck, if it goes out like AOL's current junk...everyone would be able to dig up at least five of these disks in a matter of minutes.

Usurper_ii

Re:Linux on AOL free CDs

[usurper_ii]

Well, thinking about it for a minute more, the one thing that is going to hold AOL back from doing this is DRM. At some point someone up top at Time-Warner is not going to like that their AOL Linux distro lets people bypass all the new DRM software being built into Windows. AOL Linux would then become a "circumvention device," and the jack-booted thugs would have to start spending a lot of time stomping on all those free disks.

Usurper_ii

Re:Linux on AOL free CDs

[benjamindees]

At some point someone up top at Time-Warner

Don't look too soon, since everyone up top at Time-Warner is now (or soon will be) up top at AOL. I'm shocked they haven't stopped this already.

VIA C3 info *from VIA*

[Anonymous Coward]

Rather than guess or report fuzzy memories with no details, check the manufacturer:

VIA's end-user Support site

VIA's Web site

VIA is onto a really good thing with the Eden series motherboards using their CPUs. The upcoming EPIA M-series motherboards are based on VIA's CLE266 chipset, which offers DDR RAM and on-chipset support for offloading DVD display operations from the CPU. If VIA delivers those features, the EPIA M will make an excellent living-room multimedia box.

Sudhian's Small Form Factor Forum is very active, and a good place to watch for more on EPIA hardware.

lindows is NOT free

[Anonymous Coward]

Since when is lindows free? Their website still says $99.

sooo

[Anonymous Coward]

when's aol DSL support coming to macOS? FreeBSD,OpenBSD, and NetBSD? oh don't forget OS X support native, and customer support that's not

What version of windows are you running?

I'm not running windows i'm running macOS

Dyam! what the hell would you want to do that for?

Or:

What's MacOS X?

I can only immagine

Customer support are what version of RedHat or Windows

I'm using Mandrake

Man what?

Or I'm using debian

or

I'm using none of the above I use the same OS your' telephone runs:BSD now pass me onto your #$%^& Sys Admin

Let me not forget the fact that to run the OSX client for AOL you need classic but none of the recently shiping macOS boxens (ibook imac G4's and soon G5's) have classic as bootable and NONE of the AOL disks have it. Oops I geues some retarted in AOL land forgot something just like you slashdot lamers did:

AOL IS A FUCKING JOKE

Re:sooo

[Anonymous Coward]

Let me not forget the fact that to run the OSX client for AOL you need classic but none of the recently shiping macOS boxens (ibook imac G4's and soon G5's) have classic as bootable and NONE of the AOL disks have it.

Um, no you don't. When my parents visited recently I downloaded the AOL client so they could check their mail from my OSX box while they were here, and no part of the installation or running of it required Mac OS 9.

You can actually make a boewulf cluster of these!

[AltGrendel]

Nuff said.

STALE JOKE WARNING!!!

[Zordak]

But it's so clear. Imagine a Beowulf cluster...

Re:STALE JOKE WARNING!!!

[Anonymous Coward]

But remember... lots of crap is still crap no matter how much you have of it.

0 * anything = 0

=)

Choice of OS != intelligence? (Re:The problem)

[phorm]

You know, choice of OS or ISP isn't a measure of intelligence

Indeed it is not, nor did I mean to imply that it was. OS choice is however, often a measure of proficiency (sometimes computing intelligence, but not intellectual).

It's also a measure of judgement, not getting suckered in or brainwashed by a big name which you hear on TV or see in banners every minute. This seems to be a large part of AOL's strategy, hear the name, buy the product. AOL isn't better than others, it isn't cheaper than many. It's becoming more and more visible as they attempt to push their way into every aspect of life, and that lends to an increase in marketing audience, which is probably what this is mostly about.

The idea is to make computers easier to use, not more difficult.
As for those that use linux, they don't use it because it's easier, the use it because it's functional. Making computers easier to use doesn't help much if they're not functional enough to do what I need. Calculators are easy to use.

One of the big problems is in that making everything "easy", we make people less proficient. As soon as the GUI as gone, 95% of users will probably crap their pants at a CLI. Not to complain, it keeps me employed, but we're making things prettier and users dumber, PC skills wise.

Do you know how many people can't even format a disk, or run a program that's not in the start menu or desktop? It's scary. Linux is an operating system of choice. GUI's have been made that make it nicer, and easier, but by far the most useful part of it is still within the little icon entitled "terminal." AOL users moving to lindows will likely not be any more PC-smart than their windows counterparts, not will the learn much about linux.

However, I do hear screams of anguish resonating from MS-headquarters - phorm

Re:Choice of OS != intelligence? (Re:The problem)

[reallocate]

I used to run this little test of computer savviness: 1. Using a program of your choice, create a file and save it. 2. Now, using any other program of your choice, find that file.

Most people flunked. Many were stumped at "create a file".

Sigh.

On the other hand, I tend to think we often equate "capabilities" with "complex and difficult" because many new capabilities are rolled out in a CLI-only versiond. Building a GUI adds more cost and complexity. If a GUI presents the same capabilities as a CLI, that's OK with me. Capabilities will likely always be ahead of the curve, but, in the end, it's an interface issue.
For example, if an interface allows all of a machine's capabilities to be exploited while eliminating the need to be aware of an underlying file system, dropping to a command line doesn't add to the user's capabilities.

Re:Choice of OS != intelligence? (Re:The problem)

[electroniceric]

Here's the rub:

It's also a measure of judgement, not getting suckered in or brainwashed by a big name which you hear on TV or see in banners every minute. It's becoming more and more visible as they attempt to push their way into every aspect of life, and that lends to an increase in marketing audience, which is probably what this is mostly about.

Pardon me if this comes across as a rant, but I see a lot of this kind of crap in the Linux community, and elsewhere, and frankly I think it hinders not helps the process of acheiving a fair body of law about corporations. I don't much like modern marketing tactics, nor is there a lot of love lost between me and most large companies, but casting the decision to use a different ISP than AOL as a battle against the dark forces of consumer capitalist imperialism seems melodramatic with a self-congratulatory undertone for "freeing" yourself from these entraining influences. What about all the people who DO like AOL, are they yearning to break free and don't know it? Perhaps more simply not everyone wants to dedicate himself to outsider stance of opposing the everyday elements in his life, based on a veiled premise of a moral superiority?
Again, apologies if that sounded like a personal attack - it's not meant to be. I just think that constantly staking out the high ground is counterproductive. Come on down and play in middle, where things happen.

One of the big problems is in that making everything "easy", we make people less proficient.

This problem is the consistent bane of teachers. What people need to know to be considered "educated" is in tremendous flux these days, and really has been since the opportunity to seek higher education was offered to more than just a few elites. It's a tough question in computing. I agree that it's important that people understand enough about the machine to be able to control it, rather than the other way around. However, I don't necessarily think that GUI is dumber. It's just that, as in teaching, it's hard to design software that accounts for and leads users through widely varying levels of skill and experience.

Do you know how many people can't even format a disk, or run a program that's not in the start menu or desktop? It's scary.

See 1st point. Not wanting to know how to take apart a point-and-shoot-camera is not scary. Don't confuse undereducated with not technically oriented.

Re:Choice of OS != intelligence? (Re:The problem)

[phorm]

See 1st point. Not wanting to know how to take apart a point-and-shoot-camera is not scary. Don't confuse undereducated with not technically oriented.

I mean, even in windows, they can't format a disk or other simple tasks. In DOS it took 1 command, maybe a few presses of enter, and a lot of people can do this. In windows it's right-click, format, (etc) OK. Fairly easy as well, but most people aren't willing to try and figure it out.

There are many other less technical things that people just refuse to try and learn on their own. It's not that users should know everything, but they should have a decent grasp of how to use their equipment functionalities in a reasonable manner.

Nowadays, it's a tech admin's nightmare. When the tech is getting called on constantly for little thing after little thing, a lot of the important jobs get little time in them. If they focus on the big jobs, then the people with little jobs often get annoyed or irritated at the admin rather than trying to find their own solution.

It's FINE to have to show somebody something once, but if you've explain it, given out documentation, etc and people still refuse to do it, then there's no reason that the users can't in some small ways fend for themselves.

In one case, we have a tech who constantly gets called/emailed to add users to the proxy/email/etc lists. There are scripts that make this simple, it's just a few commands, and they've been given out. Yet various people insist on calling for help, because they are afraid of something that doesn't have a GUI with a 50-line description, a help button, and an OK/NEXT button.

Often enough you can find a secretary who ends up learning many of the small tasks that the IT admin can't be bothered with (format disks,etc,etc) and that other people are too afraid to do. There is an inherent fear of computers as unstable devices, and anything that's CLI nowadays becomes the realm of "those tech people."

The computer will not hurt you, nor will it explode, you don't have to be afraid of it - phorm

Re:Choice of OS != intelligence? (Re:The problem)

[Anonymous Coward]

Do you know how many people can't even format a disk, or run a program that's not in the start menu or desktop? It's scary.

Do you know how many people can't get a glass of water without a faucet? It's scary.
And then, when they have a plumbing problem they have to call someone, can you believe it!?!
I mean modern plumbing has been around for _centuries_ and some people still just can't figure it out!

Just like you (probably) can't fix a water main, or even your kitchen sink, you shouldn't expect people not in the computer industry to be able to get into the guts of a computer either.
And honestly, if you just want to send an email to grandma why in the fuck should you have to know how to format a disk?
no, really, honestly

Re:Choice of OS != intelligence? (Re:The problem)

[Anonymous Coward]

Now, if formatting a disk wasn't something "people not in the computer industry" have been doing for circa 20 years, you might have a point.

Opening programs and formatting disks is hardly "getting into the guts." It takes, as the grandparent said, a few clicks. A rote procedure anyone could perform -- if they tried.

Why should Joe Average need to know how to format a disk?
If it's something a person needs to do regularly, and it's possible for them to learn it and do it with a minimum of fuss, they should learn it and do it, rather than calling for the Almighty IT Person to come down and click a few times. It's a matter of efficiency and self-sufficiency.

Potato Guy? POTATO GUY?!!!

[Thud457]

Holy shit, POTATO GUY?!!!!

Dude, I'm gettin' a Microtel!

Other Way Around

[reallocate]

It's the other way around: getting AOL users to use Linux.

Forget about mainstreaming Linux by convincing everyone to learn Unix. Hasn't happened in 30 years; ain't gonna happen. If/when Linux becomes a mainstream desktop OS, it will be as WIMP-ish as all the rest. OSX is a good precursor of what it will take.

Re:Great... -- Overrated --didn't read the article

[Anonymous Coward]

Are you daft?

First of all, I don't believe you wasted that much time responding to me either. That was one of my very weakest attempts at trolling. I really don't have anything better to do but that is another story.

An another note, your rebuttal is noted and is in fact a semi-valid one but that still does not mean you read the article before you posted. Rereading your post I am certian you thought the product was hardware not software.

Anyway YHBT HAND Hot grits and all that other troll mob mentality. It will make you feel beter to think of me as a troll rather then a bored computer engineer who refuses to enable cookies thus preventing a /. account from being created.

In the future please read the article before you post.

Much Clown LUV
SpellChecker

Solitaire?

[Geeyzus]

Games include Tron, Battleship, Poker, Minesweeper, Potato Guy

This may sound dumb, but hear me out... why isn't Solitaire included?

My mom plays Solitaire on Windows. So do most users that don't do much more than browse the web and check email. Half the people here at where I work do. Why not include solitaire?!?!

It's just one more thing that a Windows user could ask. "I really like playing solitaire. Does this computer have it?" "No."

Maybe a dumb point, but it just seems like it would have made sense to incude it. It's not like Microsoft has a monopoly on solitaire.

Mark

Re:Solitaire?

[Anonymous Coward]

BUT IT HAS POTATO GUY!! Why would you want Solitaire?

Re:Solitaire?

[geekoid]

how about:
"no, but I can download any number of solataire games for free. How many do you want?"

It is a good point, but it also gives a glimmer on how Linux's marketing people(us) need to improve are skills at conviencing the majority of computer users why they should choose Linux.

Re:Solitaire?

[Anonymous Coward]

Some kind of solitaire is undoubtedly included in KDE games or some other package. Probably aslo a version of Mahjong and a tetris clone.

Re:Solitaire?

[Anonymous Coward]

potato guy > solitare

Wha...?

[writertype]

"The KDE desktop looks and feels like Windows, with a few exceptions. You have to double-click an icon on the desktop to get it to open, but only single-click an icon in the toolbar to get the same result." Um, this is exactly what you have to do in Windows, n'est-ce pas?

Free PC with subscription?

[zurkog]

Microsoft was offering a $400 subsidy of your Best Buy purchase if you signed up for a two year (?) subscription to MSN, I believe.

AOL ought to offer the same; a free Microtel PC (plus a cheap monitor) for new AOL subscribers that sign a 2 year service agreement. That's become almost the standard now with DirecTV receivers...

-Grant

Need AOL/GNU/Linux...

[VivianC]

My mother-in-law and two brother-in-laws all have computers. Here is a list of the software they use:

• Word Perfect 8
  
• AOL
  
• Photoshop

If AOL goes stable on Linux, I can get their P-233s off Win98 and save myself a lot of support headaches.

Re:Need AOL/GNU/Linux...

[wackybrit]

How does that help you with Photoshop though? The Gimp is a piece of crap (really). Is there any decent alternative graphics software on Linux that isn't The Gimp that I could check out?

Re:Need AOL/GNU/Linux...

[VivianC]

The Gimp works fine for the simple stuff they do. On the high end, I liked Photogenics from Idruna. At $699, it's a bit expensive but if you need it, it's worth it.

Via C3 CPU -- WHERE?!?

[greywire]

Anybody know where I can actualy buy a C3 CPU? I was thinking it might make for a nice upgrade to an old S370 system... but I cant find anybody selling them!

Re:Great... -- Overrated --didn't read the article

[Anonymous Coward]

Next time, spend that much time reading the article before you post. And no, I am not the same AC who, correctly, put you down in the first place.

AOL, the negative value company

[Anonymous Coward]

By the way, now that AOL owns Time/Warner, the value of the combination has dropped to below the value of Time/Warner alone. Investors seem to have decided that AOL has negative value.

Re:AOL, the negative value company

[swillden]

That, of course, has no relationship to the general beating that the tech and entertainment stocks have taken. And none whatsoever to the fact that the markets have just hit a five-year low.

Just in case anyone was confused.

It's only a matter of time...

[einstein]

til they start mailing these to everyone on the planet..

Oh, crap, 3 more computers from AOL this week!

--

Re:It's only a matter of time...

[Arandir]

Whoohoo! I can have a beowulf cluster of these things in a month!

AOL *with* an OS? Not the first time...

[Anonymous Coward]

OK, maybe OS is a stretch, but I had an AOL account back in '90; version 1.x actually installed PC/GEOS. It was fairly impressive for the time (and looked cool too...).

From the (very old FAQ):

"PC-GEOS 1.0 was released in late 1990. Also referred to as PCAO, to distinguish it from the Windows-based client, WAOL. Version 1.0 was the very first client software for AOL. This was a minimal installation of PC/GEOS. PCAO was updated quite frequently, with versions 1.2, 1.3, 1.5 released across 1991 and 1992. Version 1.5a was released in late 1993, and was followed in 1994 by version 1.6. Surprisingly, this occured after the release of the 2.0 client for Geos 2.0 (see below). PCAO required a Tymnet or Sprint connection. AOL stopped supporting Tymnet around 1995, and is now in the process of abandoning Sprint, so PCAO is now officially unsupported completely"

Lindows == Windows 3.1

[garoush]

If you look deep into the installation of Lindows (striped down version of any major Linux distribution, running as root, etc.) you will see that it compares to Windows 3.1

Most consumers will think twice before buying one. I can see Joe consmer thinking: "Why is it so cheap? It must be junk. I am getting a Dell". Think about it, a decent Dell with Windows XP (which has a lot more functionality then Lindows does, multimedia, et. al.) is only few hundred $$ more then a Lindows box.

Re:Lindows == Windows 3.1

[metallic]

I think you are missing point. It's my understanding that AOL is targetting this at the low-end of the market for people that dont necessarily need a powerful computer, but just merely wish to run AOL and pretty much nothing else.

Also, a system from Dell would cost several times more than this offering from AOL, and would probably be more than some AOL users would need. All they would really care about is signing on to AOL and occasionally doing some word processing, none of which would be too much for this system apparently. It's really just a niche market for AOL.

Re:Lindows == Windows 3.1

[AsparagusChallenge]

Oh yeah, a real multitasking, fully 32bit Windows 3.1

Here's a wacky thought...

[VivianC]

I was just looking at the Gentoo Linux page when this thought hit me:

What about AOL sending out a bootable CD that runs a basic Linux distro and AOL on top. It might be a bit slow and have trouble recognizing all the different modems, but it be cool when it worked.

Almost there

[Nyarly]

Screw this installed on a $200 WalMart box crap. What would be the killer situ is if AOL started to put their Lindows distro thing on those stupid CDs and DVDs they clutter your mail with. Imagine millions of users who get these CDs being able to install Lindows on their boxes. That's Microsoft's terror and no mistake.

It is how AOL got market penetration. It's how they became worthy to buy into Time Warner (more, it was a merger); why not piggy-back Linux onto the AOL distribution process? And when Linux is as catholic as Windows is now, imagine the glory! Whoo-hoo.

Granted, I wouldn't touch the support desk for that with a ten-hundred foot pole. "Um, where did Windows go?"

Flamebait?

[Bilbo]

Hey -- if I had any moderator points, I'd have given this a +1 Funny

Actually, I agree that there is certainly more going on here than meets the eye. I'm sure that MSNBC goes out of its way to appear unbiased and objective (as if any source of news is ever truly "unbiased"), especially when covering technical issues. I wouldn't be surprised if they are snickering under their breath, hoping that the whole venture fails. However, if they are, then they have done a better job than usual in this article in hiding their usually thinly veiled derision.

I am still concerned about some if the issues with Lindows -- issues which have already been rehashed add nauseum in this forum. However, I still think these computers are still a step in the right direction, and appear to be making progress quickly. I still hope they catch on.

Re:Flamebait?

[jvmatthe]

Thanks for the virtual +1 Funny mod. I'm beginning to think I need to post gigantic ASCII art smileys for all the not-quite-with-it moderators around here. :^)

Re:Flamebait?

[Anonymous Coward]

When will you knuckle-draggers realize that NBC has 100% editorial control of what appears on MSNBC (both the television network and the .com)?

Microsoft is just in the equation to pimp their Internet properties.

"GNU/Windows" is actually used

[yerricde]

I guess anyone with CygWin loaded on a Win2k box should call it GNU/Microsoft Windows.

I detect sarcasm in your comment, but what you claim is actually the case. The name "Cygwin" was originally short for "Cygnus GNU/Windows" or something like that. Even the stripped down version of Cygwin based on msvcrt.dll rather than cygwin1.dll is named MinGW, for "Minimalist GNU/Windows".

Perfect...

[Xaleth Nuada]

...for my 4 year old cousin.

She's got two parents who although they work for the Federal Government (even one in software engineering) don't have personal computers. They just have their 'work' laptops.

Meanwhile cousin Dave has been searching desparately for a cheap way to give this girl a step up in the computer literacy dept.

God bless AOL. (I may have cancelled you and gotten a cable modem, but you were my first step into a larger world.)(well there was that 'Prodigy' thing but that didn't last long.)

you got it the other way around

[Kircle]

Umm ... I think what he was actually saying was that since MSNBC is a reputable news source and, for them to publish a such a "glowing article" on this, it must really mean something.

AOL Linux / Gamera

[FuzzzyLogik]

Quite some time ago, there were many reports of an AOL client for Linux being leaked to the net, even on /.. I have tried and used this AOL client, it was an internal build that only worked on their networks, so it was really pointless, but yes it did run, and just sat there. So, it's probably not running on Wine at all, though there was one comment from a guy that WINE CVS does run AOL7. We'll have to wait and see. There's also this application for Linux users Logik

No servers

[Anonymous Coward]

And I highly doubt that Lindows users are going to be running a bunch of servers(that's more of a security problem). Perhaps Lindows will even default with a Firewall and whatnot.

I think it's fine. It is too difficult not running as root. Well I guess a better solution would be to make everything in /opt world readable so you could install say Adobe Acrobat and Java, and everything in /usr/wallpapers, /usr/icons, /usr/xmms/skins. Actually, I think *the* solution would be: for instance, you dragged a cool image from your desktop to /usr/wallpapers and it asked for your password instead of "Permission Denied."

Good or Not?

[phatvibez]

In the past I was quick to judge Lindows.com, but now that they have started to change from there OVERLY custimized KDE, via xandros, to a more default KDE look and feel I have to say that I am starting to change my mind...but...

though i feel this is a good move for Linux on the desktop, is this the distro we want associated with Linux?

there are still a lot of things to think about here

(1) Still run as root!

This is a problem that needs to be overcome, there has been much discussion about this over at OSNews.com

I think they need a better policy for this, something similar to OS X maybe where you don't necessarily run as root but the users still have some administrative abilities but need a password for others.

(2) Lindows? the name sucks

I think they definetly need a new name, not only does it sound ridiculus, but if they want to lose the gimmicky image and be taken seriously by anybody they need a name change! (Mike, are you listening?)

what they are really good at is Marketing, i mean they market every little thing that other distro's can do or have been able to do for LONG time and make it sound like they are the only ones.

look at the article for example, he talks about "new" power savings modes for laptops...and they also claim to have "new" printer setup...which is ALL part of STANDARD kde! nothing new.

If anybody is the MS of the Linux world it's Lindows...use others technology and claim innovation! is this bad really? i don't know but just something to think about...

Try another client

[bluhatter]

If you're a windows user, miranda icq is very nice, tiny, and skinnable. If you're a linux user, no doubt you've heard of licq or Kit. And if you want something more than just icq, both Trillian (windows) and jabber (linux) are good alternatives to using the default icq bloated adware.

Watashi wa watashi.

Re:Try another client

[allism]

I tried using trillian for a while at work but for some reason I couldn't get the auto-reconnect on disconnect to work (I am willing to admit that it coult be PEBKAC, I wasn't willing to take that much time to figure it out) and since it disconnected about every half hour, it wasn't worth the hassle to me.

"Optimized for WINE" on the box

[yerricde]

Every time you run an app using WINE, you take one more incentive away from app makers to move away from Windows.

Yet you give one more incentive to app makers to make their Windows binaries run well on WINE as well as Microsoft's flavors of Windows. Here's the game plan for proprietary software publishers:

1. Read feedback form results that ask politely for a port of your software (which is currently at version 2.2) to Linux.
2. Make version 3.0 of your software work on WINE.
3. Work "Optimized for WINE" into your box art. Possibly license the Lindows logo.
4. Sell version 3.0 to users of x86 Linux and x86 *BSD.
5. Profit.
6. As you maintain 3.x for Windows, you find that the feedback is now asking you for a "native" port to non-x86 operating systems.
7. Port version 3.5 of your software to Winelib (an implementation of the Win32 API in a *n?x shared library) for more predictable performance across the *n?x spectrum. This should be relatively straightforward, as you did most of the dirty work on the Windows side when you got rid of the calls that Wine doesn't support.
8. Your app is now *n?x native. Work that fact into the box design.
9. Ship version 3.5 with Linux, BSD, Solaris, and Win32 binaries.
10. More profit.

I haven't seen it yet.. but..

[Anonymous Coward]

if this stuff will work on normal Linux without WINE

Have pigs started flying yet?

AOL client is at least a dialer

[yerricde]

So what is porting AOL over to linux going to acchieve ?

Compatibility with a dial-up protocol that Linux currently doesn't support. Linux currently supports PPP and SLIP; with AOL's contribution, it'll support AOL-Dial as well, probably through some sort of proprietary network interface driver for aol0 (analogous to ppp0 or eth0).

Heisenburg, Hunter S Thompson, and Post Modern

[jerryasher]

I don't like bias either. Unfortunately there is no such thing as objectivity. I think that's the post modern lesson.

I would rather listen to someone (anyone) whose bias is upfront and identifiable, then listen to someone that claims to be objective.

Objectivity, is that like where unknown to most listeners, Disney owns SFBay hatespeech radio station KGO and that makes Disney's pretty right wing KSFO seem to be the moderate alternative?

Re:Heisenburg, Hunter S Thompson, and Post Modern

[brooks_talley]

Really? Suppose you've got two choices for articles to read:

1) Here's your upfront and identifiable bias: a bible-thumbing fundamentalist ranting and raving that evolution is nonsense, that abortion is murder, that atheism should be illegal, and that all non-Christians are sinners who will burn in hell

2) Here's your pseudo-objective type who probably has bias: A theology professor, who has studied the world's regligion in depth, discussing the similarities and differences between them and the challenges they face in an increasingly secular and technology-focused world.

Who would you rather listen to? Now, which example is closest to the tone of the /. community when Microsoft is even peripherally brought into the conversation?

Cheers
-b

Re:Heisenburg, Hunter S Thompson, and Post Modern

[swillden]

I would rather listen to someone (anyone) whose bias is upfront and identifiable, then listen to someone that claims to be objective.

Pushing that a bit further, I think the movement towards "objective" journalism that began in the early part of the 20th century has been bad for Americans and bad for the American press.

Read some newspapers from the 19th century or earlier and you'll see that the norm was for journalists to wear their biases on their sleeves. And it was common for educated citizens to subscribe to multiple papers so that they could find their own version of the truth among the different slants on the facts. Having an informed opinion in those days meant having to apply a little thought to the issues rather than being able to quote the day's sound bites.

Less efficient? Maybe. But we'd all be better off if more of us engaged our brains a bit more frequently. "Objective" reporting tries to convince us that we don't have to do that. Problem is, "objective" news does not and cannot exist as long as humans are writing it.

Re:Heisenburg, Hunter S Thompson, and Post Modern

[pyrrho]

this is ridiculous!!!! How inflamatory.

It's KSFO that is the hate speech radio owned by Disney, making the fairly conservative KGO seem moderate in comparison.

And the fun part is to hear the KSFO fans bad mouthing KGO and disney... not realizing that KSFO and KGO share locations, owners, and a desire to cover all the bases for clean ownership of the talk radio market in Northern California and beyond.

You can't own the whole market, in this case, with one offering, because it doesn't appeal to the biases of all listeners. But get two "opposites" going and there you have it.

Does it make sense? Owning a Rush Affiliate and a Bernie Ward Outlet? Um... does it make sense to use two ropes to steer a horse?

PS: just joking about the inflammatory part, in case that wasn't obvious... you were right on except I think you got your call letters reversed.

Re:Heisenburg, Hunter S Thompson, and Post Modern

[jerryasher]

Yes, I think you're right about the call letters being reversed.

I'm not sure where I would place Bernie Ward. He's not that much of an alternative and he uses the same tired hatespeech radio techniques to troll listeners and to drag 30 seconds of content into 30 minutes.

KGO (then) also has Pete Wilson -- funny I liked him more when he was just the TV talking head.

Regardless, will either of these Disney affiliates talk about Eldred vs. Ashcroft (and Disney?)

Re:Heisenburg, Hunter S Thompson, and Post Modern

[jerryasher]

Why do you believe you have only two sources to listen too?

Perhaps because anyone can post to /., I find a very large amount of pro Microsoft information in /.

Re:Heisenburg, Hunter S Thompson, and Post Modern

[NeMon'ess]

What would be really great is if reporting would cover the who, what, when, where, why, and how of stories like they're supposed to, of all the sides or parties involved. Articles are so cropped to fit more ads and articles into the same page that journalistic principles get cut too. Another problem is owner or newsroom biases. An example is the Palestinian-Israel conflict. Some newspapers almost only feature crying palestinian mothers and children, but not the families of Israeli civilians or soldiers. Often all that gets shown of the carnage is the bombed wreckage of a bus or building. It seems that since the Palestinians are getting killed almost every day by soldiers before they can blow themsleves up, that doesn't make the pages. When Isreal retaliates for a successful bombing, that goes on the front page of the World section and those without a clue wonder why Israel killed two and injured forty bystanders in an attempt on the top Hamas bombmaker.

TV is worse of course, by condensing everything into sound bites it rarely covers the five W's like it should.

Re:Heisenburg, Hunter S Thompson, and Post Modern

[swillden]

You're saying that it would be really good if journalists could offer more complete reports so they could be more objective.

I'm saying that objectivity is imposible. It would be better to have two newspapers, one of which is blatantly pro-Israel and the other of which is blatantly pro-Palestine. Readers of both would then understand the issues far better.

One of the great things about the web is that those who are on-line and interested *can* get all sides of the story in this fashion.

Re:AOL is on drugs

[sbillard]

Would it also be cool for mom to call your cell phone 3 times a day... "I have to compile what?....Hold on , let me get a pen" - "Vorbis? Who is Vorbis?" - "dump the call stack? OK here goes...grunt/heave...SMASH!!!"

And this differs from Windows98 in what way?

[alispguru]

Maybe someday there will be a Lindows-equivalent for something Windows-esque with a better security model. For now, Lindows is an attempt to fill a need, and there is a chance they'll improve, but only if they have some degree of commercial success now.

I'll worry more about this when I hear of the first Trojan specifically aimed at Lindows - which will be evidence that there are enough Lindows boxes out in the wild.

Re:And this differs from Windows98 in what way?

[Anonymous Coward]

I'll worry more about this when I hear of the first Trojan specifically aimed at Lindows

Man, your philosophy rules. Who needs locks? I'll worry about door security when I've been robbed, which will be evidence that enough people use doors without locks for the robbers to notice.

Re:And this differs from Windows98 in what way?

[Anonymous Coward]

Locks are security through obscurity, which we all know doesn't work.

-n00b

Lindows? Lindows??

[mr.newt]

Am I the only one who has seen the Lindows logo? Am I the only one who has noticed that all of the Lindows employees are also Microsoft employees? Are you all insane? It seems abundantly clear to me that Lindows is a Microsoft-created way of getting mainstream would-be linux users to see that deep down, every operating system is really a Microsoft product. You are all going on and on about being wary of AOL, but you should be wary of Lindows itself.

Its pretty smart.

[Anonymous Coward]

I know a lot of people who just buy PC for the sake of AOL. They don't use the PC for anything else. When these people go for shopping, the AOL PC gets their attention, because thats exactly what they want.

With users comes support.

[miffo.swe]

When enough users use linux (insert your favourite vendor here) will also start supporting linux. Dumbing down or as i like to see it abstract the GUI from the user is very different on linux and MacOSX than on Windows. All the options and commands lies right there beneeth the surface and are ready to use if you want to something more advanced. In windows you are constrained to the GUI but in linux its most often just a matter of sending a normal command from the gui to linux. Something that you yourself might aswell have typed in is now done with a button.

We need this support if we want drivers to continue to come for linux. What do you do the day you sit there with linux and nothing is usable on the internet because it lacks support from all big vendors?

Re:With users comes support.

[wishus]

In windows you are constrained to the GUI but in linux its most often just a matter of sending a normal command from the gui to linux.

Actually, both of them work the same way, and neither of them work either way that you've described. Windows or Linux, when you activate that shortcut icon or click that start menu item, you are passing a command to the shell.

And get this: When you double click on a Word document on your Windows desktop, the program manager looks up the file association in the registry (hopefully finding out that you want to open .doc files with word) and then sends the command "winword.exe /o something.doc" to the shell - the /o is the command line argument for "open".

It is possible to run all your windows software from the "Command Prompt." You can even set up your $PATH variable so you can run winword.exe no matter what your current working directory is. Most people agree that "Command Prompt" is a crappy shell, though. Some people replace it with bash. Most of us don't bother and just use the GUI. Here is some info about replacing the shell.

Re:With users comes support.

[miffo.swe]

Yea i know but how easy is it to send register keys and most of all to remember them?

c:\>progman 3219487198237921873921873

I dont think it even resembles what you can do with bash. And yes i can rebuild windows to work a bit like linux but whats the point?

I meant that its workable whitout the GUI in a way thats not possible with windows if you like it even if some abstraction takes place in the GUI layer. The GUI and the underlying kernel is more separated than in windows and that makes it non destructive to stupidify because everything looks as normal to us geeks under the surface.

Re:Via C3 CPU -- WHERE?!?

[mkarpinski]

Actually, Fry's Electronics and Outpost.com sell this:

VIA EPIA-800 Mini ITX

It's a motherboard and CPU combo in a mini-ITX form factor.

The truth about redhat linux adcanced server

[Anonymous Coward]

The truth is right here .

No, Tetris is on drugs.

[yerricde]

Linux has no useful apps or games

Are you kidding me? Linux has lots of games. For instance, Linux has XBill (shoot the evil computer crackers), Tux Racer (snowboarding), Tetanus On Drugs (a tetris clone with a twist, literally), all of the GNOME Games and KDE Games, and several id Software games. For more, go to SourceForge Gaming Foundry or Freshmeat's games section, both brought to you by OSDN Keiretsu.

And through emulation and virtualization, you can run even more games. Most of the 2D games run on WINE. Older PC games should run on DOSEMU, plex86, or Bochs with FreeDOS installed. If you have an NES cart reader (hard to find), Linux has every NES game ever produced, through FCE Ultra. If you have a GBA cart reader (easy to find in online stores; look for the Visoly Flash Advance Linker), Linux has every GBA game ever produced, through VisualBoyAdvance.

On the hardware side, Linux supports game port joypads, USB joypads, and even game console joypads connected through a parallel port adapter.

because it was written by a bunch of stupid communists.

One of the most popular video games in the world, Tetris, was written by citizens of a Communist country as well.

Re:No, Tetris is on drugs.

[fault0]

Don't forget ut2k3, which will probably become the most popular competitive FPS soon.

Twilight of the Nerds

[RobotRunAmok]

I have said this time and time again, "Who cares if the average American uses Linux."

Coupla questions and an observation:

How do you define "success?"

Do you value Linux because it is "cool?" Would you value it less/not at all as an Operating System if your mother used it (having installed it by herself, without baking cookies to entice your assistance?)

See, from where I'm sitting, Linux is not a success, mainly due to the patronizing, condescending, and supercilious attitudes of its self-annointed priesthood who continue to actively foster the illusion that it is difficult and for "geeks/experts only." And, given that it's 2001, and not 1997 any more, being geeky and l337 is certainly no guarantee that it's going to remain cool much longer.

Which is a shame, because it does all I need as an OS and I don't have to pay through the nose for it.

You're not seeing it if you're spending all your time glued to SlashDot, but we're living in the Twilight of the Nerds. It would be a shame to see Linux become a remnant of a bygone age, "cool" in the way those Mayan Calendars and Egyptian Pyramids stand as testimony to the technological prowess of ancient peoples not smart enough to pick up the phone when Destiny came calling.

Re:Twilight of the Nerds

[MaxQuordlepleen]

dude it's 2002 ...

Re:Twilight of the Nerds

[Anonymous Coward]

LOLlolLOLlolLOLlolLOLlolLOL

Too damn funny...

Not Clock-speed equivalent.

[mbourgon]

Check further in the above's post - while at some things the speed is abhorrent and other times good, it's not equivalent to a 800 mhz celeron. Most times it scores worse than a 667 Celeron, but sometimes up to a Celeron 1300 (UT2003), but LAME encoding takes 3 times longer (1224 vs 451 seconds) than a 667. Those numbers are really fubar'd.

Re:Not Clock-speed equivalent.

[boskone]

cirix procs have always lagged in floating point, which is what encoding uses. they do "OK" for general purpose computing, but that crappy math unit really hurts a lot of performance. The old ones were HOT too, like, oven hot, not as in fast.

I'll stick with my ... what?

[Anonymous Coward]

It was supposed to say:

<xbox/ps2/gamecube>

But do to my haste, HTML, etc etc

It came out wrong. I'm sorry.

fuck lindows. look at this

[7-Vodka]

They sell mandrake PCs too:

Wallmart design your mandrake PC

Why buy a computer with a linux ripoff that charges you $99 a year and has everyone running as root. I almost forgot, they rebrand all the apps other people wrote too.

Mandrake is the OS I'd recommend to new linux users.

Re:Via C3 CPU -- WHERE?!?

[greywire]

That would be neat for making an entertainment system box or something. Too bad they dont seem to sell just the CPU. Horror of horrors, maybe I need to visit the local Fry's and see if they sell the chip...

I just want a cheap upgrade for the wife's computer... :)

MSNBC (of all places )...

[waferhead]

I despise MS as much as the next slashdotter, but I hate seeing MSNBC dissed--- They actually seem to go WAY out of their way to be impartial, as they realize evryone expects them to be, well, a MS...NBC flunky.

It isn't the best, but it `aint bad

The truth about redhat advanced server

[Anonymous Coward]

Its all here.

Confused!

[LoudMusic]

Ok, now I'm really confused. AOL ... Linux ... Walmart ... Microsoft ... who are the good guys? Who do we hate? The lines are becoming fuzzy.

~LoudMusic

Re:Confused!

[Anonymous Coward]

sigh...
Slashdot Quick Guide to Morality 0.1:

Protaganists
-----
Linux
FSF
OSS

Antagonists
-----------
Microsoft
RIAA
MPAA

Victims
-------
Walmart
AOL
Apple
Federal Government

Directions: choose any ONE entity from either 'Protaganists' or 'Antogonists'. Match with any ONE 'Victim' and said victim will magically absorb/acquire all moral attributes (good + bad) of it's partner.
Example: This story = (AOL+Linux) = Protaganist = hooray!
likewise
Rendezvous = (Apple+OSS) = Protaganist = hooray
however
Office X = (Apple+MS) = Antagonist = booo!

This process may be repeated ad naseum on /. as news items are posted.

Re:Could this be a new business plan?

[Anonymous Coward]

I hate it when people repeat jokes that they didn't really get in the first place.

In the case of your post, "profit" would be item number 2, because there is no mystery in where the profit comes from when you sell a MS-less PC witha cheapie CPU for $200 in a massive national chain store.

Dumbass

$40 for DOS 6, Windows 3.1 Was a Freebie

[UNIBLAB_PowerPC]

Always before MS has been able to hide the cost the consumer is paying.

No joke ... the other day, I was cleaning up at home and found the build sheet for my 486/66 (about $4K for the curious). It was extremely interesting to note that I was charged $40 for DOS 6 by the vendor and that they tossed in Windows 3.1 for NO CHARGE. That's right -- the first hit was free. And yes, sharing this little story makes me feel old ....

Of course!

[fault0]

Yup, that's actually a quite true statement. People who work for netscape are AOL/timewarner employees.

Today's games don't suck?

[qurob]

I'd rather play games at the peak of PC gaming then now.

Sierra Adventures, the first LucasArts games, Wolf/Doom, Epic Megagames, Apogee, Prince of Persia, the list goes on

Re:Today's games don't suck?

[scrytch]

Grim Fandango, Black and White, Neverwinter Nights, Quake 3, the list goes on. There was never a golden age. You are simply forgetting the long list of games that sucked, then as now.

Re:Today's games don't suck?

[ceejayoz]

Homeworld! Half-Life!

Re:Today's games don't suck?

[Anonymous Coward]

But most of those games suck. Especially Black and White.

Don't take benchmarks too seriously

[qurob]

Now you know why smart people don't take benchmarks for face value. My computer might edit video better than yours, or play games faster, but do you want it as your company email server?

Re:ROFLMAO

[fault0]

Actually, hick.com is the original hoster of goatse. If you resolve goatse.cx, you'll get hick.com's address. Goatse.cx is just a virtual server that points to hick.com/goatse.

To the moron who modded me down

[bogie]

You mod something as overrated when its been modded up by others and you disagree with that, not when 2 is someones starting score.

AOL can beat M$ at its own game.

[alchemist68]

AOL can finally beat M$ at its own game. And now AOL has an OS and cheap hardware to do it. First came the FREE (as in beer) AOL CD's, now comes a cheap PC for cruising the internet. If this hardware/software combo takes off, the next best thing for AOL to do is to help coordinate a suite of software products for Linux that are commonly used by the average Windows PC user and distribute them in a Linux CD. This way the average joe PC user won't lose functionality of his/her PC. While this hypothetical situation is a long way off, it's nice to know that M$ Windows won't be REQUIRED for the internet experience. For many people, the only thing they need a computer for is the internet and this is a good solution for average joe. While I don't like AOL internet software, AIM is OK, and using Linux is even better. This is how M$ will lose market share to Linux. It's about time someone made a PC with Linux installed from the factory.

Cheap hardware, Linux, AOL. I love it!

[Chris Tucker]

For many years, computers were the rich person's toy.

This is a system that almost anyone can afford.

Now there is a decent little box, running a decent Linux OS that can also run some Windows stuff and there will soon be an AOL version that will run on it.

For a lot of people, this is just what they need for themselves or as a computer/homework machine for the kids.

Sure, the savvy Linux user won't touch it with a stick. To quote Frank N. Furter, "I didn't make it... FOR YOU!"

Stop lamenting about what it doesn't do. Contemplate what it DOES do.

With one stroke, millions of people who formerly could not own a computer, can now have their OWN COMPUTER. They can access the internet. They have the WWW at their fingertips.

This is wonderful. This is nigh-miraculous.

FInally, WE ALL OF US were clueless newbies the first time we sat before a keyboard.

Let the clueless newbies who buy this $200 system make their mistakes and learn from them.

Eventually, they will grow curious and try something new. Something new like a Mandrake or Debian or Red Hat distro CD.

Personally, something like this that chafes the corporate scrotum of MS can't be all bad.

Good or bad?

[carlmenezes]

Question is, AOL now has a reputation of being "the software bad boy" due to it's incessant advertising, unrequested desktop shortcuts and irritating banners.

So is it really a good thing having AOL associated with Linux? On the one hand, you have a HUGE potential user base, while on the other you have an automatic aversion to AOL.

Be realistic...

[taernim]

Everyone with any knowledge of the Internet hates AOL. Why? Because AOL "dumbs down" the 'Net. It is quite annoying to have to explain to someone "No, chat rooms are not just a 'place' you can go to on the Web. That's part of AOL." That and their dang keywords.

Besides... what is the point of this. If people are using Linux, it should stand to reason that they have enough knowledge to get a REAL ISP.

All I need is to hear that damn voice... "You've got root!" heh.

Re:Be realistic...

[Anonymous Coward]

Everyone with any knowledge of the Internet hates AOL. Why? Because AOL "dumbs down" the 'Net.

And yet, 30+ million people are happy with AOL. Why? Because most people don't care about the technical details about how the Internet works -- they just want to surf the web, send email, and chat with their friends. AOL makes this simple for them. They don't need to know what an IP address is, what HTTP stands for, or how the Karn algorithm works.

A lot of Linux users seem to think that Linux can save the world from the grip of the Microsoft monopoly, but then when someone takes Linux in a more mainstream direction, elitism takes over and suddenly people without a clue should just use Windows. You can't have it both ways. There are a lot more people in this world without a clue about computers than there are who understand computers.

screenshots!

[minus_273]

http://www.lindows.com/lindows_products_screenshot s.php?desktop=yes
check out the AIM and netscape

Re:screenshots!

[Anonymous Coward]

Here is the good URL:

http://lindows.com/aol

The current C3 is not based on Cyrix

[yokem_55]

The current incarnation of the VIA C3 is not based on the old Cyrix 686 designs, but rather the Centaur developed core that was used in the IDT WinChip. Via did buy both companies, and for a while, the early socket-370 (ppga--designed for the original mendacino celeron) C3's were based on the Cyrix core, but after the Cyrix design ran into a brick wall regarding clock rate, Via switchted over to the Centaur based design.

LindowsOS In-Depth Review Here

[Anonymous Coward]

Here is a review by OSNews from someone who actually has installed LindowsOS. He loved it.

http://www.osnews.com/story.php?news_id=1803

yeah, like none of us run as root by default.

[Anonymous Coward]

right. nooooo one hereruns as root by
default. nooooo. that would be bad.
</sarcasm>

I said this would happen

[Anonymous Coward]

and I got called a troll for this about 6 months ago.

Re:ROFLMAO

[Anonymous Coward]

I bet it took you 3 weeks to figure that out.

It's been done

[Anonymous Coward]

AOL on linux? Um the Gateway Touchpad was running Midori...and a few guys from Textbox extracted it (dev.textbox.net). This is old news

Even Cheaper

[Vegan Pagan]

They could sell it even cheaper if they used this tiny case. Why aren't they?

Re:Even Cheaper

[Anonymous Coward]

No, those tiny cases are EXPENSIVE. Materials costs are generally NOT a major factor.

Re:Even Cheaper

[kroneko]

Yeah I checked those out a few monthes ago and the price was very expensive if I remember correctly, it's just like with most electronics, with miniaturization, comes higher costs, let alone having to design a cheap and effective way of fitting all the parts in there, and it would make tech service even harder, considering it's hard to mess around with things when it's all shoved into a smaller case.

Tech Support

[xtremex]

Maybe I'm different, but I have never called a Tech Support Number..even for my job. Maybe it's a pride issue, but as a professional, I'm paid to know certain things, and if I don't know, I find out. Damn, my mother could do my job if all she did was call tech support.(That's how alot of people do their jobs, actually) I'll give an example. I bought a Microtek scanner last week that is compatible with Linux. Well, sane kept coredumping whenever I tried using the scanner. I checked the sane site and no details on this in the buglist or anywhere else. So, I scanned the microtek site for any info..no dice.
Did a google and deja search...nothing on it. So, from experience, I figured I had a dud..returned it, got a new one, and it worked. Sure, it took me some time, and I knew that tech support would have me do everything I already did, to just tell me to return it. I know, this is OT, but I just had to say it:)

aol is going to do what the linux community hasnt

[deft]

linux community, you are a great experiment, bravo.

but now aol is going to do what you havent been able to yet, and thats:

1. bring a massive amount of normal users to linux via their client.

2. make the normal things that people do with the net possible on linux, with a simple easy to use interface.

3. most importantly in my eyes, this statement will be made by a real normal user: "oh, yeah, my mom uses aol on her lindows/linux whatever computer, and its not complicated, i guess it used to be hard, but its totally cool, tell your friend to just get the cheaper one, you dont need windows."

linux as it stands is the kickass power user platform... and soon it may be the platform for doing things that normal people do (just email, chat, mp3, and shopping).

i see this as a win for you all. congrats. you attracted a major player to your little gem. its a good thing!

What about Microsoft you slashdot bigot!

[Idou]

. . . just kidding ;)

let the troll mods begin!

if you want

[tacokill]

If you want people to enjoy computers and integrate them into their lives, it must be easy. Period.

Re:if you want

[Anonymous Coward]

If you want people to enjoy computers and integrate them into their lives, it must be easy. Period.

The problem being that a sufficiently uncomplicated computer is typically a computer that has been reduced to a set number of simple tools (eg. you're not addressing it as a computer; you're addressing it as 'a music player' or a 'solitaire game you play with a mouse').

Therefore, when you hand people computers that they can enjoyably and easily use, it's usually (barring any special circumstances) because those computers are just providing an even-faster-and-easier version of something that the people in question already have. eg. "Hey, look at this, you can fit five hundred cds worth of music on this thing and play them all back whenever you want" sort of thing.

So the question is why you want people to enjoy computers.. or if that's really what you want at all. Most likely you just want them to think they enjoy the computer... which means providing them with a tool they like via that hardware platform.

Personally, I've long since reached the stage where I'm convinced that computers aren't what most people want or need for most tasks, and most people don't deserve the effort... but that's just cynicism for you.

Re:Via C3 CPU -- WHERE?!?

[benzapp]

Go to walmart and you will get the whole damn machine, for $199.

The "internet appliance" finally done right?

[aquarian]

The hot thing a few years ago was the internet appliance- the i-Opener, 3Com Audrey, etc. These were a great idea, they just lacked what was really needed to make them work- AOL! AOL was the one company that could have pulled this off. I think it could have worked at the time, and I can't for the life of me figure out why AOL didn't do it. I still think it can work. Maybe it will happen.

Think about what most people use their computers for. Certainly a lot use them primarily for net access, and a lot of those just for AOL. Add to that writing the occasional letter, creating the occasional greeting card, and uploading the occasional picture. An internet applicance can handle all these things through web services, at much greater convenience to the user. It's not for everyone, but it's the perfect solution for many. I hope someone at AOL has their brain turnied on.,.

don't expect a non packaged linux AOL client

[Anonymous Coward]

that would be a customer support nightmare for them. By bundling it with a walmart el-cheapo lindows PC they at least start with a known config & environment.

supporting commercial linux software on anybody's random distribution with their own random misconfigurations would be expensive.

"hi my AOL is broken; accountname grandma01"
"what OS are you running grandma01?"
"what's an OS?"
"and what version of libraries, etc."
"huh?"

AOLinux

[Anonymous Coward]

The Linux advocates have an opportunity to get Linux to 'the masses' and all I see is alot of bitching... great job.

Re:It was a bad idea to begin with...

[NamShubCMX]

Yes almost all the config tools in KDE asks you a root password when you're not already in root (which you shouldnt blah blah blah)

What would be nice though would be the ability to run the whole system as root, for a limited time (just in case you forget to turn it off). Or have an account type "between" normal user and root that lets you switch to root EVERY time you need it (you want to extract something in /usr, enter your password. Need to save that httpd.conf file from KEdit, enter your password)... I understand this might not always be a good idea, hence why a new account, between root and user, could be useful.

No kidding, I install programs almost everyday. I "su" a lot but sometimes it would just be easier if every tools would ask me for permissions...

Resistance is futile if newbies like it.

[Gldm]

Yeah I know, nobody's got a gun to your head and all that.

Still, even though I loathe AOL as a service provider, I'm constantly bugged by novice users to "help fix my internet thingie" and deal with various other issues. Chances are if AOL does release their own OS, I'll be forced to learn how to use it because other people will constantly ask me to help them with it and assume I know all about it.

Now the question is, how much damage will this do to the unity of the Linux community (which isn't all that unified to begin with) when half the users are in favor of this "Hey! AOL is getting people to use Linux and is gonna give MS some competition!" and half are morally opposed to it "Oh god no! Now the most popular distro will be the one that's dumbed down the most and forums will be flooded with AOL users asking the same questions over and over!"

Sounds like poll time to me. "Would an AOL-made and supported free distribution of Linux be a good thing, or a bad thing?"

Apologies in advance

[sacrilicious]

Can you imagine a Beowulf cluster of THESE?

"Wow, this cluster displays AOL advertisements and spam at ten times the rate of my old machine!"

AOLinux

[c1pher]

..So easy to use, no wonder it's #1!! :-)

That is a frightening filesystem layout

[Anonymous Coward]

WTF?

The AOL client will be native

[Nailer]

I wonder if this stuff will work on normal Linux without WINE."

I'm pretty sure the AOL client will be native, because I already have a copy of the AOL 6 client for Linux RPMs lying aroundsomewhere on my hard disk 0. This client was used in a AOL / Gateway set top box, and was basically Mozilla with a skin.

Re:Console key(s) instead of root password?

[CommandNotFound]

Couldn't Lindows (or other local, single-user-oriented distros) just assign a special console key to count for root access? For instance, we allow a reboot with CTRL-ALT-DEL because we only honor that key sequence from the local hardware and not from some network-borne process. Ditto for CTRL-ALT-BACKSPACE to kill X. Why can't we have a CTRL-ALT-F1 or similar to allow root access when requested? You click to install a package or configure the system, and a window pops up with a picture of the keyboard and says to hit these keys to continue. Or, have the magic keys only enabled on demand, and you could make the magic key *any* key, so long as it came from the local console.

I haven't thought this through enough to figure out the details, but it seems like it could work.

Somebody has to say

[Anonymous Coward]

3. Profit!!!

So I'll do it anonymously...

Is it 'cool'?

[ttsuchi]

Does anyone know if the CPU can run w/out a fan (w/ some underclocking if necessary)? If so it'll be a great candidate for a 'quiet' 7-24 home ftp / http / games server... I thought about using XBox for that purpose too, but I think even its fans are pretty loud. Is it actually possible to custom make a decent (regular) PC for $200 anyways?

Re:Via C3 CPU -- WHERE?!?

[Anonymous Coward]

You can buy them off-the-shelf at Micro Center and the occasional CompUSA.

The Linux Battle

[kroneko]

What's sad is that you have so many people here with different views as to letting in the "brainless" ones to Linux. But there's this whole argument with people dumbing down linux. I was recently reading something at download.com in which some "idiot" had problems installing a game and several Linux users chewed him out and told him to go back to windoze. Then he basically said how he hated most linux users as they were arrogant geeks who wouldn't be open minded. If they're AOL users, they may not be the best with computers, but they're bringing support and numbers to linux. If a family goes out and buys one of the Windows PC's and then there happens to be an 8 year old kid in the family, who instantly starts liking Linux, perhaps you have a future programmer for linux. This isn't some war with dumbing down linux, or letting new people in. If you don't want a dumbed down OS, don't use Mandrake or Lindows, if you don't want to help the people having problems, stay out of linux help irc rooms, and try to be open minded, not everyone who comes to linux knows what they're doing at first, and there's no reason why we should instantly shoot down their hopes of using a decent OS. Anyone agree?

Re:The Linux Battle

[Anonymous Coward]

Along those lines, I would also like to make a point that I support what's going on right now, the opposition to Micro$haft, with Real, Netscape, AOL, and Linux. I recently downloaded Netscape 7.0 and I was actually impressed, it's been a while since I was impressed with Netscape. If all these companies want to combat Micro$haft and form an alliance, I would have to say, why not let them? For all we know AOL might come up with a niche for the 'typical linux geek', and at it's bringing money, and it will bring change (in a good way I'm certain).

User Friendly

[TheSHAD0W]

Well, Iliad has weighed in on the subject...

AOL RedHat Mirror

[Daemon5150]

RedHat mirrors are found in the damnest places: http://redhat.newaol.com/redhat/linux/8.0

Last Post!

[alpg]

There has also been some work to allow the interesting use of macro names.
For example, if you wanted all of your "creat()" calls to include read
permissions for everyone, you could say

#define creat(file, mode) creat(file, mode | 0444)

I would recommend against this kind of thing in general, since it
hides the changed semantics of "creat()" in a macro, potentially far away
from its uses.
To allow this use of macros, the preprocessor uses a process that
is worth describing, if for no other reason than that we get to use one of
the more amusing terms introduced into the C lexicon. While a macro is
being expanded, it is temporarily undefined, and any recurrence of the macro
name is "painted blue" -- I kid you not, this is the official terminology
-- so that in future scans of the text the macro will not be expanded
recursively. (I do not know why the color blue was chosen; I'm sure it
was the result of a long debate, spread over several meetings.)
-- From Ken Arnold's "C Advisor" column in Unix Review

- this post brought to you by the Automated Last Post Generator...