Slashdot Mirror
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."
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?
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.
-- the computer doesn't want any beer, no matter how much you think it does. NEVER, EVER feed your computer beer.
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)
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.
Xavodim.com
The proper name for this system is GNU/AOL.
Please change it before the Hurd tramples you.
Eve Fairbanks says I drive a hybrid!LOL
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!"
Introducing the new Occam Fusion! Now with sqrt(-1) fewer blades!
Just wait until it becomes cheap enough for AOL to ship you free computers. Imagine all the junk you'll have then!
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.
Your Servant, B. Baggins
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.
-nd
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.
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!
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.
Denver Isuzu Suzuki
Just FYI, here's Walmart's page on Lindows OS PCs.
It hit 1GHz back in June
Tom's Hardware
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.
"Old man yells at systemd"
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.
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.
Enjoy...
-brian
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
Or would they even be around today? Netscape was doing poorly to say the least when it was bought by AOL.
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.
Please correct me if I got my facts wrong.
- 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
-nd
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.
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.
hyperpoem.net
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.
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.
The good and new comes from no quarter where it is looked for, and is always something different from what is expected.
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.
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.
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.
-- Slashdot: When Public Access TV Says "No"
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?