Slashdot Mirror
AOL: Lindows Is Misleading People
jgeelan writes "According to this breaking news item, AOL has apparently said over the weekend that it is going to ask Lindows to change its promotional material after concluding that Lindows is misleading people into thinking that it has a strategic relationship with AOL."
I suspect the main reason Aol is doing this is to distance themselves from being a possible competitor to Microsoft.
After all, they wouldn't want to do anything to weaken the M$ monopoly notion would they?
eTrade SUCKS
The issue is totally independant from the software. The issue is that Lindows is claiming strategic partnerships with AOL and Netscape, when in reality all they did was "fill in a one-page form on Netscape's web site and click the 'I Agree' button. So have 70,000 other resellers under the Netscape Browser Distribution Program. The software is free.". Whether the OS was Linux-based or not, the issue is that you can't just go around claiming partnerships with any company you want just to get yourself 15 minutes of fame or credibility.
slashdot!=valid HTML
esp. since most of the people buying these boxes will think it can actually run Windows apps, which is what killed OS/2.
Linux will never get anywhere, never, until it stops acting like it owes people something and makes its own headway without emulating anything.
I think Lindows is trying to follow the Napster model:
1. Create a product (it doesn't have to be any good).
Oh, that's right, Napster *was* a crappy product, despite the fact that it was one of the first of its kind, and managed to almost single-handedly change the face of music online. Napster was the cream of the crop when it started, despite the fact that it started to tank later on in its life.
Lindows has no such claim to fame. From what I can tell (not having used the OS), it just seems like a sloppy distro, made to look pretty, with a name that (erroneously) implies that it'll run MS products. It very well may do more harm to the Linux (GNU/Linux, whatever) cause than good.
Everything inside Lindows 2.0 is improved. Not perfect, but improved. The graphics are better and there's an overall feeling of a professional OS inside, rather than geeks-only software. The KDE desktop looks and feels like Windows, with a few exceptions.
Jeez I don't know where to start...
There's an overall feeling of a professional OS inside, rather than geeks-only software.
Ummm I'm just reading this and my head begins to hurt. I use linux and I believe it has always been a professional OS. By professional I mean, well it works, it's extremely advanced, can be used for just about anything and it's very customizable. Not because it isn't "geeks-only" what kind of stupid statement is that? If I give my cousin a fisher price computer thingy with those plastic crappy cards that have different games on them, I don't call it a professional computer because it's not. It isn't "geeks-only", but that doesn't make it professional.
When I want a professional OS, I don't install Windows Me, that isn't professional, it isn't "geeks-only" either. I would install Linux (or FreeBSD which I have started to use these past few weeks.) When I use Linux it does have a "geeks-only" feel to it, that's one reason why I like it. It's stable, secure (well most of the time), small, powerfull, and all this stuff is what makes it professional (in my opinion), I don't call something professional when it isn't "geeks-only." I don't want a little paper clip to hold my hand when I compile a kernel, I don't want a little dog to help me updatedb and locate | grep. I want a raw OS, one that's powerfull and secure, not one that's designed with my grandmother in mind. The things that make it professional are the same things that make it feel like it's "geeks-only."
The KDE desktop looks and feels like Windows, with a few exceptions.
Why does everyone try to compare desktop managers with Windows? Isn't the whole point of installing Linux to get away from Microsoft? Out of the 6 billion people in this world (yeah they're not all comptuer geeks but still at least one should be good enough) is the Windows desktop the most creative and easy to use interface we can come up with? I'm sure there must be something better out there to use. Why do we keep making Linux more and more like windows in all these Distro's. Well I guess it's to make the transition into Linux an easy one, but people seem to learn how to use Mac OS just fine and that's far from windows (at least from what I've seen it is, I could be wrong, not a huge Mac user.) Anyway that statement about Lindows being more professional because it isn't "geeks-only" really pisses me off, and also the comparison to windows.
Why shouldn't AOL team up with a linux distribution to make some kind of "AOL-Linux"? It would be a niche product basically for people who use their PC's exclusively for AOL and web browsing. A 50% tax on perfectly usable hardware ($200 bare bones at Walmart, $300 for same system with windows) is quite excessive.
you had better give people the right links, after all you wouldnt want their cookie sharing exploits to get in the way
http://msid.msn.com/mps_id_sharing/redirect.asp?w
at least on my backup machine..I have to admit coming from Windows to Lindows was relatively painless, easy for a user of Windows since Version 2 (or was it 3?) Anyway it was easy, much easier than Windows, and a damn site easier than learning Linux (for a lifetime Windows user)
From Lindows President(Kevin) on the Lindows forum:
As with any company, you have press that like what you're doing, and those who don't like what you're doing.
Maureen O'Gara who wrote this article certainly falls in the "not like Lindows.com" camp. She has from day one not liked Lindows.com, and she has time and time again tried to short circuit much of what we are doing. For example, she didn't like the Wal-Mart deal and tried all she could to get Wal-Mart to kill their deal with Lindows.com. She called them, emailed them, and so on to short circuit the deal. It obviously didn't work, and to this day Wal-Mart remains thrilled with their association with Lindows.com. She's apparently doing it again here, trying to short circuit our relationship with AOL. Of course, it won't work. AOL is a HUGE corporation, and not every department at AOL may know what the other dept. is doing. Certainly, a "reporter" for the Linux press would have the least access to AOL or information about their plans.
As we have said many times, we don't pay too much attention to this sort of thing. We simply remain focused on building a great product. This reporter has been proven wrong many times already by Lindows.com, but not by our words, but by actions and the history of this company.
As for an "AOL Computer," the MSNBC reporter was the one who made the inference of an "AOL Computer." That's why the headline had a question mark after it. The MSNBC reporter was saying, "Hmmm...COULD this be an AOL Computer?" I think it was clear what the MSNBC reporter was suggesting, NOT reporting that there WAS an "AOL Computer," but that this could certainly be used in that way.
We stand by our press release. It is 100% accurate.
Kevin
PS: I responded as soon as I saw this thread. We're very busy, as you can imagine, getting ready for the General Release. When we're not on the forum it means we ARE working! Don't give this "reporter" too much of your energy, as I'm sure it's exactly what she wanted.