Slashdot Mirror
Which Desktop Distro Will Die First?
Over at NewsForge, Roblimo asks the musical question of which of the several recently released "desktop oriented" Linux distributions won't survive the coming year. It's nice to see user-centric distributions at all, but it really is a niche market for now. Apropos that,
psykocrime writes "The fine folks at UnitedLinux have issued a Press Release announcing UnitedLinux 1.0.
Should be interesting to see whether this sinks or swims, considering the general ambivalence (at best) or even outright hostility (at worst) that most of the talk about United Linux has met, from the Linux community.
Questions about GPL compliance, per-set licensing terms, etc... is this the future or Linux or just another albatross?" And J. J. Ramsey writes "BeyondUnreal reviews not only Xandros Desktop's installation, but also shows what this distro's $99 price tag actually gets you. Read more here. LinuxPlanet also has an in-depth review of its own."
Lindows. If they have any success in 2003, Micro$oft will just sue them into oblivion. If they fail during 2003, Micro$oft will just laugh at them and label them as the Open Source failure. If they break even.. they'll probably just sue anyways to get it over with.
Why? Because the one with the most votes already has widespread consumer awareness about its distro. The one that nobody knows about is the one that should be the most concerned.
1. Bad marketing plans redolent of dot-bombs.
2. Onerous licensing not in keeping with Linux's mission.
3. Just plain bad distros.
4. Unprofessional behavior.
The latter will kill a company that deals in Linux very quickly, I've found, since the Linux community is very aware of a company's behavior, far more so than most other communities. If company X with distro Y is seen as "in bed with the enemy," they're going to get shunned faster than a sweet potato that's been up Rush Limbaugh's butt for safekeeping during the winter.
Maybe this is why small companies like Slackware are still around: they cater to a specific need, they do it well, and they don't try to shoot themselves in the foot with pretentious We Need To Grow Our Business jargon/corporate newspeak.
It has far too many license issues :) :) :) :)
The package quality is too high
It seems to have files in sane locations
You can upgrade to the latest version far too easily
It supports far too many archs
The swirl logo has lost its hypnotic appeal...
"For a pretty Linux desktop experience there's Debian; for the more seasoned Linux hackers there is Mandrake and SuSE; for the Linux newbies there's Slackware and Gentoo"
I can't wait to see how this one turns out... if saying that Slack and Gentoo are for newbies doesn't pull people out of the woodwork, nothing will.
Hmmm...The writer of the UnrealTournament article gripes that Xandros uses ReiserFS as the default file system, instead of ext3, which is journaled. But isn't ReiserFS journaled as well, and faster to boot? I don't know much about Reiser, that's just what I heard.
I think you swapped around all of the distro descriptions. I'll leave it as an exercise to the reader to sort them out. :)
I just want to make a couple of points here...
#1) A linux distro doesn't die or disappear. I'll get flamed to hell for this but look at slackware. Its percentage of installed user's has dwindled and so has its development. However, the users it has are very dedicated (and vocal) and it is a good system. I'd imagine the same may spring up for any one of these "desktop" distros.
#2) Why don't they all merge? They all are obviously trying to take on Microsoft. They all are remarkably similiar. Basically a slicked up kde system and a $99 price tag. I would think it would be in their best interest if Lindows, Lycoris and whatever that other one (Xandros or something) is if they all pulled their resources and competed with MS alone (not each other).
#3) What the hell is wrong with Mandrake? I use Mandrake for everything (mostly cooker) and it rocks. While its not really fair to compare it to WinXP, I'd say if you compare it to WinMe it kicks the living crap out of it. Automatic hardware detection, easy network setup, kde 3.1 (mandrake 9.1... I'm using it now), etc... Walmart should focus on one of these distros and it should be Mandrake.
#4) United Linux is crap. "We want to make a new standard/certifying brand for linux... send us money". We have Red Hat distros (Red Hat, Mandrake, Yellow Dog, etc) and we have the LSB (Mandrake, probably some others... debian?). Ransom Love screwed up in the Unix world, now hes out looking for money off of linux. As previously stated, United Linux is crap.
*Huff*
can't sleep slashdot will eat me
If all this should have a reason, we would be the last to know.
In a sense you can say distros never die, as their GPL source will always live. Corel came back from the grave with Xandros, let's just hope that it doesn't 'die' again.
IMHO it's hard to sell any distro without giving some kind of 'sample' (i.e. ISOs online.) I can see that distros will not be a success as they don't really make any money at the moment. It is my belief that RedHat is not successful because of their desktop distro but because of their server distros and services they provide.
I'm sure we'll go through tons of forgotton distros but as time progresses, so will these distros progress, and eventually we'll have a distro with the true stability of Linux along with the smoothness of something like OS X/Windows/[insert favorite desktop OS here]
Of the 'real' companies, I'm afraid the small will die first.
Redhat (possibly et. al.) have the best chance of success in the business world because the have:
a) Industry credibility
b) A half decent support organisation
No serious business customer is going to invest any money without those...
# init 5
Connection closed.
Oh...
I've seen Michael Robertson, CEO of Lindows.com, speak (at Debconf 2) - and I can tell you that I am certain that Lindows.com will not be yet another dropout of the Desktop Linux business.
How am I sure?
Michael's a salesman, pure and simple. He speaks with passion and he makes you love him and his company - and I've heard that he succeeded in convincing a lot of people who attended Debconf. You should be aware this is coming from a group of people who are probably a lot less friendly to corporate (particularly proprietary corporate) involvement in the free software world.
Michael's ability to make the connections, to sell his company and his vision - that's what's going to make the difference. I've interviewed for a job at Xandros, and I'm sure they've got good people technically (I'm saying this sight unseen), but there's one thing Lycoris, Xandros and all the rest don't have - Michael Robertson. He will make Lindows.com succeed, I guarantee you.
(Of course, this is discounting the huge war chest of money he got from the sale of mp3.com. I'll bet he could fund Lindows.com for a lot of years even if he never sold a single product.)
I figured I should make sense of this post before some newbie actually believed it If you are new to linux and want a clean desktop to get you started select one of the following: 1) Redhat 8.0 2) Mandrake 9.whatever 3) Suse (what number are they to?) If you are a bit more seasoned and want to play a bit more try these: 1) Redhat 8.0 2) Debian If you are a wizard and want real control: 1) Redhat 8.0 2) Slackware 3) Gentoo These are all my opinion...disagree if you like, but I am right in my little world :)
Unstable Apps: Our Android Apps Don't Suck
There *is* a Linux based version called Blue-Eyed OS (YALD - yet another Linux distro), but I think that the speedy and efficient OpenBeos will make some waves, especially in the "Digital Hub" arena.
If you haven't tried it, you should see what I'm talking about. There is a free download at Bebits.com (in my sig) - Personal, Max and Max Lite distros are available.
Ain't enough 'O's in smooth to describe Beos.
I don't think the article draws a clear enough distinction. He says that they will either "go out of business" or "stop emphasising the user..." Hmm...these two scenarios are NOT the same. If Lycoris has crappy spending habits compared to their income, yes, they'll go out of business. Ditto for redhat, any other linux distro. When these companies marked "desktop useability" they moreso mean on the -Corporate- desktop. Thats where their real dollars are. (in _SUPPORT_ contracts) As long as the support contracts vary enough from distro to distro, you can expect them to be hyping desktop-usability to corporate clients for a long time. (Some companies prefer suse licensing&support, some mandrake, some redhat....etc)
Oh, and if someone DOES go out of business?
GASP! The result of a market with competition!
When in doubt, parenthesize. At the very least it will let some poor schmuck bounce on the % key in vi. (Larry Wall)
You are joking, right? Pretty Debian? Mandrake for seasoned hackers? Gentoo for newbies?
No more of this or someone may get hurt.
*** "Freiheit ist immer die Freiheit des Andersdenkenden". -- Rosa Luxemburg ***
At least bet on a Linux distro in a dot-com deadpool.
s earch.php?search=linux
http://www.fuckedcompany.com
There are 17 HOF-fucks already for Linux companies, and with the economy, I expect a lot more:
http://comments.fuckedcompany.com/fc/phparchives/
My picks? Lindows and SuSe, and quite possibly Slackware. Lindows because it's iillegal, and SuSe and Slackware due to general lack of popularity, corporate backing, and maintenance.
I'll take the plunge and post for the first time in my life.
No one will pay for desktop linux. Why? Because people who pay for OSs are generally businesses, and businesses want productivity. There's just not enough of that in Linux desktop apps. If you're going to pay, you may as well pay for what's going to give you the most bang for your buck. And that's Windows.
I am not anti-Linux, at all. I cringe at Windows-based servers, and I fully realize Unix-based server power and flexibility, and encourage my clients to consider it. One of my clients moved to Red Hat and they pay RH some nominal fee for every RH server they ship out. Not even for that RH Network thing. They just pay some ammount to ensure that RH continues its development.
And yet, these guys use Windows on the desktops in the office. They are all Unix professionals. But for shit they need to do on the workstation, Windows can't be beat.
Ecce Europa - Web Design for Business
...One will survive. And yes, I am optimistic. Linux on the desktop is possible. What needs to happen is people need to be exposed to it. How? Here's my plan.
Start with education. Before someone can use Linux, people have to get beyond relying on Microsoft to take care of everything and actually learn some of the ins and outs of their machine. That way, when it comes to actually installing Linux, they're not as lost as they would be when it tells them "Hey, your modem isn't compatable."
After they are educated, start them on something that doesn't require a leap of faith (i.e. repartitioning their hard drive, etc). Knoppix is perfect for that. It runs off of a CD and doesn't require any extensive knowledge, reformatting or repartitioning. This will help them get used to Linux's differences from Windows at a pace they can understand. They can click around, see what's where, etc.
Once they're familiar, at least in part, with Linux as an OS, then they might be ready for a distro like Mandrake, Debian, or one that doesn't require them to do any Kernel work. Another reason for starting with something like Mdk or Deb (or even RH), is that software installation after the initial OS load is fairly simple thanks to packages. The only conceivable snag in that plan is dependancies. Make the machine dual boot with the default OS in LILO (or whatever boot manager you pick) pointing at Windows. That way, they don't have to leave Windows right away.
From there, it's all up to software companies. But, of course, they won't be too quick to jump on. While Joe and Jane Consumer won't really care about modifying and redistributing source code, major software vendors aren't too keen on the Open Source/GPL way of doing things. They're only concerned about money. Since MS likes to keep their source closed, they feel a whole heck of alot more secure about things. They can charge for their software, in other words. It's getting them to embrace the Linux platform that is going to determine the fate of Linux on the Desktop in the end.
And all this is probably just wishfull thinking on my part, since we all know how MS works...
Blog Prophyts - Right On, Man
I think it was intentional to show that the moderators don't even read half of what they're moderating.
That didn't work so well the last time they tried it...
I think Red Hat will succeed because it has essentially become pretty much the de facto standard for Linux.
I mean think about it: here in the USA when people know about Linux they definitely know about Red Hat Software. And Red Hat Linux is the commercial distro that is by far the most used in the corporate world. Even IBM's well-funded Linux research uses a variant of Red Hat Linux.
Slackware may be better for the highly-experienced user, and Mandrake may be great for newbies, but for the corporate crowd Red Hat Linux is pretty much it.
face it.. the general population is not ready for linux desktops. hell, the genereal population isn't even ready for windows XP or OSX.
True that. But the thing is, XP and OSX are ready for the general population. Linux is not.
Give me an AIM client that doesn't look nasty, a browser that doesn't crawl and swap on a machine that runs MSIE effortlessly, and an Office suite that doesn't look clumsy.
I am a comp sci major with pretty good Linux/Unix experience behind my belt, and still I would be neither happy nor productive if I didn't have windows on my system.
The simple test is this: I never have a moment like "I am in Windows, and I have the need to boot to Linux to do something." But I often have the "Ah shit I am in Linux, now I need to reboot to windows before I can do this" moment.
The general public doesn't care about open source, community effort, MS monopoly, none of that shit. They want features and smooth interfaces. And Linux isn't ready to give them that. Will it ever? May be. Probably. Remarkable strides have been made by RH, for example, to make Linux more usable by "regular people" during the last 3-4 years that I've been paying attention to it. They seem pretty adamant about continuing in the same path.
Oh yeah, another thing Linux needs is the ability to work on all the hardware windows can work on. Whatever's in my computer, windows handles it. If the best linux can do for me is a fuzzing sound card, a modem that drivers don't exist for, and a TV tuner I can't use, then I am not switching. I don't care if this is due to companies keeping their data proprietary. To the end user, it's the same shit: it doesn't work.
And Linux's fabled reliability isn't worth shit if it doesn't support your hardware and you can't do what you need to do.
Ecce Europa - Web Design for Business
Now, i could lambast that remark about Slack being for newbies, but I'll take the even-handed approach. True, on it's own it is a rather dumb, ignorant, flamebait throw-away remark, and you deserve a good whipping. BUT, I would recommend Slack to newbies, because with Slack you learn Linux, and it's BSD style config files are cool for tweaking and tuning, as opposed to the visual in your face stuff on other distros (which are ok too, just different) - so newbies getting exposed to this stuff is kinda good - with a little patience and perserverance. So, newbies by all means get Slack, but don't for a minute think it's a "newbie" distro, it's packs a punch for any level of user.
Lycoris, Lindows, Xandros, all look great. I just cannot see forking over nearly the same price as the "mainstream" OS. The look of these distros is proof that linux is maturing. The Knoppix distro is simply amazing. I believe that for a new distro to survive it is going to have to look great, install software easily and also have the ability to run from CD. I installed Knoppix on the harddrive of one of my spare machines and I enjoy using it. A new distro that can boot completely up from CD and show people that linux is possible. I hope that the great work continues. maudite
I find that a lot of Linux users are closed minded about non-free software. If you want to get into desktop world, you have to be able to make money from Linux applications. In order to be able make money from Linux, software developers have to make a target where the operating system has a large user base. If Linux developers want it to have a large userbase, Linux has to be really easy to use right out of the box, thus reducing the learning curve. With different desktop applications (Gnome, KDE), incomplete manual, little inconsistency copy/cut/paste (which is dependent on applications - not KDE/GNOME), added with the fanaticism and eliticism of its users (Yo! I can c0mp1l3 the whole L1nux from source - I'm 31337 attitude), I personally don't think it can compete with Mac or Windows, especially in usability area. Linux is maybe more secure, faster, and handles a lot of things better than other operating system, however don't forget about usability and consistency & coherence in the design.
...
...
There are just way too many inconsistency in its functions, plus there are too many Linux distributions, and this confuses people. If the scenario were different, i.e:
1) There's only 1 Linux
2) Only 1 desktop/windows manager
3) A more stable X-Window where it doesn't crash the whole operating system
4) Consistent look and feel (btw, Bluecurve is a joke)
5) More complete manual
6) More drivers for hardware
I believe if these criteria is met, computer vendors would be more than happy to install Linux by default. The cost to support an operating system that has many inconsistency is just too much. I've been both a developer and a tech support, and I couldn't imagine myself trying to support different distro with many inconsistencies everywhere.
I have produced a few free Linux software since 1999 and I was a member of Gnome foundation, but now I erased all my Linux partition and just use Windows entirely. Moreover, I need money. I can't make money from developing Linux software. Nobody in the past has hired me solely based on my ability to develop high quality C++ and C software in Linux.
--
My $0.02 + 7% Canadian GST tax + 8% provincial tax
Microsoft(R) Windows(TM) 98,ME,2000,XP.
Well, it won't survive in my business anyway.
I simply don't have the time to administer technically-inferior products distributed by illegal monopolies.
"Nine times out of ten, starting a fire is not the best way to solve the problem." - my wife
will be the one that relies the least on its bottom line and the most on a passionate community of users and developers. This is why Slackware and Debian keep going, yet groups like UnitedLinux, Lindows, Lycoris and Xandros keep coming and going. The latter parasitic group almost always has the worst reputation with the host community and eventually the community rids itself of the parasite, which is left to regroup and figure out another way to attach itself again to get the profitability up somehow.
Eventually, there will be a completely community oriented desktop-specific distro that exists to scratch the itch of the developers and community surrounding it. Maybe it even exists somewhere (Mandrake or Redhat?), but until it does, expect these fly-by-night, dotbomb leftovers to be up and down all the time.
One of my friends bought a Wal-mart PC with Lindos pre-installed and it was awful.
From both the perspective of a linux user and a windows user. It failed at everything. It was tough to use, the menus were cluttered with software you didn't have but you could pay for. It was slow, it couldn't run windows programs the way it advertised.
I can't believe wal-mart would have agreed to let them ship it on their systems.
The man who trades freedom for security does not deserve nor will he ever receive either. - Benjamin Franklin
How can one improve on perfection?
(Many thanks, Patrick.)
this is a very, very good question, which distro will die first. a really good question.
;-P )
in the interest of answering the question, i will keep track of the various distros under deathwatch on my amiga work station.
i will enter their information on my OS/2 database.
everyone can view the results, as they are tabulated, on my minix server.
again, this is a good question and a very important one! we shall watch the distros die! and i will give the winner, the one who predicts the order of death, a genuine TRS-80 Color Computer!
(note the details for the '12th Annual "Last" Chicago COCO Fest May 17-18th, 2003' on the link... wtf?! a TRS-80 Color Computer fest in 2003?! WOW! i started this post as a flippant jaded joke and i find myself in dumbfounded amazement
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
More importantly, you should have a pool to guess which distro will first become as good, usable, and easy to install as Win2k is. My guess is, RedHat, in the year 2007. or maybe 2009.
It's great to see the linux community is really getting behind the whole linux movement and voting for which distro is gonna tank first.
Sounds alot like us Windows guys talkin about whether or not XP was gonna suck ass.....we only had one choice though.....
***********
This post is probably a troll. Mod as such.
As well as switching just to be anti-MS. Take me for example. 99% of the apps I use are written for Windows only. If I decided to become a Linux zealot right this instance, my sum total of computer usage would be 1) using WinZip and 2) using Mozilla. That will get old in like 2 minutes. The "replacement" apps you would then recommend I use, I wouldn't use them even in Windows. Example? Well I like to do graphics. Well, you say we have The GIMP! Please, I wouldn't touch that crap if an exact version existed for Windows (who's version is even worse), much less migrate to Linux for it?
This is the part Linux zealots don't get: most people want to do work, not make some OS-religious statement. When NORMAL people talk computers, they say something like "I was playing Tomb Raider last night...", not "I was using Windows last night...". It's the app that's important to 99% of the world. You'll probably say somethiing now like "well if more people switched to Linux, more apps would be written" Well man, what do we do in the meantime? Just wait there mutely till whatever app I use gets made? No, I want the apps now, I don't have time to wait. The business serves ME, that's how it works. There's a reason I use a particular Windows app, IT'S THE ONE I LIKE!
1.) if you are a comp sci major (as am i)...how could you possibly like windows (besides the obvious). have you taken a look at the size of the MSDN libs lately?!?!? hello...in .NET they DEPRICATED IOSTREAM.H!!! never mind the bloat that goes into their APIs.
2.) not evey single person is in your situation. i have never said "i can't do this in linux, i must re-boot to windows". if you are a comp-sci major that is only interested in game development or 3d rendering, i can understand, but even heavy duty rendering is done on *nix systems. very few of the 3d visualization systems i've worked on were windows based...
3.) we DO have features and smooth interfaces...we also have a lack of both. it depends on the disto, packages installed, etc.
4.) my sound card, zip drive, webcam, nic card, video card, and joystick all work in linux. the only time you tend to run into the problem of hardware incompatability is when you are running hardware that is made by companies with chipsets that aren't in common usage, or the company doesn't want to release the info to developers that they need to write open source implamentations of the drivers. if you stick with hardware that is even remotely common you shouldn't have a problem. if so...a great wizzard comp-sci major like you should have a problem looking at either the man page or linuxdocs.org right???
-frozen
I'm not always the brightest pixel in the stream
I know I'm preaching to the (mostly) converted here, but:
Open Source does so well because people can do what they want with it. If a program is buggy, unstable, or too expensive, people will either fix it, fork it or dump it and write their own...
Think of Open Source as a gigantic Darwinian "survival of the fittest". You may end up with a dominant species (eg. Red Hat), but that doesn't instantly mean all the others will become extinct.
Having lots of desktop distributions helps to speed their evolution as they all compete for 'resources' in their respective niches.
-- Askari: Give JavaScript the bird.
At least according to the 2nd review. Sure, they may have irritated some GNOME heads, but there are those of us that prefer KDE. And if I can run Windows apps seamlessly (I'll wait for more info on this) I'd gladly spend $99 for Xandros and replace WinXP.
I too am a compsci major and I have found that I cannot code in windows anymore. The linux environment is simply too well equiped for programming not to mention how much I use ssh to use labs remotely. That being said I still find myself constantly wondering how to do task X, what do I use to uncompress this (yeah I know man pages and the gui acn do it also), how do I install this, and why I haven't I had sound for over a week:)
But I often have the "Ah shit I am in Linux, now I need to reboot to windows before I can do this" moment."
Other than some games or having to talk to someone on MSN (not for a few months) I pretty much have this urge finally kicked unless I want to print something...
I stole this Sig
SuSE not popular?
AFAIK SuSE is very popular in Europe, wheras RedHat is more popular in the US (than SuSE).
Although I do laugh at Lindows, I subscribed to their mailshot on one of my e-mail accounts... and the amount of "Michael's Minute" messages that come through is astounding (the message subject is prepended with the word "{SPAM ?}" by the mail server). I gave up reading them long ago... talk about an evangelical salesman!.
Are you local? There's nothing for you here!
Mmmm, no. Linux is free. Alas, most importantly
as in beer. That is its de facto selling point.
You'd be surprised how many things people will
put up with if they pay less.
I've been using Linux for years, and I still encounter distributions that I've never heard of.
;) Also of note is Linux From Scratch.
So, here's my list.
'Business' Linuxes:
Perched for massive growth: RedHat, SuSE.
May die from bad business planning: Mandrake.
'Eternal' Linuxes:
Slack, Debian. These will be around long after all the trendy little skript kiddiez are dead and buried. When business has left Linux, and it will, grizzled veterans will still be playing with source and debs. I'd dare to say these two distributions aren't so much distributions as they are religions.
'On the Verge of Apotheosis' Linux: Gentoo. Total customization? This is fast becoming the 'l33t' of the 'l33t'.
'Dead, Dying, Wounded, Peasants' Linuxes:
Turbolinux, all those other ones a fraction of the population has heard of, but never seen. But who knows - miracle recoveries can happen.
Now, to cut off the flaming Mandrake users - Shut up. Asking for money is no model for a business. I'd like to see Mandrake succeed as much as the next person (Linux needs a good freaking desktop!), but you can't question that Mandrake doesn't have the corporate staying power of RedHat and SuSE.
Times like these make me wish there were more options for negative moderations like "-1 Lame" and "-2 ALERT! YOU ARE A FUCKTARD."
For the record, I think the next Linux distro to die, primarily intended for desktop or not, will be something like Lycoris or Caldera. Distributions like Mandrake and Red Hat provide ease of use and power in one package, providing a solution for all levels of users, while the "elite" distros requiring clue such as Gentoo (and maybe Debian and Slackware) will satisfy the tinkerers, superority complex, "make world" and other types of Linux users. A lot of choice is a good thing, but the key is identifying redundancy and figuring out which redundant distro is inferior. I think that will help pick off the next to go under.
perl -e 'print $i=pack(c5, (41*2), sqrt(7056), (unpack(c,H)-2), oct(115), 10)'
When I'm in Windows, I consistently think about the things I could rather be doing in Linux.
"Man, if I only had a bunch of virtual desktops so I could have an uncluttered screen."
"Wow, what I wouldn't give for grep right now."
"Hell, why is it that the registry is so incomprehensible? I wish I had a manpage or a README describing this crap."
"Stupid spam. I'd love to have procmail running here. Ah well, I guess I'll wait until I reboot to Linux to read my non-web email."
"It's so great that I've got tabs in Mozilla. Why can't I have them on my windows too like I do in Linux?"
The list goes on. I only boot to Windows now when I absolutely have to. I don't even use the "oh, I need to play games" excuse any more because I've simply stopped playing windows games. I'll play nethack or Q3 or an emulated SNES game instead.
Sure, it's a choice in the way that I choose to use Linux, but it still means that it passes your test. And yeah, I could run programs like Cygwin in Windows, but that's like saying you can run Windows programs in Linux via Wine, which doesn't cut it.
Once I started learning how to use Linux as Linux, rather than as a bad version of Windows, I became much more reliant on its features. Now I feel frustrated by anything without a bash shell and a copy of vi. It's all in what you learn to accept from your interface, as well how you're willing to work with it.
"I may not have morals, but I have standards."
If Lindows spent the time to work on creating a quality distro they might have become a viable contender, but instead they chose to try and turnout half-ass software in order to show some sales made off of momentum from their PR machine.
Too bad most of their PR that has anything to do with tech is just complete BS. The best is the version numbering, Version 3.0 in less than a year of development?
Lindows.com PR last year.
I don't care that people want to use Windows. It's not a horrible OS and there are many pluses. But stop preaching about "looks bad" and "not productive" because quite frankly, if my 9 year old can figure it out, the 13 year old can do her homework, and the 15 year old can code - ALL ON LINUX - then it's a matter of preference, choice and experience. You don't want to change and that's fine, but your ability to be productive on Linux is NOT universal.
I write for a living. I have all the latest toys and I've never had a problem finding drivers or support under Linux. StarOffice is great, Galeon/Mozilla display things fine (except for lazily coded sites designed for "ie") and I'm extremely productive.
Your inability to be productive on linux is not the fault of Linux. It's your own.
I don't have a solution, but I certainly admire the problem.
The Latest info I can find is from last month where Lindows asked the Judge to dismiss the case filed by MS. There can not have been any ruling yet as the press would have written about it regardless of outcome.
Help fight continental drift.
"Ah shit I am in Linux, now I need to reboot to windows before I can do this"
I have those moments all the time. I'll be sitting at home thinking, geez, I havent had a W32.worm rape my system in months, I'd better boot into Windows.
"I'm tired of all this 'Aren't humanity great' bullshit. We're a virus with shoes" - Bill Hicks
second of all kde 3 (in my opinion, and that's what we are talking about here, is oppinion) is getting pretty polished.
third, as far as e-mail clients go...one is as good as the next. if we are talking about outlook + exchange i can see your point. other than that...we (when i worked for an isp) encouraged our users to use eudora because most found it was easier to use, less chance of executing a virus, and less hassle to support.
fourth, most people do run decent hardware. when i worked for an isp, we flat out REFUSED to support winmodems. we didn't care what os you used, we didn't like dealing with the headache, so it's not a windows issue...it's a hardware issue. anyone who chooses to use hardare that isn't "mainstream" runs a risk, whether in linux or windows, as to whether or not they will recieve support, will it work, etc. after all...with XP, to be supported, the driver has to be certified by MS. if some podunk NIC is giving you a problem, it will probably be a problem no matter what. in linux, at least you have the advantage of forums to tell you if you f*cked, or if there is a fix. try getting that help from MS.
all that aside. i'm not saying that MS doesn't have it's place, but what i'm trying to say is that Linux isn't as nasty/hard/obtuse as most people make it out to be. do i have any illusions that linux will rule the world? no. we can be competitive given the chance...
-frozen
I'm not always the brightest pixel in the stream
My money's on Yggdrasil. Oh, hang on...
The simple test is this: I never have a moment like "I am in Windows, and I have the need to boot to Linux to do something." But I often have the "Ah shit I am in Linux, now I need to reboot to windows before I can do this" moment.
This simple succinct comment sums up my Linux vs. Windows experience over the past four years better than anything I have ever seen. I have never been able to come up with such a short and perfect statement of why I never seem to be able to completely migrate over to Linux no matter how hard I try. I have tried all distros, with Gentoo being my favorite and on the other half of my hard drive -- but I'm in Windows again now because today I needed to get something done, *quickly* and I just havn't gotten around to (or seen the need to) boot back.
It's all about what businesses decide suits them best. If enough companies have an incentive-- be it open source, community effort, [or] MS monopoly. All of these factors can provide a reason for a company to invest money in an alternative. More importantly, any one of these reasons may make it worth a significant investment to switch.
The last wave will be the US; other countries have much greater reasons to invest both public and private money to refine Linux to serve their own needs. (Namely that Windows and Mac are both American products and money spent on them has almost no ripple effect on the local economy.)
How much would it really take to make Linux viable, given sufficient corporate resources?
Once companies switch, it isn't much of a step for their employees to do the same...
2. Onerous licensing not in keeping with Linux's mission.
Linux's "mission" and it's traditional community are irrelevant with respect to a desktop distro. IMHO a desktop distro is not for the traditional community it is for bringing new users to Linux. All that really matters is how well such a distro functions as a newbie desktop, how well the user gets along without Windows or Office. Linux's desktop future will be determined by people who don't give a rats ass about the GPL.
Oh...it already died?
And, like Buffy and Xena, has been reincarated?
Now called Xandros?
Gosh!
ttyl
Farrell
CAN-CON 2019 - Ottawa's only book oriented Science Fiction Convention! October 18-20, Sheraton Hotel, Ottawa, Canada h
* better word processing
whatever. I dont see a difference. OO and Abiword do just as much as MS Word
Abiword didn't (as of my last download a few months back) even support tables. If all you're using Abiword for is to type text in and maybe do a search/replace, yes. For just about anyone else who uses a word processor, formatting with tables will be a requirement at some point during the time they expect to use it.
creation science book
Then download Debian or buy a CD with Debian and install it and set it up yourself. But what about people you know who are not into computers enough to do it themselves, but still want occaisional access to your knowledge they can fall back on if they have problems, and you would prefer they have Debian? Well ... there's Xandros ... which is based on Debian.
now we need to go OSS in diesel cars
ok...then have you used jdk for linux? if so, why? java is an open standard (or was ment to be)...so why develop for only the MS implamentation?
I tried moving to Gentoo recently at home and failed. Why? Games, Palm, Photoshop. GIMP doesn't compare to Photoshop
that depends totaly on what you are doing. for most users, gimp is plenty. in fact, on my windows partition (granted i haven't booted it in about a year or so), gimp worked fine for everything i needed it to do. unless you are a serious photoshop developer, gimp will work fine. never mind the plugins that are availible for it (both free and non-free).
What Linux doesn't have is a *consistent* interface. Yeah, GNOME looks funky. KDE is looking sweet these days too. But why should the user be subjected to different UIs and interface standards (copy-paste etc.) depending on the toolkit the programmer chose? granted this is true. however...highlight and middle-click (both left and right button at the same time for those emulating 3 buttons) is far nicer than the ^c ^v of windows, and is pretty standard in the XFree86 system (WM usually doesn't make a difference). true *nix developers need to choose their interface, shortcuts, etc. i have, however, run into several programs in windows that didn't behave as though i though they would/should. again, this a a programmings issue, not an OS issue.
Hardware...Linux won't even recognise my scanner (Canon FB630U) despite the SANE version I'm using supporting it. My Palm is out as QuickOffice doesn't sync with Linux (and I'm too lazy to write a conduit, despite QO files being just HTML on the Palm side). Oh, and it doesn't like all the buttons on my Logitech Mouseman. Dang nabbit.
my mouseman works just fine...i just told XF86 that i was using a mouseman and it was fine. this step shouldn't be necisary granted, but many distros include and autodetect function that will config this for you...so it's a non issue. as for your scanner...i have posted many times about the manufacturer not helping open source people develop drivers for hardware. oh, and palm works find under linux...(depends on distro, etc...). i spent maybe 2 hours total configuring my desktop and server in linux. i spent more that that with 1 windows installation alone.
the bottom line is that everyone's experiance is different. can linux take the desktop? yes, and you are right, it will take a little work for it to do so. on the other hand, for the common tasks of an office environment, linux (with a skillfull admin), could easily smack windows down.
i have taken the time to post to most of the responses here, which i normaly don't do...but if i am wrong, or am incorrect...e-mail me...i dare you to prove me wrong. in fact, i hope you do.
-frozen
frozencesium@hotmail.com
I'm not always the brightest pixel in the stream
hello...in .NET they DEPRICATED IOSTREAM.H!!!
.NET's elegance. Although I'm a relatively new programmer (6+ years of professional experience), I've worked with many 10+ year developers (BSC, MSC, and those with just an HS degree) and although not all of them love Microsoft, they will definitely agree that .NET is a huge step in the right direction for Windows based software and Web Applications.
Well, once you start programming outside of the classroom you'll appreciate
my sound card, zip drive, webcam, nic card, video card, and joystick all work in linux.
See, this is the problem with CompSci. You really need to get another major, and do CompSci later - it's too narrow focused of a degree, and most of the stuff you can learn on your own (still a good degree to get though). There's this little science called statistics, and it requires a sample size. So who cares if your sound card works in linux? That doesn't mean that everyone else's will.
There is no longer anything that can be done with computers that is nontrivial and clearly legal. -- Paul Phillips
gee, good ol' slashdot taking potshots at linux now? this in addition to giving more press to ms then any supposed 'nerd' site I can think of?
this is bullshit folks.
I stopped using AIM because I couldn't organize my friends list into categories. Falls somewhere into the "I need to boot to Linux" category.
.pl files, since I can't run them on the command line automatically. Do I want python? Roughly the same thing. System scripting? Well, I can't just type commands into a file, 'cause Windows batch files can't do much on their own. I have to learn another language.
Also ironic is that my Video Capture card, a Buz! won't work on the latest version of Windows I used before I stopped (Win2K). Also, system tasks are far more difficult. If I want to search for a file named "test1.3p2" under every subdirectory of a particular system, zip it up, remove the original, and spit it back out (which is something I've done), its a one-liner in Linux...I wouldn't even want to attempt that in Windows.
Its a general feel more than anything else. Do I want to program in Perl in Windows? I'd better go download activeperl, change my autoexec.bat to have the right environment variables and path, and associate the "perl" extension with
I have minimized my Windows use to three programs: mIRC (don't like the Linux ones as much; I've tried MANY), IE (only to test webpages; using Phoenix at the moment), and Access (AFAIK the only thing that can open access files is Access). Of course, for those, I can just use win4lin, so I don't boot to Windows. If I leave the emulator running too long, my system runs out of memory due to leaks, and I have to reboot to fix it (I have 512MB).
In Linux, setting up and running development environments is trivial. Of course, there is always Cygwin, but at crucial times it sometimes doesn't work, especially when you need some esoteric package to do what you want.
HOWEVER...there are still some TASKS that Linux can't do that I would really like to (notice I'm avoiding the whole game thing). Some of them are on the way, and some of them are not. But they are all definitely something to think about:
1) High level networking. Samba's not as nice to develop for as WSH.
2) GUI coding. There are many better ways to do it in Linux than in Windows, and you get a nice uniform look.
3) CD-R UDF. How much I want it. The lack of this means that the all important non-network based portability is much, much better in Windows, as are backups. Considering that copying files to CD using such an approach takes less time than copying to a floppy, and CDs now cost less than a cent each, it is the one thing that makes me constantly reconsider my decision to give up Windows. They say its on the way...its been on the way for two years though.
4) Remote desktops. Windows XP now has it pretty much down pat, and its faster than X.
Mod me down and I will become more powerful than you can possibly imagine!
A 9 - 15 year old is a poor example as they are at the optimal age to learn something that is not necessarily easy to use. Hell, I used MiniLinux when I was 12 and configured PPP (ya, it was a bit of a task at the time), wrote lame iRC scripts, etc. At the same time, my parent's just DIDN'T GET IT, so I progammed some nice menu's for them. Still, it wasn't good enough, so they bought a Mac.
There is no longer anything that can be done with computers that is nontrivial and clearly legal. -- Paul Phillips
I know some people will be upset at this, but Red Hat has more staying power than all of the other Linuxes combined (other than Debian and Mandrake). I don't have anything against the other linuxes, but let's face it what easily sets RH apart is that they have the most clout with major businesses here in the US and abroad. I think even Linus still uses RH! No other Linux has that kind of credibility factor going for it. With RH 8.0, the look and feel of the desktop seems professional and appears to be striving towards some type of consistent feel, look etc....and this is where linux IMHO is really lacking. A business linux on the on the server and even more importantly on desktops has to have some level of consistency. I hope RH understands this concept. What I think the linux distributors really need to do is to get together and finally decide on a standard configuration for /etc and init scripts....the resulting linuxes then can be called standard linux. That doesn't mean there can't be non standard linuxes, but I think it would go a long way in getting linux accepted. It's clear to me that RH knows they are on the way to being the standards leader for linux and they don't have much competition.
"You helped our nation celebrate its bicentennial in 17 -- 1976." --George W. Bush, to Queen Elizabeth, Wash
Fine. Use windows. I'll admit that the applications aren't available for linux yet. But...don't whine when it breaks or you get a virus.
Some of us switch to linux because it has some nice tools. Some because it's stable. Some cuz we like open source. and some because we want to look l33t. It's a *NIX, too...I happen to like UNIX-ey environments.
I understand your point - but *this* linux zealot is trying to get people to enjoy a whole new computing experience, and also trying to suggest replacements for tools you might miss. Sorry if you are offended, many of us are only trying to help.
Who is this Anonymous Coward character, how does he post so much, and why is he always such a whore?
My idea of Mr. Robertson is that he's looking for the quick buck, i.e. he's more interested in signing contracts with companies to provide Lindows-based PCs. Especially to the companies who don't want to sell OS-less computers because M$ assumes they are supporting piracy...
All that stuff about "Lindows is like Windows", "can run all your Windows apps", "runs Office", "is easy to use", "one-click software purchase" is all marketing BULLSHIT Robertson needs to promote his ideas. It was nothing more than a fucking hype machine with very bad execution.
I don't even think he gives a shit about the desktop, other than showing nice themes with a simple menu layout.
Of course this is just my opinion.
1. Suse will have to lower prices, at least in the US, to remain competitive with Mandrake and Red Hat - especially after Red Hat's insanely user friendly 8.0 and it's intuitive "Red Hat Network". Not to mention that they don't provide a free download, which hurts them in the distro popularity contest.
2. United Linux will be met with very little fan fare for the forseeable future. Their entire ethic system contradicts the choir to which they preach, and in this small niche market, that just doesn't fly.
3. A more wide spread acceptance of lesser known distros (lesser known to non-long time Linux users, that is) distros like Slackware and Debian will spread. As Linux is more widely used on the desktop, casual users will start to become famailar with it, and many will yearn to have that "complete control" over their system that their guru friends keep telling them about.
I do not believe that any of the distros will ever "die", as each and every one of them has a large developer base. Now which one will turn little to no profits, well, that's another question entirely.
Oh, wait... it's supposed to be already dead or dying or something like that... NOT!!!
Soon as I saw the story on the front page I knew what awaited inside. Hundreds of posts from zitty geeks trying to be punker-than-thou by coming up with ever-more-obscure namedropping to make up for their lack of real style (or to pretend that they are actually old enough to have been involved). Drop the pretension kiddos. We all know that your Blink 182 CD is older than your copy of Bollocks.
I love how a whole new level of conformity has been created by the average bozo's efforts at individuality. It might almost work if your personal definition of individuality didn't depend so heavily on how you present yourself to others. I mean, what's the sense of being into bullshit like [insert pseudo-non-mainstream hobby here] if you can't talk about it to make yourself superior to your peers?
Kinda sounds like the Linux crowd, huh? "I'm so ALTERNATIVE by patching my kernel every day while you brainwashed Windows sheep meander in unenlightened tedium." Funny to think that if you had back all the time you spent tweaking and patching (for no good reason other than to say you have the latest version), you wouldn't know what to do with the workstation on your desk.
*sigh*
excuse the rant. caffiene has yet to be digested.
The only one? Gentoo is certainly fully community-driven. And it's an awfully friendly community at that.
Gentoo: check.
What Gentoo lacks in age, it makes up in every other area. Security and timliness are most definitely not one of its downfalls. Quite the opposite.
Seen DistroWatch lately? Seems to me Gentoo has slowly been leaving Debian in the dust.
Ok, man. Time to stop making sweeping generalizations. There is a world outside of Debian.
IWARS.
People, in general, disappoint me. Politicians even more so.
Heck, anyone can do it, and it has been proven, however, one sticking problem is the fact that there are no high profile, mainstream applications for it, like Lotus Notes, Dreamweaver, Fireworks and so forth.
If a distro company REALLY want to make a difference:
1) Embrace United Linux and add to it
2) License the source code off companies, port it and then, under an agreement with the original company, sell it. For example, there is a big demand for Macromedia software, why not license the source code, and use MainSoft and port it natively to Linux?
The two above things would push a company not only into the black quickly, but also remove one of the reasons why people can't move to Linux. Hardware support will come with people using Linux, however, people won't use Linux until they can get the exact applications they run on Windows, on Linux.
Sure, there are "replacements", however, the average Joe and Jane would much rather use something they're familar with.
the next one i install...
/. leads to bad karma of the pc for me.
every damn time i get some freakin' weird hardware issue that hoses the system. new hardware, old, and in between.
good karma of
*sigh*
(taking laptop to the repair guy tomorrow)
I initially build my own systems...then I started to use Distros as they became available...saved me a lot of time in gopher/ftp space.
The first distro I used was Soft Landing Systems (SLS), then switched to Slackware. I've tried a number of other distros since then (In a week or so, I am looking forward to trying Gentoo!), and I really like Lycoris's offering...but I keep on comming back to Slackware.
ttyl
Farrell
CAN-CON 2019 - Ottawa's only book oriented Science Fiction Convention! October 18-20, Sheraton Hotel, Ottawa, Canada h
There are too many editors in the market place:
.NET features, DRM and XML and anything else I read on cnet this morning. And that non-expert users will abandon emacs and vi in favour of GUI editing environmnts with intelligent paperclips that assist with more complex editing tasks. The market just can't support nearly a dozen text editors!
- sed
- ex
- nedit
- pico
- emacs
- vim
- elvis
- notepad.exe
Our insanely expensive consultants report says that the minor editors will be driven out of the market by Microsoft's better integrated offering that will support
Xix.
"Everything is adjustable, provided you have the right tools"
Sorry to ask a stupid question... I've been a SuSE user for years now, after having graduated from Slackware (go figure, slack still rules tho).... but... where can I download UnitedLinux? Is my SuSE 8.1 "UnitedLinux" and if so what about the SCO and Turbo and Connectiva downloads? Are they, too? If so, the UL group has done a worthless job of branding and consumer-recognition. If not, then this "1.0" release is useless since it can't be readily downloaded. I pay for my Linux distributions (Yes, I did buy Slackware CDs years ago, and yes, I even had a SuSE "subscription" which mysteriously died a few years ago, and I still purchase every other SuSE pro release) but I certainly wouldn't purchase one I couldn't download/test first.
Am I insane here? (ok bad question) Am I out of line here?
Hmmm..... Am I the only one that is amused that an albatross can fly while a penguin can't?
I actually have very little faith in United Linux, mostly because I don't approve of Caldera's business practices (their main source of revenue has seemed to be lawsuits).
LedgerSMB: Open source Accounting/ERP
- loyalty to the locally-produced product
- language/region specific features
I've seen various predictions of SuSE and Mandrake headed for the dust bin, but last I heard both of these distributions exceed Redhat in popularity in Europe (SuSE from Germany, Mandrake from France). And Turbolinux might be sputtering here, but I think the Japanese are quite happy with it.As for most popular distro in the future, if we're talking sheer numbers I'd say it'll have to be Red Star Linux as soon as there's a PC in every home in China! ;-)
sig != null
And yes, now that Debian has begun to move far beyond its "techie-core" roots, there is a large interest in developing newbie-friendly installers and system maintenance utilities. Interested? Get coding! (:
I'm not sure Debian hasn't already moved too far from it's techie roots, and that is why there has been an explosion in source based distros recently. It's okay that stable moves at a snails pace, but unstable doesn't even have software that has become standard on other distributions.
Time is what keeps everything from happening all at once.
Why do you need to boot Windows to use MSN messenger or print? GAIM supports MSN messenger, and MOST printers do have open source drivers.
Slashdot gets worse every day... Pipedot: News for nerds, without the corporate slant
SuSE is largely kept afloat by funding from IBM, who have just pulled that funding. As of last week, SuSE had 40 days of working capital left.
Here in Europe, the picture is reversed. Germany, the country with the highest Linux use per capita in the world (netcraft et al) is mainly SuSE country, this mainly because SuSE is the first distro that people there hear about and because SuSE is German and has, surprise, better German documentation. (Not that I like SuSE though, my own experiences with them and their distro have been very bad). Mandrake also has a higher density in France than elsewhere, and has, surprise, good help in French. The localisation of these distros is what gives them their strength. Internationally though, RedHat has the best chances of success. Debian remains the friendliest non-commercial distro, once it's installed, with apt-get being the real choice item in the distro.
My prediction: Linux should devise a method of device support that lives outside the kernal and can be changed on the fly without rebooting.
I can't comment on the stability or usability of Evolution, but when I used KDE 2.2 at Argonne Nat'l Labs two summers ago, it was rock-solid.
After all, who better to determine the fate of the great promise that is Linux more than a forum of its most stalwart defenders and evangelists?
I think with the interesting people, their lives can't possibly be wrapped up into a nice little package.
...They become the object of zealotry and/or niche markets. Not that this is a bad thing! A distro in a niche market allows that distro to fully grow into what it was best designed for, without having to add in feature-kruft in order to "keep up with the Jones" as they say.
Plus, a little zealotry never hurt anybody, right Amigaos? Zealotry over a distro low on the radar could end up with some interesting experimental programming and ingenius solutions to common problems (who knows how many home-brew and esoteric languages have found practical applications).
Remember, distros only die when people stop support. Hug your favorite distro today.
Zech Harvey, MCSE, MCDBA, CCNA
There is one thing that Mickey$ofters and lot's of Linux advocates often fail to notice:
When a company offers a Linux distro it's not just offering Software, it's mainly offering a service. The Linux Distro companys are on the way to establish a buisnessmodel that M$ tried/tries to copy with their upgrade lock-in and all that. The model being: charging not for software, but setting it up. M$ makes most of the big money by name and brand, not yet by upgrade lock-ins, the distros make money through the service they offer their users - selling boxed Linux pakages being only a small portion of that service.
Customer ties are crucial in such an enviroment and usually are very solid too.
SuSE might not be sitting in butter in full, but they offer a top-notch distro with docs that own any other and they have a firm grip of germany, the country with the highest amount of users per capita. The fact that germany has the highest amount of Linux users per capita is due to SuSE, btw. Allmost the same goes for Mandrake in France. They even managed to 'beg' for funding via a club and a lot of their trusted customers was willing to pitch in. And RedHat...well, I don't think they'll go broke anytime soon either.
No, there's only one who actually might have a little trouble in getting the curve from an inhouse software only company to a more service orientated one: M$. Aside of that, there's more than enough room for 3 Linux 'Desktop' distros.
Hancom I really can't tell. They're big in asia, aren't they?
We suffer more in our imagination than in reality. - Seneca
Pulled funding? Link to the story please!
-- "As a human being I claim the right to be widely inconsistent", John Peel
THAT is the interesting question for Linux distros in the next year!
I don't have the slightest clue what the answer will be.
Bye egghat.
-- "As a human being I claim the right to be widely inconsistent", John Peel
The GPL requires that everyone who DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY gets a copy of your GPL'ed binaries should be able to download [fsf.org] the sources from you.
Not true.
Everyone who directly gets binaries from you must be able to get sources from you. (B gets binaries from A, therefore, A must provide sources to B, but not necessarily to C or D.)
As soon as the someone redistributes binaries, then it is THEIR responsibility to provide sources. (B provides binaries to C and D. It is B's responsibility to provide sources to C and D. A has no such responsibility.)
This is the WHOLE POINT of the GPL. You know the wording, in order to protect your rights, we must forbid anyone from taking away your rights. Threrfore, you cannot take away rights when you redistribute.
If Lindows provides sources to all GPL'ed works on their disk, then they have met their GPL obligations in full. Ideally, just compress sources and include on CD, then there can be no argument about it.
Those who would give up liberty in exchange for security and DRM should switch to Microsoft Palladium!
Examples:
Any distro that can remove some of these confusing things and make it super easy for ANYONE, not just us geeks, will have the ultimate success on the desktop or anywhere else for that matter. Even some IT people don't want to have to struggle to do things that should be simple. The fact is that easy things should be easy...maybe most users don't need 700 ways to do the same thing. Linux has how many text editors and I still can't find one that I like. Yes, I take pride in the fact that I can hack the crap out of a linux box and make it do what I want and even put it to use in critical business applications, but most people couldn't give a rat's ass about that.
Uhhhh, yeah, thath dithgustin. [The lady's man]
You are right and I am wrong.
Not only does the fsf gpl faq address this, but section 3 of the GPL makes it clear.
You must either
- Include source code
- Accompany with written offer to ANY third party
- Accompany with written offer received from someone else -- but this option available only if YOU are a NON-commercial distributor, and yourself received the second option above.
It's the ANY third party that I was hung up over. So yes, Lindows, must either include source on the CD's or include downloadable source to anyone, not just their customers.Of course, they don't have to make it easy to find.
This written offer good for anyone who visits our web site between 2:00 and 3:00 AM CST on the 2nd Tuesday of the month.
Those who would give up liberty in exchange for security and DRM should switch to Microsoft Palladium!
[reading GPL clause]
Um.. does the GPL say anywhere else that you must provide source code for FREE? Or even that the ourchase of the binary distribution must include the cost of getting the source?
All I see in your post is a requirement to make the source *available*. It doesn't say you *can't* charge for source, or even that you can't charge a *separate* price for it. If this is the case, it's a huge loophole. (Binaries, $1. Source, $1M.)
Someone clarify this for me, please!
~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?
Fair enough--didn't read "for KDE" as "KDE library specific," my bad. However, Pan's worth installing the GNOME libraries by itself :).
Call (206) 338-5780 COLLECT for information about a genuine BA, BS, MA, MS, MBA, or Ph.D.
If you want to run linux on the desktop as a replacement for the normal computer user, SuSE or Mandrake will probably do a better job from what I've seen.
The man who trades freedom for security does not deserve nor will he ever receive either. - Benjamin Franklin
It's okay that stable moves at a snails pace, but unstable doesn't even have software that has become standard on other distributions.
Like what? OK, yeah, KDE3.. but that is only because the Debian project is undergoing the enormous transition to using gcc 3.2.1, which has some c++ incompatibilities with 2.9x. Once this is complete, unstable will move much faster with the latest and greatest KDE stuff.
If all this should have a reason, we would be the last to know.
OK, I was not aware that Gentoo was fully a community effort. After checking it out further, however, I would have to classify it as a decent distro. On the other hand, I don't agree with some things about it.
Source-only are fairly impractical in many real-world cases. I can't afford to wait a whole day for all software to compile when setting up a new customer. Granted, I could just compile with everything enabled, use compatible defaults, and then clone the partition, but then that would kinda defeat the purpose of a meta-distro, wouldn't it? And then what happens when I need to upgrade the software? More downtime for re-compiling! Point being, I don't have the time to customize each client machine, so what's the advantage of Gentoo vs. well built Debian binary packages. With Debian, I can install from binary packages for the vast majority of software and install from source packages for the handful that I need to truly customize. Sure, there's room for improvement in making this task more user-friendly, but I don't see the need for a whole new distro when Debian's source package management tools are not THAT far behind what Gentoo is doing. The main difference is that Debian doesn't force you to use source packages. I believe there is even a tool that will automate downloading and build of dependancies when installing from Debian source packages. All this and Debian supports more architectures than any other distro: 10, with a couple others in the works. Gentoo only supports 4. Packages available? Debian: ~10,000 vs. Gentoo: ~3,000. And Debian is moving to become non-Linux-specific as well so that you can use BSD or Hurd kernels. Who's leaving who in the dust? Btw, Distrowatch is misleading if you're going to compare package version numbers: No, Debian 3.0r0 is not as up to date as Gentoo, but few people use *only* the stable releases of Debian. I'm not saying Gentoo is bad, but it IS redundant.
Knowing the difference between Red Hat and Debian, or FreeBSD and Solaris, or Linux and Windows ... is for you. If you want to get your non-computer friends and relatives off Windows and on to something like Linux, then by all means go for it. You know you'll have to be in a position to help them out. Have they not already asked you why their computer did this or did that, and you get flustered because it due to it being Windows and it might not be a problem if it is Linux, or if there was a problem, you could more quickly fix it? So you know you want to get them on Linux. But if you're into Debian, but don't think vanilla Debian is right to put on their computer (because they aren't computer oriented), I'm just saying you should have Xandros in your "computer help kit" for them. Some might even be able to do the install themselves. But if they need some package added from the net, you can tell them how in Debian terms, or do it for them in a familiar way.
now we need to go OSS in diesel cars
Yeah, count me in. I remember installing Slack back when all of the various packages had cryptic one-letter names. Like A, D, N, X, etc... You could add in whichever bits you needed. Getting them to work *together* was a bit of a pain though...
;)
I used to use the Yggdrasil "bible" documentation to help me figure stuff out.
*sniff* Ah. the good old days
In the Portland, Ore area and like card games? Check out: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/portlandgames/
I would think that the one that offers the free downloadable iso, for anybody to try will prevail. Who is going to pay $99 for an operating system they know nothing about. The WinXP upgrade was only $99, and I already know how to use that. These companies seem to have forgotten that the problem with MS is that it's expensive to own and update, whereas Linux is free(XP is as stable as any Linux distro out there).
There is no reason for a single Linux distro anymore than a need for one of the many to go away.
Diversity is the key advantage that Linux has to offer over the Microsoft idiots.
Why?
Because everyone does not have the same needs.
Just look at the diversity of Linux distros now.
Xandros (including CrossOverOffice and clone of Windows Explorer, Openoffice).
SUSE desktop (to include crossOverOffice but not a clone of Windows Explorer).
Lindows (neither one of the above but a nice click & run package to simplify downloading and installing software- plus StarOffice).
Mandrake (nice distro but hard to network with windows and no CrossOverOffice).
RedHat (not really a viable desktop option at this point).
The point being that a good Linux desktop can include all of the above if that is what you want. But, when it comes to packaging systems you simply can not bundled it all without raising the price to everyone. Lindows includes StarOffice but not CrossOverOffice. Xandros includes CrossOver but not StarOffice. Puts OpenOffice in instead. That may mean they cost about the same but are packaged differently.
And, of course you can always add all that stuff you want on any distro.
The Microsoft approach is to bundle everything and make it cost prohibitive to all but those forced to use Microsoft technology for other reasons.
But, notwithstanding the above that does not mean that one of those distros will go away anytime soon. They do target different market segments. And, as long as their targeting is valid, they will survive. They will survive to serve those markets and be around to focus upon others later.
Just look at what SUN is doing. You may not like SUN at all. Who cares? But, SUN is targeting their Linux systems to a particular market. Guess what? If you are a individual, the chances are high you will not be interested in a SUN Linux box. If you are a corporation needing 10,000 + boxes to do this or that, you may very well be interested. And, if you are not going to network with Microsoft crap, you do not need the nifty clone of Windows Explorer that comes with Xandros. If you do network with Windows you might very much appreciate it and avoid Mandrake, SuSE, Lindows and others.
Linux is not a singular product as Microsoft wants all idiots to think they need. Consumers are different. They have different needs. Their needs include different or alternative licenses as well.
Read the StarOffice license for a fresh idea. 5 installs for you. Read the Lindows License. Install it all over the machines in your family. That makes it much more economical than the "everyone pays top dollar" from the monopolist.
So distributions will differ. And, licensing will differ. And, many of those differences are put in place because of the target market they are after. It is just like the auto industry. 80% of all of the car models available are not appropriate for you, right? But, at least one is.
Microsoft will not compete with that because they loose the benefit of illegal bundling and illegal marketing. They hate choice on the part of consumers and spend their entire day trying to figure out how to screw all consumers into buying only and all of the Microsoft products.
You do not need CrossOverOffice? Fine, buy a distro without it and save some money.
You do not need to network with Windows? Fine, buy a distro that does not easily do that. You can save and not know the difference.
Microsoft is just stupid enough to think they will cram a home PC version and an office PC version down the throats of all consumers. But, that only means that everyone pays too high a price.
NexuSys - Linux support by the best
The Microsoft crap is also highly overpriced feeding upon those who must use it for reasons independant of the OS.
NexuSys - Linux support by the best
I'm looking forward to it then, because I do believe that Debian could be the universal distribution, particularly with the apt-build in the works.
Time is what keeps everything from happening all at once.
Before you just assume one Linux distro or another will not make past the year you have to first look at the marketplace developing.
For Linux desktop distributors the market can grow 50-100 times slowly eating away at the share currently consumed by Microsoft. Can Microsoft grow by 100 times in one year? Absolutely not. Microsoft's growth is extremely limited. And, as the Linux desktop market begins to open up, Microsoft's share may reduce significantly. How much?
Well. It is not really a zero sum game as some would suggest. As the price for software drops (thanks to Linux) the market can actually expand. But that expansion is only available to the low cost distros not the high priced monopoly products. Must be why Microsoft looks to other markets for growth.
The Linux desktop distros have a wide open field. They do have to compete with each other as far as packaging goes. (And, services, support and price.) And, they compete with the over priced Microsoft products. But, on price they will always beat out Microsoft by substantial margins.
And, there are other reasons for just not buying proprietary products. See the article today in regard to India. That kind fellow just told Gates point blank that they will not deal with monopolists selling proprietary products. That sale is lost for good.
And, the idiots at Microsoft have earned that.
NexuSys - Linux support by the best
/.
Really, I hate answering this at all.
The easiest answer is to pick the ones who seem to think they have the right to release only the changes from some other standard distribution.
But they are not, as much as I wish they were the most likely to go away first.
The most likely, as painful as the prediction is, is YellowDog.
I don't think the distro will flat die, but come on, how many nix's does the Mac need, or should I say current production Mac.
YellowDog is really really good, but OSX has a lot more weight behind it.