TheOpenCD Launches First Edition

Emil fra Loeneberg writes with welcome news from TheOpenCD. "This article on NewsForge describes a project which plans to distribute Open Source Software (OSS) widely to Windows users. You can download a CD image from a mirror site and start spreading the OSS message. It's basically an OSS distro for Windows. This project was also mentioned on Slashdot back in April and now they are ready with a first release. Any first reviews?"

Comments

gnu/Windows

[Anonymous Coward]

I don't think microsoft will be very happy with stallman for trying to call it gnu/Windows

Re:gnu/Windows

[kenthorvath]

Could we actually succeed in seperating the windows kernel from the rest of the applications? What would it take to make GNU versions of Explorer (the shell) and other such programs. Could GNOME be ported to windows without Cygwin? And should GNU be changed to GNW in this case or GNMS?

I have an idea

[Ezubaric]

Let's call it America's Open Library (AOL) and send it out in bulk mailings on cheap blue CDs. This has gotta be effective, right?

Re:KNOPPIX

[bahamat]

I've found that it's much easier to say to people 'hey, check out this software that runs on windows' than it is to say 'hey, ditch windows and use linux'. People are generally more responsive if they don't have to leave their comfort zone, then once they have a chance to use Free Software, see that they like it, that it's better, have used OpenOffice in windows, then say oh yea, Linux can do that, and more, and with more freedom. It's especially easy to nab programmers that way, because they get to see the source of what they're using.

I've been doing this for a while, building my own CDs and passing them out. First with Win32 software then a Linux distro. Knoppix was rad because it let me add another step to the conversion process. It's a step to change mindshare and for a lot of people OpenCD will be their first step towards computing freedom.

I leave a trail of little Linux users everywhere I go and this is the tactic I've been using for a long time. Now they've made my job easier.

This is great

[Bluesman]

I've been using Open Office on Windows for a few weeks, and it's just fantastic.

I think too many people focus on Linux when they talk about open-source software, when the beauty of this software is that it's portable and usable on so many platforms. When I have to use Windows, I love to be able to use The Gimp and OpenOffice, since I'm not locked into proprietary formats.

Microsoft's monopoly exists in their applications, which have always been much better than the easily available alternatives, until now.

How About The Games?

[Anonymous Coward]

They should make an OpenGames CD with FreeCraft, FreeCiv, Doom, Quake, Quake 2, Tux Racer, etc. etc. Kids would love it.

Re:How About The Games?

[dzym]

Just making a CD with Doom, Quake, or Quake 2 executables isn't going to work. You still need to distribute the data files--and the shareware or demo versions of each won't cut it because they're released under a proprietary license.

You may contribute to a project such as Freedoom, however. I'm fairly certain there's an analog for Freedoom for each of the currently big-name open-sourced id software games.

Re:KNOPPIX

[Russellkhan]

Well, If you'd read the first couple of paragraphs of the article, you would have seen this:

The idea was to make a compilation of mature open source software (OSS) for windows users as an easy introduction to OSS. The project was inspired by a question which is frequently asked in Linux forums: "Given that we now have this fast, secure, desktop-ready, free OS, why doesn't everyone switch?"

Well, the answer is complex, but includes elements like:

1. It is a major hurdle for an intermediate user to scrap their entire OS to try an unknown system, filled with strangely named applications like "grep."
2. Most people do not care which OS they use, but rather what their programs can do, and there is a perception that Linux apps are not as capable as those in Windows.
3. Microsoft's OS bundling has been extremely successful encourages people to regard their current OS as free (as in beer).
4. Software piracy, while apparently depriving proprietary software makers of profits, in fact simply serves to cement the commercial products as "the standard," by making home users familiar with these packages, and by locking everyone into proprietary file formats.

These cover the largest and most commonly cited reasons. The first two of these points are the most serious: the perception of Linux applications as difficult to use, hard to learn, and inadequate to their tasks encourages people to continue buying (or pirating) Microsoft products, not just Windows, but also Office.

And there's lots more good stuff that directly answers your question. If you ever get ten minutes or so to spare, I recommend giving the article a read.

Value difference with free OSes lowers...

[CaVi]

Free OSes (Linux, BSDs,...) have a lot of values, _one_ of which is their large library of free applications.

By bundling those for windows, people will have less reasons to switch to one of those free OSes. Of course, there are still reasons, but there is one less.

People who don't matter for ideology behind free OSes won't bother switching. ANd I'm afraid this means a lot of users...

There is some momentum which is needed with free OSes to have the attention span of big companies, and convince them to throw resources at supporting their products under those OSes. Having less people switch to those means less momentum, and therefore less attention.

On the other end, using those tools under Windows will at least render much easier data exchanges, and is therefore a first step in breaking the dependency on those proprietary and more or less closed formats.

I'm not sure if this is ideologically good or not. It will for sure be usefull for those who have no possiblity to switch of OS (because of job requirements, or games,...).

My 2 cents...

Re:Value difference with free OSes lowers...

[concord]

I agree with you. I don't know the answer to that either but it's not going to succeed or fail based upon what you or I do.

Let's not forget the fact that free software _is_ free and that includes the fact that people will _always_ want to port it to unstable but popular platforms - we can't (thank you GPL) stop it. We don't want to anyway, right? If software is free but only to people who want to use it or port it to particular "approved" platforms, is it really free?

Let's not lose sight of the fact that we aren't here to hurt Microsoft. We're here to help people enjoy better software and to give them the freedom to enjoy it secure in the knowledge that it'll always be there for them, their children and their children's children. The GPL ensures that it always will be.

In the long run I hope you're right about the fact that it'll make popular free OSS windows programs which can save in formats compatible for _all_ users of the program, regardless of their OS.

My 2

Re:Value difference with free OSes lowers...

[Peter_Pork]

Yes, let's make OSS look like M$... This is about free software, that you can use in any platform, in any way you want. As people use OSS more and more, the OS will matter less and less, that is the only way to get rid of monopolies (call them M$ or Linux, they can be as bad).

Re:Value difference with free OSes lowers...

[rickymoz]

Maybe you have one reason less to switch, as you say, but you will have one reason less NOT to switch. Think of all the people who say: hu? OpenOffice? I don't know that, I'll stick with MS Word, at least I'm comfortable with it.

So basically their reason not to switch is that they are not familiar with OSS. With this CD, they will be and this kills this reason which keeps them hooked on proprietary software.

Re:Value difference with free OSes lowers...

[Mr_Silver]

By bundling those for windows, people will have less reasons to switch to one of those free OSes. Of course, there are still reasons, but there is one less.

Whilst this is a valid point and true, one of the biggest problems with the Slashdot mentality (and I'm not suggesting that you have this, because I don't know you and your comment seemed well balanced) is that there is this misguided belief that everyone on the planet is unhappy with Windows and would change it at the drop of the hat.

This isn't really the case. There are plenty of people (millions) who are just fine and happy about Windows and don't really care about moving. They see Windows as an enabler to other productivity applications and as long as it's enabling (which it does pretty well) then they have no reason to move.

So the question ultimately is:

Do you want to show these people the alternatives out there and accept they possibly aren't going to move from their closed OS?

Or do you want to avoid doing such a thing and accept that they may never ever see any open alternatives?

NT, as in Not Today

[OtisSnerd]

This is an admirable idea. Unfortunately, it will suffer the same fate that Linux suffers in most businesses; no drop-in replacement for MS-Access. I'd love to see an 'Open Office' product replace that bloated hog MS Office, but my employer lives on Access. It's used as both a front end, and as stand alone single user databases. --- Is it possible for Newsforge to use an even smaller font? I can barely read it now...

Re:NT, as in Not Today

[Anonymous Coward]

But openoffice already HAS Access functionality, and it's relatively painless to setup.

it requires an external database, anything that can be used via odbc, basically. unfortunately, i don't think it handles access files themselves *yet*.
see here: on linuxmafia for more information on this topic.

ashridah

Re:Overkill?

[sydneyfong]

I don't have a broadband connection, you insensitive clod.

Well, actually I do, but many don't.

Besides, URLs change over time, and if people were so inclined to download the software, a simple google search would do the job, why bother getting it from a CD?

This really has potential...

[b0ycheese]

Blank cd's are cheap, so using them to distribute free software is a wonderful idea. If you can burn this, and give it to a few friends, co-workers, or family members who use windows, if they like it, most likely they'll burn it and pass it on (the probably already do this with other software anyway). This being legal, they'll actually feel good about redistributing it. The wider this gets spread, the less money goes into the pockets of people who head greedy corporations, and more money goes to the actual programmers. In my mind, if i'm getting all my software free, i'm more likely to be able to donate directly to the programmer(s) to keep the projects going, because i'm not wasting money on pretty boxes, or supporting company bureaucracy. Send copies of this or knoppix out with your christmas cards this year. Give people the gift of freedom. :)

Re:Beonex

[Rhinobird]

From thier FAQ:

Q. Why didn't you include Mozilla?
A. We were contacted by a developer in the Mozilla project, who asked us not to include Mozilla. The Mozilla.org project provides binaries for testing purposes only, as anyone who has read this page knows -- scroll down to the very bottom, and you will find a notice to that effect. In short, they do not want to wind up providing end-user support to people, and so they ask people not to re-distribute Mozilla unless it has been customized to make it clear that Mozilla.org did not provide the binary and will not support it.

Unfortunately, it is not at all clear what requirements we need to meet in order to be able to re-distribute Mozilla, or what level of customization would be needed to do so. Also, we didn't have anybody willing to take on that task. If you want to help us out with this, get in touch! Beonex is a fine product, but we tend to think that Mozilla is better, especially since it is updated much more often.

Some Cynicism

[Anik315]

This needs to be done in conjunction with a robust support system (that corporations would pay for). The software can be free, but for businesses to adopt this kind of thing, there will need people who provide the operational support and integration sevices which can not be effecively done without money. The prime candidate for this job is IBM. Once people use this at work, they'll use it at home.

Target audience faux pas?

[JessLeah]

The faux pas isn't the target audience itself-- it's a bad misjudgment of how far "market penetration" (if I must wax Corporate for the moment) will go among said target audience.

Or, to put it more clearly-- this CD is targeted at bringing open-source software to people who otherwise would not use it, or maybe even have heard of it.

But how many of those people are going to have heard of OpenCD.org? Joe Beer and his wife Martha surely aren't reading SlashDot. Or Kuro5hin. Or $OTHER_GEEK_HANGOUT_SITE.

Not to be a fatalist, but I don't think this CD (which is an EXCELLENT idea in concept) will get very many users. Sure, here and there a rabid OSS person will show it to all of their friends, and that's a Good Thing. But one thing SlashDot readers (and posters) tend to underestimate is the colossal "mindshare" Windows and Microsoft products in general hold. People, realize-- to many people in this country, Bill Gates is a "great business leader", to some almost a hero. Many people aspire to be like him, and hardly anyone (excepting geeks) has anything against what he's doing. We at SlashDot aren't quite so complacent-- but the great masses of people in this country ARE!

Going against the MS monopoly with this nice OSS CD is like... well... To make an analogy to Star Control 2, it would be rather like going up against a fully-loaded Ur-Quan Dreadnought in a Shofixti Scout. With the Glory Device broken...

Re:Target audience faux pas?

[Teach]

Sure, here and there a rabid OSS person will show it to all of their friends, and that's a Good Thing.

Exactly. And it all depends on how many "friends" you have. I teach computer science and webmastering at a largish high school near the "Silicon Hills" of Austin, TX. I've got over 100 students in my classes. And there are over 2000 in the school.

You can bet as soon as I get the ISO downloaded ("ETA: 14:27") I'm going to burn a dozen copies or so and make them available to my students. Especially if I encourage them to burn copies for their friends, too. There's a "healthy" warez scene at my school, so they know how to do that, at least.

My students influence their less-technical friends, influence their less-technical parents who will then influence their coworkers, and will soon influence their classmates when they go to college. It all starts somewhere.

This is the same reason I keep copies of the latest RedHat on hand which I loan out for students to copy/install. I collect a $5 "ransom", which they get back if they return the CD.

And as Apple learned in the 80s and Microsoft knows right now, making cheap products available to computer students can grow up a generation of people who may pirate now, but will probably pay for your product when they grow up and start getting paid.

How about GNUWin???

[Artemis3]

This looks like yet another GNUWin...

They really have to catch up :) Go GNUWin team go!

Re:nozilla!

[Monoman]

Read their FAQ ... or just the appropriate text pasted below.

Q. Why didn't you include Mozilla?
A. We were contacted by a developer in the Mozilla project, who asked us not to include Mozilla. The Mozilla.org project provides binaries for testing purposes only, as anyone who has read this page knows -- scroll down to the very bottom, and you will find a notice to that effect. In short, they do not want to wind up providing end-user support to people, and so they ask people not to re-distribute Mozilla unless it has been customized to make it clear that Mozilla.org did not provide the binary and will not support it.

Unfortunately, it is not at all clear what requirements we need to meet in order to be able to re-distribute Mozilla, or what level of customization would be needed to do so. Also, we didn't have anybody willing to take on that task. If you want to help us out with this, get in touch! Beonex is a fine product, but we tend to think that Mozilla is better, especially since it is updated much more often.

Re:Overkill?

[AndersM]

I think the power of this CD with a load of goodies on it is that it can be downloaded by a LUG or similar activist group and duplicated (with a burner, or perhaps at a CD factory if the group has the financial resources).

Then they can distribute it to all those people who don't necessarily have the connection or the patience to wait for the big downloads to finish.

Remember, the target group here aren't the power users who have dsl or cable, but the home users who might still be happily downloading their mail with a 56k modem.

Put yourself in the position of a computer user without particular interest in how the computer works. When your computer-savvy friend hands you a CD and says "This disc contains a lot of good, free software, and no, it isn't pirated! Just pop it in and try!" - you'd be a lot more inclined to actually trying it out than if the same computer-savvy friend told you to check out an URL, and wait for long, long downloads, wouldn't you?

I certainly think the OpenCD is an excellent way of pulling people onto the bandwagon. It's already moving, we just need to give it more mass and more momentum.

Re:Does anyone really care?

[concord]

Many businesses are too smart to download and install warez versions of anything. It is illegal. Most businesses are too worried about liability issues arising from disgruntled ex-employees blowing the whistle on them for stealing software.

OSS versions make it possible for these companies to save money, not suffer lock-in, and not worry about being eaten by their own young. :-)

Re:Overkill?

[stwrtpj]

Seems to me like there's gonna be a lot of unnecessary downloading of files you'll never use. How about just a floppy with the Program Browser on it, but links to download the file from the internet? Along with a comprehensive description of the program, users would only have to download what they want. And i don't think i'm being harsh in saying that anyone without an internet connection really needs to shape-up!

The reason this is a bad idea is because this is NOT how most Windows apps are shipped. Most Windows apps do not force you to go to a website to download the software, they come on an easy-to-install CD. The idea is to have users believe that OSS apps are just as easy to install and use as Windows apps. You don't want to point people to a URL to download, only to have it change, or to suddenly have what was once a stable production-ready release replaced with the next beta.

Also, recall that some of these apps are going to be GPL, which means they come with the source. Not everyone has broadband, and those source bundles can be HUGE.

Re:Mozilla

[stwrtpj]

It's really too bad Mozilla won't be included on the CD.

It deserves as much press time and attention as possible.

I thought this at first also, but then I realized that Mozilla still has a little ways to go to be usable for the Windows masses. This is not a troll about Mozilla; I use it myself all the time on my Linux box. But I have spoken to a few people that I had try out Mozilla on Windows, and they all reported little quirks here and there that people like me might ignore, since I'm used to that sort of thing in some OSS products, but for a windows user used to more or less smooth running of their apps, it is unacceptable.

Also, not to put too fine a point on it, but Mozilla's newsgroup reader is atrocious (random hangs, no way to mark all read without clicking on article first, no yEnc decoding, etc etc etc) I just barely tolerate it myself.

Re:Does anyone really care?

[stwrtpj]

Does anyone care about this? Surely anyone who is aware or interested in OSS would download this stuff themselves to get the latest version? Anyone who doesn't know how to do that is probably also incapable of installing these programs.

Did you read the article? Seriously, I'm not trying to troll here. The article states that they took a long, hard look at which apps to include. From the list that they picked, it appears that they chose ones that are easy to install. Remember that this is specifically targeted towards non-OSS users.

Case and point: try installing OpenOffice some time. I did it recently on my older RH 7.1 box after my wife got a brand new RH 8.0 laptop with it pre-installed so we'd have the same software on both machines. Took about 30 seconds to install. The experience was akin to installing a Windows app. If its this easy to install on Linux, I can't imagine it being much harder on Windows.

Naturally, if someone out there has had a negative experience, please correct me on this.

Re:nozilla!

[Hewligan]

I mean, since Mozilla is "free" can they place distribution conditions on it and deny people the ability to distribute it?

Well, no. They can't force people not to distriute Mozilla, but they can ask you nicely not to, since that's not what the binaries are intended for. I suppose the OpenCD people could have told mozilla.org to get lost, but since there are plenty of alternatives, and it's not like they don't have a good reason for the request, why not play nicely?

Is it not better...

[SuperKendall]

to have some people use Free software and see some of the benefits, than to have those people only use Free software if they switch away from Windows altogether?

A CD like this is helping users down a path, where you want them to climb a wall.

This is awsome.

[Lokist]

How many times have you Windows users had to download a shareware program that expires after 30 days? or have the program throw annoying popup windows after using it?

This is awsome for the Windows community. It brings a little bit of open source to a closed sourced world. Maybe we can convert a few?

Recently I sold someone a system that came with Windows XP. After debating if I should throw Linux on I decided that since the owner already paid for XP, they might as well use it... The problem was that they didn't have a word processor, they couldn't do graphics editing...they couldn't do anything... Whats the point of Windows without something to run on it?

I ended up downloading Mozilla (because as we know... we can't trust Microsoft), Gimp, and Open Office... Wouldn't it be great if someone kept things organized and put out one handy dandy ISO for it all?

If anything... This shows that the open source
world is not selfish... We are bringing our software to a system that wants nothing to do with open source.

See ya Bill Gates...

--
An active Open Source Advocate.

But it is on the CD

[vondo]

Beonex communicator is on the CD, which is a rebranded mozilla. I've never used it, but it looks pretty much the same as stock mozilla 1.0.1, but rebranded and maybe missing the debuggers, and chatzilla. It has mail, news, composer, and of course, the browser parts of mozilla.

WHAT???

[SuperDuG]

you slashdot the website the cd images are stored on and you want us to review them? Basically you've set the project back almost 2 days until the story leaves the front page.

Open Source Coasters

[MeanMF]

Is there somebody out there who is going to collect 1,000,000 of these and deliver them to Richard Stallman? If so, sign me up!!

Re:Beonex

[Aanallein]

Can someone fill me in what (if anything) makes Beonex a better choice?

Although like any other distribution based on Mozilla (like Netscape), Beonex is running behind in features on the regular Mozilla releases, it does actually have a few things that it does better than Mozilla.
If I'm not mistaken (*actually bothers to check the website - ...I'm not) Beonex 0.8.1 is still based on Mozilla 1.0.1, so it's got all that stability, yet it does offer a few features from the trunk, such as the option to view HTML mail as plain text.
Another feature from Beonex which isn't found in Mozilla at all (yet?) are options to set the HTTP_REFERER; I think you can opt to never send it, to only send it within the same domain, to always fake it to somethign else (not sure about this one), or to just send it always.
Where Mozilla preferences are set in such a way that they don't provide optimal security and/or privacy, Beonex has changed those defaults so they do. (Improved privacy & security are the main focus of Beonex as I see it.)
Beonex also comes with a spell checker by default, something which the latest version of Mozilla is still lacking. (Yes, the Netscape 7 spellchecker is currently once more working on linux builds, but not on windows.)

Of course, now I'm comparing Beonex with Mozilla, while what I should do is compare Beonex with Netscape 7. There you trade in integrated AIM/ICQ for popup blocking (though that's finally coming in Netscape 7.01 - even with whitelisting options), image blocking, better default preferences, and general lack of AOL clutter.

Basically, Beonex would be the ideal distribution for any geek if it wasn't for Mozilla itself appealing more.

Open source philosophy?!

[Christopher Doopov]

From the What is TheOpenCD website:

"It also includes a selection of essays about Open Source philosophy, and links to other programs that might be of interest."

I'm sorry, but what is exactly open source philosophy? Open source is about technical and economical advantages. Free software is about philosophy. Please do not flame me for saying the obvious. When Eric Raymond took Debian Free Software Guidelines and published them as Open Source Definition in 1998 he did it exactly because he wanted free software without the strong philosophy associated with the "free software" term since at least the announcement of the GNU Project in 1983.

I think that TheOpenCD project should not talk about philosophy if they want to promote the open source movement. But if they think that the philosophy is important, then they should promote the free software movement and change their name to TheFreeCD. Because the philosophy is exactly the difference between free software and open source movements. If they talk about "open source philosophy" they are being against the main priciples of both movements.

TheOpenCD project people should read these books:

• The Cathedral and the Bazaar: Musings on Linux and Open Source by an Accidental Revolutionary by Eric S. Raymond (online version)
• Free as in Freedom: Richard Stallman's Crusade for Free Software by Sam Williams (online version)
• Free Software, Free Society: Selected Essays of Richard M. Stallman by Richard M. Stallman (GNU philosophy website, book CVS source)

Those books are not very long, but they provide enough background to let avoid using such unfortunate oxymorons like "open source philosophy." I strongly respect both free software and open source movements and I can not stay ignorant when people insult any of them, while the term "open source philosophy" insults both.

Re:The installer

[ctid]

One of the criteria they have is that each application should have a professional-looking install process. Some applications have been rejected on the grounds that their installation processes weren't up to scratch. From what I read, it seems that the programs are installed individually, not as a group.

The "Gateway Drug"

[The Monster]

Linux can do that, and more, and with more freedom

For the Kansas City Linux User Group booth at ITEC a few months ago, we threw together our own Free (at least as in speech - mostly GPL but some other licenses too) Software for Windows CD, and handed it out alongside our Linux offerings (inxluding Demo Linux, which allowed people to get used ). I called this the 'gateway drug', explaining to people that once they got a taste of what free software could do on a closed-source OS, the next step is to see what it could do when it's completely free. Our collection included a lot of things the Open CD people didn't - we had things like Apache and Ethereal on ours, but Open Office and the GIMP were probably the ones that most people would find helpful.

Nothing new here ...

[jc42]

I have a number of friends who are stuck with using NT at work. They say they have an approach that works pretty well. They note that Microsoft claims that NT is POSIX compliant. They take this at face value, and start downloading the source for all the usual POSIX-based tools from the online linux archives. They compile them, and they mostly work quite well.

There are problems with the things that just don't work right, of course. But a friend put this in an interesting perspective. Back in the early days of POSIX, the committee sent out requests for specs for a system called WEIRDNIX. This was defined as a system that was technically in compliance with the POSIX specs, but took advantage of every loophole and ambiguity to do things in the worst possible way. This was a technique of pre-emptively adjusting the wording so that vendors would have difficulty violating the spirit of POSIX.

The Microsoft version of the POSIX libraries can be viewed as an implementation of WEIRDNIX. This should give you a good idea of them problems that you will encounter.

But in general, the gnu and linux tools are widely reported to work pretty well on NT. Better than the NT tools, anyway.

--

Re: And to think it almost didn't make it!

[Darnit]

Sorry about that. All the main hubbub happened during the summer when people weren't as busy with school. Selanit busted some major ass to get this out before finals came up and bit him.

Progress was very slow though at the start of the fall semester of school.

But we are still here.

This is great! Software SHOULD be cross platform!

[Mustang Matt]

A lot of these programs are cross platform.

A lot of linux users don't understand why anyone should spend the time to write/port windows software. The reason is that this sort of thing helps users transition at their own pace.

They have the ability to run open source software under the OS that their familiar and comfortable wth and the next time the license renewall comes up they can say, "hey, I can run this same software under a free OS instead of paying license fees!"

I've gotten a lot of Windows users to start using PuTTY, WinSCP2 and OpenOffice. I really think this is the first step to becoming comfortable with linux on a daily basis.

hmm

[zapfie]

From the article..

"Given that we now have this fast, secure, desktop-ready, free OS, why doesn't everyone switch?"

Hate to argue the third point, but until Linux has a single, consistant, easily understandable set of user interface guidelines that most people follow, I don't think we are there yet. One of the main rules of UI design is consistancy, but a user's experiences will differ vastly from one program to the next, often not allowing them to take what they've learned in one program and apply it to another. (for example, toolbars get located in different places, menu layouts work differently, widgets don't behave the same way, buttons on standard dialog boxes are placed differently, some support context menus, some don't, etc etc.) I'm not saying it's any better or worse on the Windows side, but in my eyes, that really is a major hurdle we need to work on as a community before we proclaim Linux a "desktop-ready" OS.

I do.

[Mustang Matt]

This means that I can download the CD and when I work on computers for people and they say, "dang it! Word is crashing every 12 minutes and giving me a blue screen of death!" I can say, "Hey, check out this free software I have that is compatible with word."

Re:What a good idea

[bfree]

One small problem, the Gimp is NOT included. According to their faq this is because

• The installer is unreliable and complex
• It depends on GTK+
• The interface is clunky
• The program is very complex
• It doesn't support gifs out of the box
• Windows port lags behind the Linux version

Now they say they could handle a few of these problems, but combine them all and they think it's a no no. Personally I think the Gimp for windows is closer to the killer Free app than anything else (though openoffice.org is in with a shout) but I can understand why they think it would be problematic. I hope that someone will address some of these issues (installer could take care of GTK+ and be stablised, gif support could be simplified with a check box in the installer to download and install it and finally maybe someone could help get the windows version into step with the linux one).

How I will use this project...

[snilloc]

I won't use this project exactly as it stands, but I wasn't previously aware of some of the programs, and I will incorporate some of them into my own shareware/OSS/cracked CD.

As somebody who (like many /.-ers) provides cheap and/or free tech support to family and friends, I make my own "distro" of software for Windows that gets installed as needed. Being a pragmatist, some of the software I have used is less than legally pure. I try to find free (beer) and free (GNU) software wherever I can, but sometimes a few serial numbers come in handy.

As has been pointed out, nobody is going to install Beonix on somebody else's computer. You're either going to update their IE and leave it at that, or you're going to give 'em Mozilla at best.

Also, I'm going to keep giving people WinAmp. No, it isn't free in the GNU sense, but lots of people use it... It's not some wierd product that nobody has ever heard of and can't figure out how to use. And I always keep an installer of Adobe Acrobat around. Sure, I'm probably violating the EULA, but what the hell? I hate going to somebody else's house and waiting for a dialup download and then charge these good people by the hour when I have already spent a lot of time ridding their computer of viruses and I have better things to do.

Probably, the biggest question I am asked about the super-anal-free-GNU software I install on other people's computers is "why?". Why, when Winamp exists and is supported, would I install FreeAmp or anything else? People don't want to hear about RMS and the GNU philosophy, they just want their shit to work, and as cheaply and easily as possible.

To summarize, my personal softare collection will

• Try to minimize the amount of legally questionable software on it, while not being anal about certain things like re-distribution of a free (beer) product.
• Give people software I think they are capable of using - if this means occasionally using a serial-ized shareware program, so be it.
• Not leave a computer unable to read common file formants (acrobat, zip), thus minimizing the amount of time I have to deal with these people.

My biggest wish from the OSS community (and I am not a programmer, and I don't have the time to learn), is for a good Windows virus scanner. I have used (and still use) free (beer) virus scanners because people don't want to pay a ton of cash to make their computer usable. I more-or-less like the one I am using now (grisoft), but I have been burnt by "discontinued programs" before. Bait and switch. I suspect that the scanner itself wouldn't be too hard to write, but updating virus sigs on a regular basis would be.

What would probably be more useful to people like myself is a "virtual" CD.... A list of freely available (but not anally or unnecessarily GNU-ized) collection of download links to software ... and the total download size magically adds up to 650 MB or less.

Not to toot my own horn...

[cos(0)]

...but I offer my own Open Source Software CD to people at my school and recently on eBay. I used Slashdot's story a few months ago about what software for Windows to include on a CD-ROM to get about 666 MB worth of software.

First I gave out a few for free to friends. Then others that are in our computer science classes -- people I barely know -- started asking me for my "open" CD for the DJGPP compiler that's on it. My school uses the ancient Borland Turbo C++ 3.0, and DJGPP's IDE, RHIDE, emulates it very well -- a great alternative to paying $70 for the suite. So far a few tens of CDs were sold at my school and two online.

These CDs are quite popular.

Re:Value difference with free OSes lowers... NOT.

[dwheeler]

I think you're looking too short-range. Look at what happened with gcc. Once gcc became a powerful C compiler, available on non-free platforms, it became extremely widespread, and eventually a massive amount of code became dependent on _gcc_ instead of a proprietary alternative. Then, once the Free operating systems became more mature, people MUCH more easily ported to them.

The same can occur here, too. It's very difficult to get Word users to switch to Linux! But if the majority of word processor users (for example) used Open Office (or Abiword or KWord), then they'd find it essentially trivial to switch.

People don't buy operating systems. They buy applications, and then get the operating system to run it. If you want people to use your operating system, you need to get them to use the applications that run on your operating system.

GNU Win II

[Bill Kendrick]

Somehow I hadn't heard of (or forgot about) TheOpenCD.

I'm vaguely familiar (as in, two of my apps are included in, and I just submitted many more to) the GNUWin II CD. It's the same idea. A CD of Open Source software we all use and love; just Windows versions of them.

I guess I'm going to have to find someone who runs Windows and have them nominate some of my ported games to TheOpenCD. :^)