Slashdot Mirror
Lindows' Heavy Hand Leads to Summit Dropouts
shawk writes "With Lindows becoming more popular the company's confidence seems to be growing. According to a news item on Desktoplinux.com Lindows unilaterally adjusted the agenda of a planned vendor-neutral summit in a way that is not tolerable for others supporting the conference.
A related article on CNET reports HP having withdrawn from the summit as well."
A little bit of conventional wisdom: alienating your developers is a Bad Idea.
i wouldn't put that beyond Lindows, as I never really considered them to be a true Linux distro in the first place.
so looks like Lindows is pulling an Athens and going Delian League on the other OS's.
/obscure Roman history reference
I didn't think anyone actually used Lindows. It was kind of a nice idea that never went anywhere, like Atheos.
I thought Michael Robertson had changed his ways when he started Lindows. Guess not. This seems to be indication that he's got as much hubris as ever.
Any source code yet? Is Lindows stealing from open source programers?
Lindows was started with hopes to get big and blast in to the Linux community with open arms.. for the majority of the first year or more not many give them any credit. Now Lindows is signing contracts here or there, putting copies on cheap walmart PC's, and to themselves they are on top of the world right now. Lindows should be careful about stressing things when they are still "so new", as it could seriously proove bad later on.
If Lindows is so popular, why do at least twice as many people use Red Hat?
From the company who brought you Lindows, comes Licrosoft like management decisions.
It will be interesting to see what happens in the next three years. What do you think will happen with Lindows?
...before a fall (whu is it spelled "goeth"?)
:)
I really think Lindows is going to lose the trademark tussle with Microsoft over the name. Not only does Microsoft have nearly infinite legal resources, but I think here they may actually be right (and that's from a Mac user). Unless they've lost control of the windows name themselves, entirely possible from what I've heard -- Microsoft has no lack of hubris and is overdue for a stumble or more.
Good think Apple never got arrogant. Oh, wait.... But they felll big time, and I think it was a good thing, if only because it drew Jobs back like the second coming, and vested him with unilateral power to match. He's proud but smart. Like Gates. If their positions were reversed, hmmm....
Stop chuckling Linux-heads. Power/pride corrupts, your turn may come.
ZDNet claims that Sun is no longer on the participant list, but they are.
A lot of people are rushing to judgement on this story. Wait until the dust settles and see what comes of it.
Too many posts I have seen are obviously colored by the posters opinion rather than any known facts.
Sorry, but is anyone surprised by this? They even NAMED THEMSELVES after a microsoft product....
Here's the question of the day. How does linux takeover the desktop market if it doesn't become corperate in the sense that there is support and advertisement?
Oh no, the evil MP3.com one of the most visited sites on the internet's former CEO is now the CEO of a Linux company, the travisty obviously this man cares not for the community but for his own pocketbook. Yet look at that... Lindows is the new hype word, even beats redhat in most not-in-the-know IT types.
So lindows wants to start its own summit and doesn't want the other vendors to jump on their turf, is this surprising?
Ignore the "p2p is theft" trolls, they're just uninformed
I see people saying that now Lindows is trying to play like it's a bid bad boy because they are supposedly popular. I want to understand how is that possible. When I browse the web, chat on IRC, participate in mailing lists, I see folk using all kind of distros. I see people using Redhat, Mandrake, Xandros, Debian, Slackware, Gentoo and god-know-what. But what makes me wonder is that I am yet to hear of a SINGLE PERSON actually USING Lindows for purposes other that reviewing.
Can anyone provide any factual numbers of the amounts of Lindows users compared to the likes of Redhat, Debian and the like ? I am very interested.
Sounds like Lindows is trying to clone more that Microsofts desktop.
There must be something about products whose name ends with 'indows'...
This doesn't seem all that out of place to me. Lindows never really seemed to have the true Linux spirit. I really wanted to try their product but not for $99, when I could have gotten a better but now defunct Mandrake distro for free. Of course this is taking for granted that the changes they made were terrible, but the article gives very little mention of what specific changes were made. Besides the change of the keynote speaker no mention is made of what other things were changed. For all I know they changed the break treats to peanuts from sweet rolls. Yeah it was dumb of Lindows to do this without any kind of forewarning, but to pull out of the conference completely? I think both parties are a bit at fault here.
Hold up, wait a minute, let me put some pimpin in it
The fact that when one vendor does something that i dont agree with i can take my business somewhere else without the blink of an eye. I think this is linux biggest strength. You can choose whatever dist you like and still get the same thing but wrapped in another context. No vendor lockin keeps the vendors on their toes and the ones not collaborating dissapears into oblivion or change their ways fast.
HTTP/1.1 400
...the expected attendance is 600 people. Max.
-Rusty
You never know...
well shit, I was just about to buy a $250 walmart pc with Lindows on it (literally) but if it means i have to pay for Lindows you can forget it :P
This isn't just alienating developers. It's alienating the whole Linux community, including users, OSS contributors, commercial entities. These people and organisations are working in a cooperative way to achieve (at this time anyhow) related goals. Backing Linux for many organisations, especially commercial ones, can be considered risky. Linux is far less accepted on the desktop, and it is likely that within organisations that are supporting linux, there are strong camps that are opposing or only luke-warm towards it. This action by Lindows is going to give ammunition to the anti-Linux factions, and specifically from Lindows' point of view, destroy trust that is so important to strategic relationships.
Maybe Lindows is a little TOO much like windows...
I do security
Is Henry V .009 stealing gasoline? Do we have any proof that he isn't? I think we should have this before we consider his posts.
(And yes, this bit of silliness is just to remind people that accusing others of unsubstantiated wrongdoing is not a particularly persuasive strategy.)
Lindows is not obligated to provide me with source code, but the last I heard they had an online repository idenitified in their distributed media. It wasn't working quite right, but they were aware of that and fixing it.
i think the question is "Who would admit to using Lindows?", but thats another point. Linux Counter reports that, out of 115,886 submitted values, there are 8 distros in use, none of which are Lindows, which must be in the "Others" department, which takes up 13.13% of the share. Those 8 (in order of usage): Red Hat, Mandrake, Debian, Slackware, SuSE, Conectiva, "diy", and Debian sid. Then again, would your average Lindows user even know or care about something like Linux Counter? -- While you're there, fill out a reg form.
Excuse me, but you should probably do your homework.
The original poster didn't claim that Lindows wasn't distributing source, only that people should look in to it. The idea is valid, as Lindows was known to previously break the GPL by not making source available. They claimed it was only for their "beta" period, but the GPL doesn't allow this in any form.
You, on the other hand, are making something up completely out of the blue. Even if he was stealing gasoline, this has no relevance to the point the oringal poster was trying to make. Lindows not distributing source code, on the other hand, is directly related to Lindows not being a team player, which is the point of the article the comment was made on.
Saying people are making logical falicies by making a logical falicy is rather hypocritical, in my mind -- and just bad form, too.
"Lindows spokeswoman Cheryl Schwartzman said the company wanted to concentrate on desktop Linux for customers who'll use it, not for programmers who'll develop it." That tells me that Lindows just wants to take from the programmers who make the programs and give them nothing in return. Not even speaking time at a conference. They just want our programs to charge users 99 dollars a year to download them and flip us the bird. Maybe the next program I create will GPLL. Meaning it's GPL'ed less than Lindows. Lindows can't distribute my program or use any of my code. Don't piss on the people that made/makes your product Lindows.
I asked a question. I made no accusations. However, if you'd like me to justify even posing question, Lindows has violated the GPL in the past: http://www.lindowsos.info/print.php?sid=16
So is M$ gonna sue Lindows again for acting like them too?
"Sic Semper Tyrannosaurus Rex."
I think I'll make a new OS based on BSD.
I'll call it Bindows. Then I'll steal all the Lindows users.
Who's with me?
Oh wait, it's been done.
If you use Galeon, you can block ads from Microsoft.
I have used it. Once. I installed it on a non-critical machine, to see what it was like. I found it to be nowhere near as slick and easy for beginners as Redhat 8.0. In fact, although the install was easy (so easy in fact that 8 or 10 shipyard ales had no noticeable effect on said install process...), I found the distro (in general) to be flaky at best.
I guess Robertson forgot he is not Steve Jobs.
Might as well use all the pressure tactics as well!
And the press is free to call attention to it, and we're free to criticize it. You don't like it, move to North Korea.
Developers! Developers! Developers! Developers! WOOOO! Who told you to sit down????
...so it's okay to act like a total asshole as long as your making money?
So, why is Lindows charging $120 for a distribution? That seems a bit high of a price for an open source kernel. Oh, right! You have to pay for those shitty Office products from MS, right?
You have no idea how deeply this offends all us other Michael Robertson's. We would like to issue a collective apology for our kinsman, who seems to have given us a a bad name. Appropriate actions will be taken to silence him. -Michael Robertson
Another bonus about Lycoris over Lindows: a damn fine user community. Oh yeah, and Joseph Cheek isn't an asshole like Michael Robertson is. ;-)
Knowledge is power. Knowledge shared is power multiplied.
So, let me get this right...pissing off people - and changing the rules in the middle of the game is going to do that - who are most able to help or hurt your company is going to help them?
Explain, please.
I think Lindows is on the shortcut to loserville with the Linux community at large. At many different times they've seemed to take the fruits of what Linux users and developers have contributed to the system as a whole and then turned right around and mooned them. At every opertunity Michael Robertson has seen fit to present his ass to the public which his company relies on for their product development. I'd much rather hear Bruce Perens wax philosophic about Linux and Open Source than hear Mike R. pimp Lindows.
One thing that has bothered me a lot about Lindows is the fact they charge $99 for a subscription to their software distribution service (apt-get). It doesn't bother me they are selling a subscription service at all, the thing that gets to me is they are using the public Debian servers and not providing their own. People pay $99 to access a service Lindows has absolutely no afiliation with and does not seem to support in the slightest. The only program repository I can actually find that they house themselves is their FTP site with their patches and whatnot on it.
Lindows is the MP3.com of the Linux world. It is riding the Linux hype wave as far as it can while shafting anyone contributing to it. Where MP3.com shafted the artists providing the site's content, Lindows is shafting the Linux developer providing the distro's content. Where MP3.com has horrible contractual terms Lindows pillages public servers and donation funded development efforts.
Hopefully Lindows will decide to play nice as a community member which they become by default when entering the Linux distro business. There is a Linux community that exists, it isn't just open source zealot preach talk. Companies wanting to interact with this community need to follow its often times quirky social rules and behave as proper community members. I don't really see Lindows doing this at all. It's a shame seeing them pull this stuff because there's a lot of people who will never know the difference between Lindows and any other distro, they'd be hard pressed to tell you why Lindows is not the same as Windows. All these people will do is make Lindows successful at the cost of the people developing Linux software or housing it for distribution.
I'm a loner Dottie, a Rebel.
They had better watch who they step on...
And if I were them, I'd start calling it GNU/Lindows, for their sake.
Lindows is pre-installed on computers sold at WalMart aimed at people looking for the cheapest possible new computer.
For the most part...
Those people don't chat on IRC
They don't even know what a mailing list is
They are not going to be visiting technical sites for pleasure
Many of these people aren't even going to know what "Linux" is.
That's the point!
I was scheduled to give a talk on "The Kernel and the Desktop" at the Desktop Linux Summit and I formally withdrew on Thursday after having a discussion with the involved parties due to the issues discussed in these news articles. The behavior shown - especially the treatment of Bruce - is not acceptable.
I, uh, bet there will be more dropouts over the next couple days - Lindows is not cool.
If he creates it from scratch, he can put it under any licence he wants to, including a GPL less Lindows. However if he's using GPL code in his program, the resulting program must also be released under the GPL (well doh, entire point of GPL).
Kjella
Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
Back when lindows started I subscribed to the insiders program. I was wholly unimpressed with Lindows as a whole. Then the big lawsuit from Microsoft came down and Robertson had a reply 'CEO to CEO' to Bill Gates. The reply from Robertson basically stated that he was going to sell Lindows to a discriminated market, and that it would be impossible for people to confuse Windows with Lindows. However, not six months later was Lindows being sold at Wal-Mart, which in my personal and professional opinion is most certainly _not_ an outlet that sells to a discriminated audience. Not to mention later on WinE was removed from the distribution. That's a whole other story however. It just comes as no big shock that Robertson is playing games again later on.
I haven't looked a Lindows 3.0 (It may be OK).
IMO Lindows 2.0 seemed to be a butcher job of Debian.
I use Debian.
Lindows has always given me a little bit of a bad feeling, but I've never really been able to identify anything really wrong with them. Sure, the CEO does some weird things, and even makes some people mad. But whatever they do doesn't even compare to many other businesses from which we buy software.
Beyond that, Linodws is a good distribution. Very easy install, and sensible defaults for an ex-windows user. More importantly, debian lies beneath the whole thing, and the debian servers are (by default) set in sources.list. That means you have everything a world-class server distro has, yet a nice interface for a beginner.
I administer some servers, and recently one of my coworkers decided to really get linux installed. I recommended lindows because it is easy to install, and sure enough, he got it up and running. I also offered Mandrake as an alternative, but it was just a little more difficult to work with and install new software. Also, I didn't know enough about RPM to help him out.
The $99 click-n-run service seems like a perfectly acceptable business model to me. It's working for my coworker, and doesn't even slow down the way I might go about installing software (apt-get). I would probably change it to run as a non-root user also, but a new user probably finds it easiest to just use root. Lindows is not too insecure, I might add, because it doesn't install all kinds of servers.
I wouldn't choose lindows for myself, but it seems like a damn good way to get started to me.
Social scientists are inspired by theories; scientists are humbled by facts.
I am a Lindows.com Insider. I have cut and pasted the post the President of Lindows.com made on our forums. Here it is:
We had contracted with one of the employees of Desktoplinux.org (they only have a couple) to pay them to help out with organizing A FEW PARTS of the summit. Without going into great detail, let's just say this relationship ended up being unworkable. Due, perhaps from some bad communication on our part, this person became upset with some of the decisions being made about the summit. (We wanted a consumer, media-friendly event, not a technical, developer's conference.) Based on early misunderstandings, this person unfortunately had made promises to vendors without our final approval and had promised speaking slots. When the agenda came up for final approval (the first time Michael or I even saw it), we made changes to make it have more of a mass-market slant. The changes we made put this person in an awkward position with some people. We told this person that we would take full responsibility for the misunderstandings and to blame us if anyone was disappointed.
In the end, it was simply a bad fit and this person was simply not the appropriate ambassador for the summit as we envisioned it. (It's hard to sell something you yourself don't believe in.) Therefore, we stopped contracting with this individual and used other people who LOVED the summit as we had planned it.
As for this notion of "vendor neutrality," Lindows.com was NOT in anyway trying to turn the Summit into a "Lindows.com Show." Anyone who attended Wineconf or an MP3 Summit (both events also sponsored by Michael) know he's not like that. One look at the agenda and it's pretty obvious this is a show about how COOL LINUX IS ON THE DESKTOP, not about Lindows.com. Besides, Linux is so much more than distros. It's about office suites (Sun), applications (Kompany), printers (HP), tablets (StepUp), Games (Transgaming), hardware (Microtel), and on and on... Lindows.com doesn't even compete with 95% of the vendors at the show. We DO plead guilty that we VERY MUCH were making sure the summit stayed a show with MASS MARKET appeal, but the notion that we wanted to turn it into a Lindows.com show is simply ridiculous. (Go view the wineconf or 4 years of mp3 summit videos to see for yourself.)
This is the sort of wacky "drama" that has plagued Linux for far too long and makes Microsoft laugh at Linux. Fortunately we, as we always do, will remain above this. The only reason I'm even making this post is because this thread asked for a response.
We'll have a packed house and it's going to be a great show. If you look at the agenda, you'll see it's the interesting, consumer-focused type of show Linux needs to start moving into the mainstream markets.
Kevin
and I plan to use it to surf slashdot daily.
if it works, that is...
you're exactly right about the reason why I'm buying it: it's cheaper than most pocket PCs. I can always use another toy...
The truth doesn't care what I think.
I am a Lindows Member too... and here is some more information that was given after the post above:
r berianc ke s
Here's an update on the latest with the Summit...
As of this evening, the following changes have been confirmed to the Summit's sponsor/exhibitor list:
Deletions:
- HP
- Questnet
- the Kompany
Additions:
-Epson
-Earthlink
-Bitstream
-Ce
-CentralCommand
-Hancom
-GridIQ
-Brobe
-SpeakEasy
-MP3.com
-Photogenics
-GarageGam
As for the issue with the Keynote. Michael was ALWAYS slated to be the Keynote. It was this person from desktoplinux.org who promised it to Bruce Perens. (Michael and I had no idea about this!) It was NOT Michael who insisted HE be the Keynote speaker. That was ME! I have heard Michael speak on several occasions and I have also heard Bruce Perens. No offense to Bruce, but he's just not a very dynamic public speaker, ESPECIALLY for a consumer-type conference. As I have said, this summit is about the ability for Linux to move to the mass markets. I think everyone will agree, that is Michael Robertson's area of expertise, not Bruce's. I can't think of anyone who has championed the ideal of taking Linux to the masses more than Michael. He has the arrows in his back from the traditional Linux crowd to prove it! Bruce fired a few more in this week. =)
For the record, we offered Bruce the prime spot of closing the summit, but he said he didn't want to speak at all. That was his choice.
Michael Robertson was always the Keynote speaker at the annual MP3 Summit's, and did a great job. These summits were always very successful and no one ever accused MP3.com of not being fair to the many other vendors who attended the MP3 Summits.
Finally, of the 25 speakers suggested to us by the "panel," (Michael and I didn't even know there WAS such a panel!) we included 19.
As is obvious from the above changes, the show is only growing in status and support, not dwindling.
Kevin
Here is even more info from the thread listed above (from the Member's forum at Lindows):
Without naming names...two of the companies that pulled out sited the reason as being "We don't want to be on the same stage as our competitors."
Here was my response back to them (in italics)"
"I must say I don't understand the notion of not wanting to be in the same room with a 'competitor.' If I was given the opportunity to be on a panel with Microsoft, I'd jump at the chance. I certainly wouldn't turn my back and leave the spotlight all to them.
News Flash...you only have ONE competitor that matters...Microsoft. There are no spoils of war for beating anyone else."
The notion of not going to a trade show, say COMDEX for example, because you're competitors will be there is nonsense, and no way to run a business. The few companies that are pulling out are being replaced by companies who fully understand that to fight the largest corporation in the world, you better act like a professional business and not get caught up in petty, personal politics.
We have lots of exhibitors who WANT to be at this show. Who proactively are trying to make this show a success. I'm happy to see the ones pull out who were the same ones sitting back and saying, "What's this show going to do for me?" It's like when I use to book bands to play live. There were two kinds of bands. One kind would say, "How many people will be there waiting for me?" The other type would ask, "How big is the venue, because I have a lot of fans that I'll be bring along." Which band do you think I liked booking, and which do you think made for a better show?
Earthlink, Bitstream, Epson, etc. are EXCITED to be there. I'd rather they get more time and let those who don't get it pull out. Do you think Espon minds if HP pulls out? Epson gets it. If others don't, more power to those who do. We're not dragging anyone to this prom kicking and screaming. Fortunately, there are plenty of businesses who believe Linux is ready for the masses and are willingly coming to the dance.
Kevin
The same people who don't "get" Lindows, don't "get" AOL. They scratch their head, wondering, "How come AOL has so many millions of users?"
There a A LOT more USERS of technology than there are technologists. Lindows seems to understand this. The reason you don't see a lot of Lindows users posting here, is they are NOT from the tech crowd. I know a 10-year old girl who uses Lindows every day, but she doesn't know what a "slashdot" is from a "pok-a-dot" dress on her barbie dolls.
Mark
Seems to me that Michael Robertson is the one person who understands where the real fight is here. He's the one person I see who has the balls to take on MS and doesn't back down.
Shame he has to fight with all those arrows from the Linux community in his back.
It's like he's trying to drag Linux into the next generation, the next wave, the next level with the masses, and Linux is kicking and screaming "We don't want to go!"
Sid
Until various Linux developers, companies, service providers, and hardware makers stop pissing on each other, Windows will rule the market.
Once some focus is obtained, concentrating all these great resources to work together (rather than against each other) Linux will have a chance.
Check out our infosecurity industry blog: http://securitymusings.com/
It doesn't appear as if Micheal Robertson and Lindows are exactly embracing the spirit or the letter of Open Source / GPL.
Others have asked whether Lindows complies with the GPL and provides source code. If you happen to have already paid them money and noted the IP address of the FTP server where insiders can download source, then I guess they provide source code. If however you go to http://www.lindows.com/ you will not find a Download button or references to source code. A search for "source code" in the "Warehouse" field takes you a list of things that LOOK like they can be downloaded, but just try it. You get dragged into something called "Click n' Run" that works more like porn web site voting lists, constantly cycling you back to pages where you can buy a download membership for $99 or if you're a programmer, another membership for $299.
If you not have a Click-n-Run membership and you are not already running Lindows OS, then they offer 3 options:
1. Purchase the membership for $99
2. Purchase a PC from WalMart and then sign up for Click-n-Run
3. Join their "Insider Program" for $299
Micheal Robertson's goal appears to be to build a business and make a lot of money by leveraging the hard work of a large number of GPL contributors. That's fine, and it scares Microsoft, which is even better. What troubles me is the direction that Micheal is moving to do it, which sure looks like just another corporate grab of a bunch of free stuff and an unwillingness to give back. I sure hope I'm missing something here.
And why do you think that a decision to piss one's suppliers off, as well as a number of attendees who paid for the conference under the assumption that it would be something else than it is, a good capitalist decision?
It's the Lindows people's conference, you say. Maybe, but that's not what they sold to the paying customers, who are in a position to ask for their money back, winding up losing the Lindows people a considerable amount of money. It's bad business.
How about the money they are giving back to the community in the form of development for WINE, KDE, etc..? I've said it before and I'll say it again. Nowhere in the GPL does it say "Free as in Beer!". Write it down. Take a picture. Memorize it. I don't give a fuck! You are eligible to get the source code after you paid your $99. You don't get to get it for free!
GPL != Free Software
Can's somebody slip into AOL and exchange their burning image for Knoppix?
:)
Linux shipped out in the millions to the world
I certainly don't "get" why Lindows wants to pass themselves off as a cheap knock-off of the nearest monopoly brandname. At least AOL always marketed itself as a unique, value-add service.
Aren't you a well-spoken dumbass?
In case you haven't noticed... 90% of the world uses Windows. The reason they make Lindows look like Windows is because the people who are trying to get away from Redmond don't know anything different. You are actually suggesting that people continue to buy and use Microsoft products. That's really going to help Linux.
When will you ignorant fools learn that the enemy is MICROSOFT and not other Linux distros? When Linux wins... we all win!
This is why Microsoft is not worried about Linux in the short-term. The members of the Linux community are busy fighting themselves while heading in no clear direction. I've heard it said that: "Lindows is A choice... not THE choice". There are lots of distros to choose from. If you don't like Lindows -- fine! Don't run it. But, what good does it do to attack Lindows (another Linux distro) when everyday Microsoft sells more operating systems than anyone on the planet?
Who cares if distro ABC is better than distro XYZ!?!? Why do we have to constantly fight ourselves. The only way that Linux will ever go mainstream is by focusing on the needs of end users. Who cares what other distros think? Who cares what other developers think? The goal is to get the end users to switch to Linux! If we continue to fight about petty bullshit this will never happen. And Microsoft is laughing all the way to the bank.
No, nobody offered me the closing spot. But people from Lindows have been saying a number of things that aren't connected with reality. It's very strange.
My participation in the conference has been publicized for months, so I don't understand how Lindows would not have known that the person they hired to set up the conference had put me in the keynote position. That person is a long-time participant in Linux business whose integrity should not be questioned. And anyway, since she was working for Lindows, if you are to believe them entirely unsupervised for months, they need to take responsibility for the work she did - which had no problem.
Regarding their comments about my public speaking prowess - both Michael and I were on NPR the other day, and the broadcast archive is at sciencefriday.com . Judge for yourself. But they have been saying this about anyone they moved into a panel slot (those are all very short) or otherwise rejected - they seem to all be bad speakers. Most of the people they say the advisory board asked for were moved into panel slots.
We want Lindows on the team, but as a team player. It's their right to hold a party and call all of the shots. But they can't expect us all to come to the party on their terms.
Bruce
Bruce Perens.
Or you could live in the United States. For a country that constantly screams about freedoms, their freedom of the press doesn't rate all that highly.
Sorry to those who feel it is OT. I just really hate it when people make remarks like "move to North Korea". (especially as, I suspect, said person is an American. Though I could be wrong on that).
"They do not preach that their god will rouse them, a little before the Nuts work loose." Kipling, 'The Sons of Martha'
Maybe it's because 90% of the world uses said monopoly brandname and know what it means. If you tell them about the latest kernel in Debian their eyes glaze over and they stop listening.
Mandrake says they get a bigger "cut" from Mandrake Club memberships than they do from the boxed product.
.ISO's, I would never have gone through the trouble to install it.
If there were no
Not having installed it, I wouldn't have felt the need to give anything back by "joining".
So, I get to do easy installations, they get their money, this is a bad thing?
Of course, it remains to be seen whether relying on others' sense of duty is a sustainable business model, but I hope it does.
Tell Wal-Mart how you feel. The average user is not going to be bullied because some CEO thinks he doesn't have to follow any kind of etiquette or exhibit some sort of manners.
That only tells you who is going to go there and do that, and its a rather slow indication of the popularity of a distro because of how popularity takes hold. Also, some distros are going to have more zealots than others ("Everybody! Go to linuxcounter and prove to the world that our distro is the most popular!").
A faster indication is from distrowatch. The difference here is that the number of people INTERESTED in the distro determine the popularity.
Here's their actual stats (and though I hate to admit it, Lindows is holding strong at #9).
Mod me down and I will become more powerful than you can possibly imagine!
I do the speedtouchconf.sf.net script for configuring the Alcatel USB Modem under Linux. I've had about 20 different people contact me so far about it - mainly problems they've had with it, many of which are my mistakes. The modem in question is obscure enough to get little enough interest, but of thost 20 (ish), two were LindowsOS users, who were missing the gcc and make utilites required. Being Debian-based, they could "apt-get install gcc" and were happy enough. I don't like Lindows' attitude, but the OS seems - from this brief acquantance-by-proxy - enough like Debian not to matter, from a developer's point of view. I can give the same advice to a LindowsOS user as to a Debian user. At that level, it suits me fine. One interpretation of these figures would be to say that 10% of Linux / Alcatel USB Modem users are on LindowsOS; I suspect this would be inaccurate, and that the LindowsOS users are maybe rather less used to Linux than users of other distro's, so the 10% is disproportionate because of that fact.
Author, Shell Scripting : Expert Re
Whoever thinks that Michael Robertson is of a calibre to replace Bruce Perens as a keynote speaker on a supposidely 'vendor independent' Linux conference, is a clueless jackass.
Mod me down more, that won't change a bit.
They just want our programs to charge users 99 dollars a year...
/etc/apt/sources.list to point to Debian's servers.
Personally, I'm a little upset by the way that Lindows dealt with this conference, and if I had been planning to go, I'd abort those plans. But I really don't care one way or the other about Lindows making money off of Debian, even though I contribute to Debian, and they're probably charging money for packages I built. That's how things go in the free software world.
Maybe the next program I create will GPLL. Meaning it's GPL'ed less than Lindows. Lindows can't distribute my program or use any of my code.
That would violate the Debian Free Software Guidelines, in particular, point 6. So you'd also, effectively be forbidding Debian from including your program.
Of course, maybe that's what you want (since Lindows is based on Debian), but somehow, I doubt it. A smarter move, IMO, would be to publicize info on how Lindows users can get free updates by editing
But in general, I think your argument is silly -- if you don't want random people to be able to make money off of your software, without giving you anything in return, then don't write free software. It's as simple as that. And if you do write free software, then accept the fact that some people will use it without giving anything in return. Debian does.
This is very interesting. Just yesterday Ira Flatow had both Bruce Perens and Michael Robertson on his show, Science Friday . Bruce is actually a pretty cool guy, I expected him to be more militant and opinionated for some reason. He kind of reminds me of Emo Phillips.
_ 011703.html
Bruce made a very artful dodge when asked whether Lindows was any good. He basically acknowledged that it was good to have another group working on making Linux better but he diplomatically avoided saying anything good about Lindows.
You can listen to the show in Real format here: http://www.sciencefriday.com/pages/2003/Jan/hour1
Just remember that Lindows is not, according to the GPL, required to provide source code to the world. They're required to provide source code to anyone who they distribute a product based upon GPL'd software to. Since their product is only available via purchase, they're allowed to restrict access to the source code to only those who've purchased their product.
They're not, of course, allowed to prohibit you from redistributing the GPL-software-derived parts of their distribution, and the accompanying source code, after you've purchased it. They can only put that restriction on the parts that they created that aren't touched by the GPL.
Michael Robertson has practiced tech-witchcraft for years, this is just the most recent example.
The basic facts of this story are clear as day... Michael Robertson wanted to hold a conference, but he knew if he held it himself nobody would show up. So, he partners with a Linux news site that prides itself in maintaining indepenace from any specific vendor. That news site demands that they have a say in the control of the agenda if they are going to lend their credibility, and he agress. They draw up an agreed upon agenda... then suddenly Michael Robertson decides he wants to substitute one where he's the keynote. News site is now crying foul play as it pulls out, and several other participants are rethinking their plans as one-by-one others pull out. The only dust left to settle deals with who's still in and who's out.
It might not be illegal, but it's certainly a mean thing to do. He's basically burning his credibilty with some major Open Source supporters all in exchange for the right to be keynote speaker at a trumped-up conference. It shows how little respect he has the Open Source community... and thefore the community doesn't like him much either.
He's soiled his reputation with past bad acts, and this just added to the list.
I use LindowsOS about 50% of the time. It's not as bad as people make it out to be. I bet a lot of these folks haven't even tried using it. It is stable and is mainly Debian. Lindows has made some tweaks to KDE but, the Click-N-Run is a nice feature. I think the entire Linux community should agree on a packaging/installation system! It is terribly complex for non-technical users. I can do things in the console or I can stay in KDE... so, I'm pretty happy with it. The installer is excellent and the hardware detection is pretty good. I've had a few small problems but was able to find solutions pretty fast because Debian is a popular distro. I don't regret spending the money on it. I hope Linux on the desktop really does take off! I support Xandros too and I have it running on my other machine.
actually the "bang for the buck" is WAY off. For $250, I get a machine with an LindowsOS installed. For $250 I get nothing if I go the Mandrake way. The cheapest they have with Mandrake installed is $391, which defeats my whole purpose.
The truth doesn't care what I think.
Well then all new users would flock to other distros such as Red Hat since they can download an ISO. Your approach would work for existing users, but under this approach Mandrake's growth would come to a screeching halt. If mandrake did not have an ISO available, I would have never tried the distro and subsequently would have never joined the mandrake club. Potential users especially coming from windows need to be able to evaluate the product without having to purchase it. Crippled evaluation versions will not work because the users Mandrake is targeting are not the type that would be willing to go through the hassle of installing an OS just for evaluation. Solutions such as Suse's eval CD are interesting in the sense that a user can see what things look like, but people need to use the finished product before purchase.
Wrong answer, Mike. Politics be damned, this is all about philosophy.
This statement from Roberston is very revealing. It says (to me) that beancounters are beginning to invade the GNU/Linux movement. Props to Bruce Perens and HP for refusing to support the philosophy that equates GNU/Linux users to mindless consumers in the name of winning the desktop war.
Am I alone in my belief that the problem is uneducated, uninformed, apathetic computer users?
--K.
Sig: Bad people happen. Try to avoid being one of them.
They're not contributing to KDE. They provide a bunch of patches to an obsolete version of KDE. How is that useful, exactly?
Yo People,
r .h tml
:-)
look at who is exhibiting & note it is not just a Lindows show.
http://www.desktoplinuxsummit.org/main/exhibito
Take a few deep breaths!
Yes, that is better.
Now, carrying on using whatever distro you want & lets have a CONSTRUCTIVE discussion!?
Greek Geek
As of next week, passwords will be entered in Morse code. --Frank Knappe in debian-user-de
(I'm the original poster.) Okay, I learned something, and I won't forget it. Thanks. That *was* a fine point of the GPL that I was missing: If I release my code under the GPL, and Microsoft incorporates it into a $499 product, they are under no obligation to let me see the source code or to roll their changes back into my branch unless I pay them $499.
I didn't really understand that aspect of the GPL, and I feel kinda dumb. I always thought it was about allowing the free flow of ideas and technology, but it appears that there is a loophole that allows companies to lock derivatives of my work up under conditions of solely their own profit.
My erroneous incentive to release software under the GPL has always been that I might get some technology back. That customers of proprietary derivatives works could access the source was certainly good, but I mostly wanted to be able to see what someone does with my code. I was under the mistaken impression that the GPL permitted me to stipulate "This Software Must Also Remain Free As In Beer, Just As I Am Releasing It". I am enlightened.
I understand now that the GPL lets Lindows get away with not granting free (as in beer) access to their branches, but I still believe that Lindows is taking a proprietary attitude towards use of GPL'd software, and that that isn't healthy. Making the source code freely available in the form of a bunch of tar files certainly isn't going to hurt sales one iota, just as Napster never hurt the music publishers. In fact, given that it would cast them in a much more favorable light among those who want to support them but have a hard time viewing them as anything but just another greedy corpocracy, do you have any idea as to why they wouldn't?
I wonder why Mr. AC bothered posting, as I can't think of any agenda that post could help (besides making the poster feel better).
I can only assume that it was the same AC that Bruce responded to.
Well... I could dream of some convoluted scenario where the second AC post was a Perens flunkie trying to discredit the first AC... but that's pretty wacky, even for me.
-------
Incite and flee.
Good point. While they're at at, they should make best value of the stockholder's investment by dealing crack, killing competitors and, for those special business lunches, prostitute children. Anything less would be a betrayal of business ethics.
The originals for those postings are here on Lindows.com's bulletin board. They come from Kevin Carmody, Lindows.com's president. That he wrote this stuff boggles my mind, but he wrote it.
Bruce
Bruce Perens.
I use this script to convert realplayer stuff into mp3's, which gives me heaps of stuff to listen to on the way to work. vsound will convert ANYTHING played on /dev/dsp into a sox stream.
[craig@furby /ulb]$ cat realplay_to_mp3.sh /ulb]$ realplay_to_mp3.sh http://www.npr.org/ramfiles/totn/20030117.totn.01. ram science_friday-bruce_perens.mp3
vsound -s -d realplay "$1" | sox -V -t au - -t wav -r 44100 -w - | lame -b 48 --verbose - "$2"
[craig@furby
Wow. In spite of RedHat's efforts to support linux development and to give a professional face to linux, many posters seem to argue that they might become "the Next Microsoft" and have a malevolent influence via their stand on KDE. Since RedHat has been rather benign and open in this regard, can we all stop pissing on them yet?
Disclaimer:
I am an anonymous cowturd not associated with RedHat in any way.
Bindow-ver and take it up the ass!
Last I heard they were sponsoring kde-look.org and keeping them from going under and they are testing the new version. The Linux Desktop Summit will certainly mention KDE once or twice. Money is coming to KDE because of work done by Lindows.com.
I have a friend who used it briefly on the machine it came preloaded on. But when he realized it was rigged so he couldn't use any source code without geting gcc, glib, and god-knows-what-else installed, he wiped it and went through several distributions before landing on (ugh) Caldera.
"that's not encryption - it's a new perl script that I'm working on..." - from some Matrix parody
Michael Robertson is a creature of habit. His plan is fairly simple:
/. community wants to read the FAQ's and other documents on Lindows.com and treat them as Halloween documents you will enjoy the effort.
1. Use free products that others develop and repackage them with marketing and a some technology tossed in as required. MP3.com did not invent or own or license the MP3 codec.
2. Market your product in such a way as to avoid display of the weaknesses and hide your original intent. MP3.com reinventing the music business to benefit artists - didn't work did it, music business won out.
3. Hold a conference that appears to be open and inviting, then drive your own agenda. MP3 Summit.
If the
All the best.
Microsoft is getting real competition in the OEM operating systems field FOR THE FIRST TIME.
I think zealots are loving it, but pretend that they are after open source and not after defusing Microsoft...
Regardless of how the market twists, you people aren't happy. This is the most progress on the x86, EVER, for Linux, for anti-Microsoft, for both.
Cover your eyes and click this link!
I am an indie musician and from my perspective, MP3.com was the best thing that ever happened to indie music. I went from having only local fans hear my music in the local pub, to litereally thousands of fans all over the world. MP3.com shared revenues for the first time with indie musicians.
Since Michael has left and Universal has taken over, it's gotten worse for us musicians at MP3.com. I'd love to see Robertson come back to MP3.com.
I attended FOUR MP3.com summits. All were very fair, well attended, and great shows.
Angeles
I say we take this outside and let them duke it out like men...
c ha el+Robertson&q2=Bruce+Perens&B1=Make+a+fight%21&co mpare=1&langue=us
http://googlefight.com/cgi-bin/compare.pl?q1=Mi
Clearly Robertson has emerged as the Champion for taking Linux to the masses. Perhaps Bruce Perens is jealous.
(I started to listen to the NPR program, but after a few minutes I was so bored, I lost interest.)
Sounds like classic sour grapes.
Red Hat has always been about selling a brand, not a product. I remember back in the mid 90's Bob Young talked about doing just that.
He compared his business plan to what Heinz ketchup and Harley Davidson do. All the japs make a better and cheaper motorcycle, but people flock to the Harley Davidson "experience". Ketchup is ketchup is ketchup, but people pay more for Heinz because they recognize the brand name.
I think that's why you see Red Hat pushing it's own cert programs, training, custom programming and what not.
Has no one seen Lord of the Rings?
I'm Rick James with mod points biatch!
It would be fairly trivial.
If they were servers, just convert them over slowly as part of an upgrade process.
If they're desktop boxes, you just flash new hard drive images onto them. Your users wouldn't know the difference. If you have power users with non-imagable machines, you just upgrade them later when you're doing some other upgrade on their box(ie, when Red Hat goes out of date and you need to upgrade anyway).
There are very very few differences between Linux distributions.
I hear Richard Stallman was behind it.
You get to help choose what actually goes into the distro, what more could a geek want?
Sdelat' Ameriku velikoy Snova!
Lindows really doesn't care if it alienates the Linux community. The attitude is one of "okay, thanks for the thousands of hours of work developing the backbone of the system guys, we'll take it from here, now get lost." The only times Lindows expresses interest in the welfare of the whole community are those times when it will benefit Lindows at least as much as it benefits anyone else. Michael Robertson, while a very charismatic and engaging speaker, is a smooth talking freeloader. Open Source vs. Microsoft, just like MP3 vs. RIAA, is just another easy ride to glory and riches. A while after Lindows becomes profitable, I bet Michael Robertson would sell it to the highest bidder (probably AOL). The really scary thing about Lindows is, Michael Robertson might have as much as $300 million dollars in cash and stock from the MP3.com buyout. Lindows believes that they will win because they've got the dough, and because the marketing+sales department is probably as big as the engineering department. I'm afraid that, because of this, the general public might begin to think LinuxLindowsAOL, just like they currently think PC"Pentinum"Microsoft.
Now that I've really ripped on Lindows.com, I really have to say that LindowsOS itself is pretty darn easy to use. Click-N-Run is great for installing software. The OS installation really takes less than 10 minutes on my Duron 850 and my XP1800+. But, that far from makes up for the careless treatment of the community.
A solution to the problem with music today
Hey, Bruce. How does it feel to have your old company pull out of the conference because you are not speaking? Looks like they miss you a lot :)
Anyway, Lindows' loss . . .
Sdelat' Ameriku velikoy Snova!
Unless of course you invite the mainstream media and then bore them to death by talking about the kernel.
LindowsOS has an awesome user community. When you charge $99 for access, there are no trolls. http://forum.lindows.com/.
A solution to the problem with music today
They have their own, security-controlled repository at http://software.lindows.com/ (the repository appears empty until a properly authenticated Click-N-Run request is received, at which point the server gives only the files needed for that install).
If you're going to bash someone, at least get the facts straight. CNR version 0.90 might've used Debian's servers, but that was an alpha test version. Version 3.0 is very very very different.
A solution to the problem with music today
Not to play a Devil's Advocate for Lindows here, but what has HP done for Linux that's so fucking revolutionary and praiseworthy? From all I know they laid off bunch of linux people and beefed up the Microsoft strategy.
In short, fuck HPQ. Even Dell is more committed to linux than HP will ever be. Bunch of corporate whores, they are.
If he runs to form, he'll sell Lindows to Microsoft after causing problems for open source licenses in general.
I'm not much of a Linux geek but I feel really sorry for you guys that M.R. is directing his attention your way. You would not believe the amount of trouble this man can cause for you. Treacherous is a pitiably inadequate word.
*feh* "Insiders can download source" indeed. I am not sure I could even come up with four words more antithetical to the WHOLE FREE SOFTWARE CONCEPT and yet this guy is already creating that situation?
I could see RMS suing to STOP Mike calling his thing 'GNU/Linux' ;)
I was just listening to Science Friday on NPR (rm stream is available at the Science Friday site), and it had both Micheal Robertson and Bruce Perens on the show talking about Open Source Software. I wonder how the discussion would have gone if Bruce knew at the time that Robertson had just bumped him off the agenda? :)
On the other hand, that show did convince my Mom to switch to Linux (her old Windows machine just died). And it wasn't Bruce Perens going on about freedom and rights, it was Robertson talking about how much cheaper it was. So he seems to be taking the right tack to get regular people to use Linux...
i used it for bout 2 mins, then switched to slack.
SimonTek
Since Lindows is not in the pull-down list (at http://counter.li.org/) for "Distributions" it would be difficult to say what percentage of the 13% belongs to Lindows (possibly need to update the list for accurate data collection).
Linux is much more than an alternative...
However, there's this: if you do buy lindows and get the source code, the GPL allows you to redistribute it any way you like. You can give it away, or sell it for $9, or $99, or $999, whatever.
Interesting point you've drawn out here... Consider this though: Which names make more immediate sense to the common man (i.e. the category both MS and Linux are aiming to serve):
:) So maybe, Redhat's Bluecurve is a step in the right direction (even though default RH 8.0 on my PIII /128 MB HP is a dog).
Media Player, SQL Server, Internet Explorer, Outlook
v/s
XMMS, Postgres, Konqueror/Mozilla/Galeon, Evolution
(OK: "Outlook" seems dicey, but the app does open saying "Your Outlook for today..." and shows the tasks, appointments and unread mails that day -- makes more sense than "Evolution")
I mean, does a Linux user have to think of the application's *name* as a "gee-whiz" feature?
Sure, Lindows may be GPL compliant. I haven't even looked at the code yet, but consider this:
;)
;)
A company wants to write a Linux distribution which will seem all Linuxy and open and free and stuff (and redundant?), but keep the monopoly for future versions and support:
They write a simply code-obfuscator (take the preprocessor output, now align it oddly, change all the var names to a,b,c,d...), work on the original code, obfuscate it, and publish that.
All the source code is there, you can even recompile it and see its the same - but understanding it would take you years... Only they could ever publish a bug-patch, an upgrade... they'd get a monopoly on that code.
And it's all GPL, too.
You can even obfuscate just the patches, and publish them with the originals and a patch-applying-script, so no one can accuse you of obfuscating the source - this is simply how we write, you'd say..
You could even sell the non-obfuscated code for money
The point of this foolishness is: GPL does not gurantee free software, if people don't want it to. Some of the 'free software' I've seen can't really be maintained by someone who didn't write it - they simply never took the time to comment, structure, etc.
My other
I know that you didn't profess to be a Heinz expert but the history of Heinz may prove some worth.
Heinz believed in people and quality.
---
The first product was horseradish, and the glass of its bottle was clear. There was a reason: while competitors extended their horseradish with fillers, concealed from view in green glass jars, Founder Henry John Heinz took his stand on quality and proudly displayed his product in transparent bottles. See? No leaves, no wood fiber, no turnip filler.
---
As for people - he built and maintained on site accommodation for his factory workers. Laundry & food, education, child care and other things were supplied as part of the worker renumeration. The families ate in huge dining halls.
Heinz was one of the few companies to not lay people off during the depression. In fact he increased his workforce. He felt that American business had let the American people down by turning them onto the streets.
& btw. hardly anyone outside of American rides a Harley. They are the gayest bikes in the world
There are places where the networks are not touching,and there are places where they are-Boeing's Lori Gunter
In Soviet Russia Americans look educated
There are places where the networks are not touching,and there are places where they are-Boeing's Lori Gunter
I'm not sure that the question in question possesses any but questions par se can have that attribute.
There are places where the networks are not touching,and there are places where they are-Boeing's Lori Gunter
no text
There are places where the networks are not touching,and there are places where they are-Boeing's Lori Gunter
Hey, he's just TRYING to make a buck with linux. What's so wrong with that (obligatory commie line removed...okay, replaced). You bleeding heart commies just want everything to be free but you're finding out that the only thing that keeps coming free is crap, the steaming kind, but so long as it's free, you're happy. Pfw. Commies.
Kevin Carmony - showman extraordinaire. Think Barnum Bailey Circus where the show is the only thing, the substance is replaceable. Note that Lindow's has changed it's course over the last year.
/. anonymously if it suits his desires.
What happened to their "Windows comaptibility" they were touting last year? They don't even talk about running MS Office, but rather "office applications".
Sheesh. By the way, Kevin will post to
You can also access the source for each package by clicking on the "Specifications" tab on each product page. I'm amazed at how many people repeat this "no source code" line without actually ever looking for source.
Now, good luck getting ahold of Xandros source!
I guess that's ok when he's harassing Microsoft by naming their product "Lindows". But once he starts the same sort of behavior towards the Linux community, it isn't ok anymore?
Micheal Robertson's goal appears to be to build a business and make a lot of money by leveraging the hard work of a large number of GPL contributors.
This is what he also did with my.mp3.com -- and the company was killed by the major labels (Universal now owns mp3.com).
Will the Linux community defend their IP?
Bruce
Bruce Perens.
I, once upon a time, shoehorned a 1.x kernel SlackWare distro onto a Tandy MM10(4MB RAM,130MB HD,512k VRAM); It ran better than the preinstalled DOS/Windows3.1. This was my first computer and I did not know that Microsoft was "Evil" and Linux was "Sacred". All I did was buy a book that interested me and found out that you could do more with a computer than play Doom till your eyeballs fell out.A money hungry CEO who thinks he has found a way to make that money off the backs of people who don't say that much had better watch out for people like me who can"t type non C++ worth a crap,i.e there are still those of us who skirt the edges of the known world.This is the most I have written on the Internet in 10 years.See you next decade.
On a completely different note, did anyone notice how the spokesperson for Lindows said that this was a conference about "desktop Linux for customers who'll use it, not for programmers who'll develop it" .... So why aren't consumers invited? They're inviting programmers and people from other companies who'll sit around and act like they're interested in each other's products.
It's just B.S. Let it go.
exact same hardware, better distro :)
The odds are high that Lindows will die a slow and painful death, but it doesn't mean that it's death (painful and slow though it be) will not help the Linux community.
What needs to happen is not a fancy smancy corporate face for linux (i.e., Lindows) but a viable platform for PCs that is user friendly. If that is built and it is free company's like HP, Dell, and others will use it. Becaues they can save money.
If a Linux based gaming platform that can run on future game machines is built that supports Maya, 3D Studio Max, and other development programers is built... it will be used.
It's not about who is going to MAKE MONEY, but rather, who is going to SAVE MONEY. Once there are decent browsers and support for all the latest graphics cards then you'll see the gamers migrate. And once they migrate the rest will follow.
Myabe he should pay the people who did the work on the conference then?
I have a friend who used it briefly on the machine it came preloaded on. But when he realized it was rigged so he couldn't use any source code without geting gcc, glib, and god-knows-what-else installed, he wiped it and went through several distributions before landing on (ugh) Caldera.
"apt-get install gcc"
Have you got your LWN subscription yet?
The cheapest Lycoris at WalMart.com is $250+ now. I wouldnt' buy a Lycoris machine at $199 anyway because I have a copy of Lycoris here, as well as Redhat8.
The truth doesn't care what I think.
Fortunately, the responsibility for providing evidence is on the part of
the person making the claim, not the critic. It is not the responsibility
of UFO skeptics to prove that a UFO has never existed, nor is it the
responsibility of paranormal-health-claims skeptics to prove that crystals
or colored lights never healed anyone. The skeptic's role is to point out
claims that are not adequately supported by acceptable evidcence and to
provide plausible alternative explanations that are more in keeping with
the accepted body of scientific evidence.
-- Thomas L. Creed, The Skeptical Inquirer, Vol. XII,
No. 2, pg. 215
- this post brought to you by the Automated Last Post Generator...