Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

OpenLindows.com: Wherefore Art Thou?

Posted by timothy on from the apt-get-transparent dept.

Joe Barr writes "I ran across a curious website recently: OpenLindows.com. The name alone intrigued me. It gave rise to speculation about a weird mix of free-as-in-beer and free-as-in-speech alternative to the $99/year Click-N-Run software subscription offered by LindowsOS, the most Windows-like/proprietary Linux distribution out there. This is a report on what I found, and perhaps even more importantly, what I didn't."

6 of 256 comments (clear)

  1. For us Non-Lindows people by Dareth · · Score: 4, Interesting

    What keeps a normal Lindows user from editing their /etc/apt/sources.list and apt-get installing away?

    Is there some kind of design limitation in Lindows, obscure config file layout to keep these people clickin and paying?

    --

    I only look human.
    My mother is a halfling and my dad is an ogre, so that makes me an Ogreling
  2. Community by vosbert · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Interesting how the author mentions community. Does a great software program really need a community? Can't there just be a great product without community? I assume good software will automatically attract a community, but perhaps this is not the case anymore. Maybe it is just as important to produce a great product as it is to promote it.

  3. Re:lindows... I still don't get it by thinkninja · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I understand Lindows better than OpenLindows. The WalMart bargin basement box has an interface that the average computer user (the much maligned Joe Sixpack) is familiar with. To them Windows == Computers (yes, I know this is a Bad Thing).

    OpenLindows, however, seems to require as much effort as installing any other Linux distribution.

    So what niche does it cater for, exactly?

    --
    "The number of Unix installations has grown to ten, with more expected." (Unix Programmer's Manual, 2nd ed.; june 1972)
  4. Re:OpenLindows.com? by HiThere · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Actually, he has it almost right.

    There's nothing stoping you from running apt-get on Lindows, except lack of knowledge. What you end up with is Lindows with some Debian packages installed. Not Debian.

    Personally, I don't think that any distro that encourages people to run as root deserves to live, but that's the main fault of Lindows. And that was a conscious choice. They did include apt-get, so there's no problem with upgrading from Debian. So you can't either fault Lindows for crippling their distro, or fault /.ers for suggesting that they redirect their /etc/apt/sources.list to Debian. It's a reasonable approach.

    FWIW: I currently use LibraNet Linux. Another distribution that's essentially Linux. And I have more Debian links in my apt sources than I do LibraNet. In fact, it installed itself that way. But I have the LibraNet sources listed first, which means that if there's a version on the LibraNet site, that's the one that gets picked.

    --

    I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
  5. Re:Wherefore != Where by bperkins · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Excellent point, however your explanation of a misconception has a possible misconception.

    You say "Olde English," which if one takes to mean "Old English," would refer to the English spoken by the people in Britain before 1066.

    Although the word wherefore may have had Old English origins (the OED indicates that it does not), Romeo and Juliet is Elizabethan English.

  6. Maybe no one uses Lindows??? by rindeee · · Score: 5, Interesting

    After all, every machine I've seen my peers purchase from WalMart.com or Tiger gets reformatted and Windows 98 installed on it from the old CD they have lying around. For $199 it's tough to bit...and Lindows blows.

    I have purchased a few of them, installed SuSE 8.2 and made Hylafax servers out of them. Blah.

    ER