Knoppix Variant Offers Full NTFS Write Support
mache writes "Full NTFS write support for Knoppix is under discussion on Knoppix Ideas forum and it looks that Knopper will include Captive into Knoppix 3.4. The best part of Live CD with full NTFS write support is that it actually exists in LinuxDefender, a remastered Knoppix distribution made by Bitdefender, presented at LinuxConf 2003, the annual Romanian Linux Users Group (RLUG) conference."
..is how it can offer better hardware detection and often better features than other, "commercial" Linux distros?
Anyone has internal information on how Knoppix is developed and maintained?
obviously no. If someone has a valid XP licence they should be allowed to use it in any way they wish to and this includes the NTFS driver.
- Boot from CD to try it out.
- Convert to dual boot. There would be a utility to re-partition, install and configure for dual-boot. Let the user keep it dual-boot while they find substitutes for any Windows-only programs that Wine can't handle.
- Convert to Linux only
You could give these out like AOL disks and slowly convert the installed base. There could be a utility to detect existing win32 programs and check their status in the Wine application list.This would be the logical extension to Bruce Perens' UserLinux idea.
However the EULA also states that any use of the software not expressly granted to the end user is reserved by Microsoft. This way Microsoft can say OK for friends and NO for competitors. Did you already forget when Microsoft threatened MS Visual FoxPro users some months ago who used the same trick?
Ditch Microsoft then no such troubles.
Just curious:
How well does NTFS read-only work?
Does it support > 2GB NTFS files on x86 machines?
If it does stuff like that reliably then I might consider using it for certain sort of backups. In many cases I won't be too bothered about permissions and the other stuff.
obviously no. If someone has a valid XP licence they should be allowed to use it in any way they wish to and this includes the NTFS driver.
The flaw in your argument: use of "obviously" and "should" instead of giving a reason why Microsoft would allow this. (Allow? Yes. Until their EULA is declared illegal or void, it's a legally binding agreement with MS software users - even when it's stupid.)