Slashdot Mirror
Another Xandros 2.0 Deluxe Review
JimLynch writes in about his review: "If we had to define Xandros 2.0 with one word, we'd pick 'usable.' This time around, the folks at Xandros have refined their product significantly and come up with something that makes Linux quite comfortable and easy to use, even if you're a total newbie to the OS. Obviously the Gentoo crowd won't be interested in this distro, but Windows users who haven't used Linux before or have had bad experiences with other distros will particularly enjoy this release. The time to begin the desktop migration to Linux might very well have arrived with Xandros 2.0." An earlier review was also favorable.
did you see the screenshots?
That's a lawsuit just waiting to happen... All the sub-apps like the Task Manager and all the Properties windows are a perfect copy! Very impressive.
The review doesn't mention one of the most important criteria: what are the copying conditions for Xandros?
-- Ed Avis ed@membled.com
I agree with you on that. Linux needs a lot of work on hardware support and graphic interface frontends before it can be used comparably to Windows or Mac OS as a desktop. Right now, the initial install and setup are easy enough in a distro like RH9.. as long as all hardware supported and can be autoconfigured. If not, it almost certainly means having to configure things through a command line. It's gotten a lot better, but it still has a long way to go, especially if the user wants to do anything more than basic Web/mail/word processing. I mean, RH9 doesn't even include MP3 codecs for XMMS. Network autoconfiguration has gotten a lot better (DHCP works a lot better in RH9 than it did for me in 7.3) but anything beyond Ethernet-to-broadband-router (even dial-up) still takes a lot of work with configuration files and such IMHO. And out of the box, even Red Hat 9 isn't able to set up Samba by itself, so there goes filesharing to Windows machines on the network. Basically my point is that it's gotten a lot better, but there is still a REALLY long way to go before it can be considered for widespread desktop use.
Sorry, my karma just ran over your dogma.
The Launch button (similar to Windows' Start button) is a good place to begin.
That is where I stopped reading.
If you want to drag people away from the abomination that is windows, you have to offer something better instead of just copying the crap blindly.
Assorted stuff I do sometimes: Lemuria.org
Linux is not ready for the desktop. They are not even close. Not now. Not ever.
Thanks for your comments. You could be even more helpful if you'd tell us what is wrong with the linux desktop (it must be pretty big if you think it'll never be fixed).
The complaint I hear from most people boils down to "it isn't windows". This is a fair point; we all enjoy what we're used to. This is why I'm pleased to see Lindows, lowering one entry barrier people have to using linux. Secondly I'm glad to see some OEMS selling Open Source apps with windows installations (one example I know of personally is some cheaper computers being shipped with OpenOffice).
Anyway, back on point... if Xandros is really "simple, easy and fast" as the review says, then Xandros has the upper hand over most other linux distributions. People will only become used to Linux when it is so transparent that they aren't even aware that there is a different OS, and these qualities in Xandros really help achieve that.
Hmmm is this really any improvement? The biggest complaint many people have with Microsoft and Windows, is that its proprietary nature stiffles any innovation. I'd much rather see someone make a desktop that expands beyond XP then tries its hardest to emulate it. Id be more excited about a DEXP, Doesn't Emulate XP then an XPDE.
What's another word for Thesaurus?
-Steve Wright
At $40+, you are paying for support, brand, and peace of mind. That is 'support' as in technical support for yourself, and financial support for the developer.
At $3, all you are paying for is media costs and s&h.
Get a grip, man!
The unofficial
Linux on the desktop will happen when its ready to happen. All this pushing does nothing to aide linux.
All that will happen is less experienced users will hear all the fuss and see phrases like "A free windows alternative" and attempt to give it a go.
Assuming they find their way through the installer, they will find that their modems, web cams etc dont work and various other niggly issues that still cause alot of problems.
The brave end-user that tried it out will head back to windows, never to enter linux territory again and whats more, will likely tell all his friends not to bother. The hype will be countered with anti-hype and things stay as they are.
When linux is viable on the desktop (for Joe Public) it will happen, trying to push it before this point will just be detrimental.
I cant understand the push anyway. Does the linux community need to validate its existance by taking on the evil empire?
I've never really felt Windows was ready for the desktop (look at all the security vulnerabilities), so who cares if Linux isn't either.
What are they giving back to the community? Name one project that they support and fund.
Also, to you idiots who keep going on about Linux and the desktop. I have to use a total of 5 computers. 3 desktop, 1 latop and 1 server. Only on of them is windows. It is the one not ready for the desktop. I would rather use KDE or Gnome then windows any day. Face it windows just isnt ready for the desktop!
If you want a Windows experience, use Windows. If you're openminded and you want to try Firebird, Thunderbird, OpenOffice, Gimp, XMMS, Korganizer, Evolution, Gramofile and the tons of cool apps available for Linux, then try a distro.
I don't mean this as a troll but you're setting yourself up for a major disappointment if you just want to have a Windows experience on a Linux machine. Linux is not a cheap Windows. It's Linux.
Why does everyone knock on Gentoo claiming it's hard to use. I'm a linux newbie and have been for about 5 years. I tried Caldera, couldn't get the hang of it. Tried Red Hat didn't like it either. Tried Gentoo, I love it. It's the first distro that didn't leave me confused after the install. Sure Red Hat and Caldera installed easier, but Gentoo was better documented, and since I had to do many things manually I learned what would need done in the future if I needed to change something. For instance under Red Hat I didn't know what I needed to do to add another hard drive to my system, or to change network cards.
With Gentoo during the install I learned how to create filesystems, configure and compile the kernel, and lots of other stuff. It takes more work, but I wouldn't call it difficult. Grandma couldn't do it, but my dad or my 13 year old cousin probably could.
Non gratis rodentus anus
"this distribution would be seen by geeks as the best desktop Linux released to date."
Hardly. Geeks would rather use something that's truly free. Once you've used Linux for a bit installing a free Linux distro along with few Mozilla programs and WINE isn't that big a deal.
My fear with Xandros, Lindow, etc is that people new to Linux will come to think that paying for your Linux distro is normal and they will continue to keep using these mostly proprietary distros. It's not like I've never paid for a box set, but that was only to support a vendor who has the best intentions for OSS in general. Can you truly say that about all of these Jonny come lately distros?
Like I've said a billion times before. There is nothing wrong with using Proprietary software but why not try go with one of the Free distros? Its not like there isn't a shitload of information out there on how to do what you want with Fedora, Mandrake, Debian, Slcakware etc. Using and learning a Free distro and then passing that knowledge along to the world is what makes Linux and its Free distros great. I don't see the payoff in spending my time finding bugs for Lindows. The same isn't true for Fedora, Slackware, Debian, Mandrake etc.
Use what you want of course and all that. IMO though its the duty of Linux veterans and Slashdot to support the Free OSS distros to insure that the future of Linux isn't a bunch of closed source payware distros. Let's help insure that the best software remains Free.
If you wanna get rich, you know that payback is a bitch
If you had said Linux is not ready for the average Joe Consumer purchasing their first computer at Best Buy, you might have a leg to stand on. But it most certainly *is* ready for the desktop. You can't make the claim that just because it doesn't run every single Windows application out there, that it isn't ready, because Mac OSX doesn't either, and no one with more than two brain cells would claim OSX isn't ready for the desktop.
I could be wrong though. I don't use Linux. I use FreeBSD. But considering that the GUI/desktop portion is exactly identical to Linux, I don't think I am. I use FreeBSD/XFree86/KDE on my desktop at work and at home, including a laptop. I still have a Windows partition, but that's ONLY for the use of ONE highly specialized program. Everything else is native FreeBSD. Web browsing, email, word processing, spreadsheets, digital cameras, photo processing, music, etc, etc. There's no common task you can do on your desktop that I can't do on mine, and just as easily.
What's holding Linux and BSD back is not the desktop. That battle has been won. What's missing is easy to perform system administration. But for many systems, that's not too far off. It was actually easier to install and configure FreeBSD on my laptop than it was to do the same with WinXP.
Don't blame me, I didn't vote for either of them!
Linux *IS* ready for the desktop if you can configure it. Linux may not be ready for Joe User however (some distros aren't FOR Joe User).
Just becouse a company charges a price for something does not make that product automaticly propitary. The GPL is all about Free as in Free Speech, not Free as in Free Beer. As long as Xandros and company keep the entire source open than there is absolutly nothing wrong with charging for it instead of just letting people download it for free.
IMO, this is where the Linux cimmunity has gotten it wrong. We think that "Free Software" means you dont have to pay for it and that is not the intention of the GPL.
Go read the license agian and you will see that there is NOTHING that prohibits you from selling a program as long as the code for said program is made available to the comminity and people can change it to there hearts content.
You could be even more helpful if you'd tell us what is wrong with the linux desktop
OK, I'll bite.
1) where is the linux desktop? What is it called? Where do I get it?
2) When will cut/copy/and paste work?
3) How do I install new software?
4) How do I install new hardware?
Its hard to think of others, because I've used Linux for 9 years now, and am used to it, but there are plenty of things it needs before going prime time on the desktop. And ripping off Window's GUI is about the last priority. Why not rip off Apple? Back in 95 that is what Windows did.
I have never used Xandros, I'm sure it's fine. But the habit of the reviewer of saying things like "even a total newbie to Linux will have an easy time navigating" really bugged me. How does he know? Did he (a) have a total newbie (or, even better, several of them) try it? Or (b) did he just play with it and think to himself "hmm... this is _really_ easy for me, so it must be at least fairly easy for a newbie".
Since he didn't go to any lengths to claim it was (a), I'll assume (b). In which case saying something like "a total newbie will find this easy" is quite meaningless. Why? Because - as anyone who has experience with usability testing will attest - it's really hard to predict what a "total newbie" will and won't find confusing. _Especially_ when you're an advanced user (say, a reviewer on "extremetech.com".
That's all.
grib.
maybe
Having two desktop environments is confusing to people who aren't used to all the choices that open source software offers. And those are exactly the people in the Xandros target market. My father started using computers after he turned 50. He's used Xandros since 1.0, and had Corel Linux before that.
Now that he's been using Linux for a few years, he installs GNOME libraries on his own so that he can use GNOME applications. But when he first started out, having one desktop environment, and having one kind of each application was enough.
My mother on the other hand, still uses Windows. She's had Windows 98 installed since 1998, and now has a start menu that is two times as long as the screen. She gets perplexed by all the options. If i were to install Linux for her, it would probably be Xandros or something else that is simple (as opposed to having lots of options).
Xandros customers also have access to Xandros message boards. On them users and a few Xandros employees help each other with support issues. If someone heard that Gaim is better than Kopete and wanted to try it out, i'm willing to bet they could get the help they needed.
But if it's a person's first time on a new desktop, they'll likely get confused by the difference between KDE and GNOME applications, and wonder which of the three or four instant messaging programs they should use.
Jeremy McNaughton
I dont want Linux to look/behave/feel like Windows
Linux is also about choice. What you like, someone else won't like - and vice versa. That's why you can choose not to install XPDE, whereas others might choose to.
The article lists 3 negative points:
1) No VPN "wizard"
This is absurdly nitpicky. It might be a neat extra feature, but I don't think any OS has a VPN wizard in the base install.
2) America's Army isn't bundled.
Excuse me? Are you insane? Why in the name of heaven would Xandros bundle a 3D game with their OS that is being targeted at corporate desktops? Windows doesn't bundle any games besides a few amusements of their own, and I can't think of another distribution that would package any major 3rd-party game, let alone one that is as politically loaded as America's Army. Linux is very international, you know... What ever happened to acquiring software and installing it? Who says it has to be bundled with the OS?
3) No Gnome
While I would be the first to argue for Gnome over KDE in the first place, including Gnome with Xandros would really be the wrong decision. Gtk libraries are an inexcusable omission if that's the case, but Gnome is an entirely separate desktop environment. Xandros is taking a stand for one DE and I respect that, given that they are targeting their distribution to a very specific market. Windows doesn't include Litestep, OSX doesn't include a full OS9 environment, so I fail to see the precedent among commercially-targeted OSes. Both Gnome and KDE are designed from the ground-up to work in a vacuum, and any interoperability is, at the moment, kludgey at best.
-3Suns
~~~~
The Revolution will be Slashdotted
Once upon a time (late last year, actually), I read an article about an electric car. It's a very expensive and impractical one in many ways, mind you, but they got one part really, really right: the range on a single charge was approximately 300 miles.
Now, you can read that two ways. Since I'm familiar with electric car technology, I know that you're lucky to get 45 miles out of a single charge in most electric cars, and the best ones can stretch to about 90. I also know that my little Nissan Sentra has a range of approximately 360 miles. So I looked at that 300 mile range number, and thought, "Holy Crap! They just leaped from 1/4 the range of my Sentra to 5/6 the range -- that's phenomenal!"
The person who wrote the article, however, presumably wasn't familiar with the technology. Or perhaps he drives a car that gets 40+mpg and carries 16 gallons. I'm not sure why, but they looked at that 300 mile range and called the range "extremely limited".
This is how I see these "is Linux ready for the desktop?" discussions.
If you've been playing with Linux and Windows for a few years, and then you try something like Xandros, you're likely to say "Holy Crap! They have made a huge leap forward in hardware compatibility, integration, ease of installation and use, functionality and compatibility, akin to the functionality of Windows 98!"
If you've been playing with Windows exclusively, and you don't see or understand the progress that has been made in the last few years, you're likely to say "Well, I clicked something and got an error message I didn't understand, and it didn't set up exactly like my Windows box did, so I don't think it's ready for the desktop."
I can play 3D shooter games. I can run 95% of the programs I want for work and play. I can listen to streaming radio stations, download account information from my bank, and SSH into my email server at home to bypass the company firewall. It's not parity with Windows XP, but it's getting mighty close.
And it's a heck of a lot more ready for the desktop than Windows 95 was -- and we all used that once upon a time.