Slashdot Mirror


TheOpenCD 1.4 Released

Lykos writes "From OpenCD's website: 'TheOpenCD is a collection of high quality Free and Open Source Software. The programs run in Windows and cover the most common tasks such as word processing, presentations, e-mail, web browsing, web design, and image manipulation.' This is a great little package to leave lying around your friends' workplace to convince them to go opensource. =) Lots of quality programs in one convenient package."

23 of 278 comments (clear)

  1. No Frozen Bubble? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Seriosuly, isn't this the first item on *everyone's* install list?

    1. Re:No Frozen Bubble? by The+Snowman · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Seriosuly, isn't this the first item on *everyone's* install list?

      When I install Windows XP, it goes something like this:

      1. Install service pack, install Windows Update patches
      2. "ungayify" Windows by reverting to Windows Classic theme, old-school permissions and file sharing, etc. 2000 had the right idea, XP "Professional" "is not."
      3. Install open source applications such as Mozilla, OpenOffice, Gimp, Vim, etc.
      4. Never use Outlook or IE again except for Windows Update

      The only thing Microsoft has on any Windows system I install is Windows itself. The rest of their junk is just that: junk. The OS is decent if you put it behind a firewall, even better if you never plug the computer in.

      --
      24 beers in a case, 24 hours in a day. Coincidence? I think not!
    2. Re:No Frozen Bubble? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      i don't like windows unless it's in "classic" mode either, but surely you can come up with a better word than gay. how about, hetero. how hetero is it to have your windows in that mode.

    3. Re:No Frozen Bubble? by cfuse · · Score: 2, Insightful
      Seriosuly, isn't this the first item on *everyone's* install list?

      In a word, no.

      Sick to death of "it's free, the UI was designed by a guy with autism, and the help system and documentation are non-existant but it's still the bestest software EVAR!" brand of advocacy.

      And remember, if you don't just 'know' how the software works, it's your fault. Documentation is for idiots. Clear examples are unnecessary. Everything must be driven from the command line with 50 case sensitive switches with no relationship to the options they represent.

      90% of people care about the way it looks/feels, not the fact that it's 'better'.

  2. Re:Oh great by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    There's a surprising amount of people selling Free software to uninformed people.

    Of course, some folks wouldn't mind paying ~$5 for a CD full of free software if they have slow Internet connections. But yeah, it would be nice if the money went to the OpenCD people, rather than the eBay middlemen.

  3. Re:Oh great by penguinoid · · Score: 4, Insightful

    There's a surprising amount of people selling Free software to uninformed people.

    And this is bad why? It spreads the free software to people who wouldn't have otherwise gotten it.

    "I believe in parting a fool and his money as soon as possible" -- someone

    --
    Don't waste your vote! Vote for whoever you want, unless you live in a swing state it won't matter anyways
  4. Re:Oh great by sohojim · · Score: 5, Insightful
    There's a surprising amount of people selling Free software to uninformed people.

    People like SuSE and RedHat, for instance?

    Check www.gnu.org if you're still unclear on whether you can sell free software.

    Hint: you can.

  5. No it isn't. by cnelzie · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Leaving that CD around won't convince anybody to go to OpenSource software. I don't have the time to look at some CD that was left around by someone attempting to tempt me to 'go over' to their side.

    As the Purchasing Agent and the entire IT Staff I get all sorts of DemoCD Crap sent to me all the time. All sorts of "Look at how awesome our crap is!", "Try it once and wonder how you ever did without it!"

    Most of it is all the same, they come from silly 'Microsoft Partners' all selling the same thing... Some kind of 'Revolutionary Business Management Software' that we would have to build our business around to get anything out of it. The rest of it is a mess of various CAD/CAM systems, most of which are the worst crap you ever did see...

    Do you know what I do with it all? I dump it into the trash first thing. I don't read the marketing hype, I don't waste a moment attempting to load something that then demands I 'Register' the Demo to get a Demo unlock code that does nothing but mark me as a 'target' to their sales drones...

    If we need software, my job is to head out and find it. I look at OSS first, because most of the little side software packages we need won't require massive retraining, like zip software or other utilities like that...

    So, would a CD Found laying around our office end up in any PC? Heck no, especially if it is unmarked... There could be all sorts of nasties on it we don't want/need on our network...

    Keep your CD to yourself unless someone mentions looking for a mess of free software, then give them the CD.

    --
    If you ignore the other uses of a tool, does that make the tool less useful, or you less useful?
  6. Shows free GUI software's problem by Karamchand · · Score: 5, Insightful

    If you take a look at the screenshots of all the included apps you'll notice the many different sets of widgets. One uses native W32 widgets, the other one GNOME-style, the third one has own.. - this will only confuse the user and in my opinion shows a large problem free GUI software is facing today.

    1. Re:Shows free GUI software's problem by TwinkieStix · · Score: 3, Insightful

      People complain about this all the time on Slashdot, but I don't think it's as bad as people think. I think that if the features are there and there is no-more usable alternative for the same cost, the interface isn't that big of a selling point.

      Look at winamp. It's always had a non-standard interface and before microsoft started bundling the same features into windows, was the de-facto standard media player.

      Another example was the old Napster. Remember how it used buttons instead of tabs for the tabed-like interface? That took me, a slashdot reading geek a few extra minutes to figure out, yet it still managed to be the biggest thing in the news for several months.

    2. Re:Shows free GUI software's problem by Chris+Pimlott · · Score: 1, Insightful

      You cite exceptional examples. WinAmp was the first full-featured Windows MP3 player. Napster was the first huge p2p app. Both of them hit at just the right time to ride the MP3 wave to popularity.

      Many people probably used these applications in /spite/ of their interface; they were just so hot and unlike anything else at the time.

      Now, not to say there isn't some innovative FOSS software out there; but a lot of it is rather mundane, i.e. apps that already exist in the closed-source world. In the midst of all the competition, if a FOSS looks kinda weird and is not obviously head shoulders better than the competition, it's probably going to be a point against it.

    3. Re:Shows free GUI software's problem by AJWM · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Widgets, schmidgets.

      The web has taught people that buttons can look like just about any damn thing the designer pleases, and they'll happily point'n'click at anything that looks vaguely clickable. Different skins for media apps prove that.

      I'm not arguing that it's efficient, mind, but anyone who is confused over different widget sets has other, worse problems.

      --
      -- Alastair
  7. Re:Wouldn't a Web portal be a better idea? by bubkus_jones · · Score: 2, Insightful

    That would require an internet connection. At least with the cd, you can take it anywhere and use it on computers, internet connection or not.

  8. Re:Torrent by NineNine · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Well, they did it with multiple redundant trackers, but it looks like they're all dead. That's what I hate about BT. It's great when it works, but finding a reliable tracker is about as easy as finding Osama Bin Laden. The tracker software apparently needs a massive re-write.

  9. question about open source by shnives · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I have a general security question about open source software. I am not a programmer so bear with me if this is redundant. The idea I have is that open source would by nature be more vulnerable to viri, spywarez, etc because anyone can see the source code. wouldnt this be much easier for "evildoers" to take advantage of? obviously the argument that keeping source code secret makes it safer is a shaky one, kinda like to one about outlawing guns (then only outlaws will have em...) people are already finding tons of flaws in windsows, and M$ writing quality on the box doesnt seem to do much about this. and this is with little or no info on sourrce code. wouldnt this type of activity be much higher (if it is easier to do, more people will do it) with open source software? I think there are 2 reasons why linux virii are not a factor. 1 there are too few computers out there for anything to replicate itself. 2 more importantly, the linux crowd is a tech savvy one, keeping a regular eye on their machines, and if a problem is found they deal with it themselves. I see a big problem here with open source goin mainstream. even if open source became simple to install. ie fool proof gui, that said install, yes, no, back and next. sure more people would have it, but there will always be people that are not tech savvy. some of them may be very intelligent etc, but just do not have the time to worry about it. I know this is kinda off topic, but would be really interested to read what the /. crowd thinks about open source being more secure, and why.

    1. Re:question about open source by Jestrzcap · · Score: 5, Insightful

      An insightful post, and good points. I'd like to use a bit of an analogy to respond. Computers and computer system (home network, business networks, the internet) are becoming more and more akin to biology and ecosystems. Your first point is (to a point) right on. But it has less to do with number of system running linux, and more to do with the fact that most linux systems (server or otherwise) are not in fact running the same sets of software and have very different configurations. This means that if you have a virus targeted at a certain flaw in a certain system, the odds that you are going to find a significant number of those system to infect is minimal. Mutations allow for survival. This is why some people can still be killed by the common cold. With something as homogenous as windows (2k,xp,server2k3 are vunerable to all the same problems) you not only have a greater number of hosts to propigate to, you also have the same flaws that allow you to infect them. Mutations are required for survival.
      Your second point is good but I do not know that it is a correct assumption. Yes, most people who are going to use linux are more tech savvy, but that doesnt mean they are smart about things like securing their systems. They may be more equipped to deal with a problem, but the smart ones know enough to avoid the problem to begin with. Dont you think that 10 years is enough time to improve a product so that it doesnt fall victim to some of these hideous data destroying worms that happen monthly (sometimes weekly)? I'm not trying to bash Microsoft for their flaws so much (they do, after all have 100x more people working against them than for them), but they have not focused on making their product better over the years, just more desireable. Nowadays they are so big, the only thing they really need to concern themselves with is how can they make people (and companies) buy more of their products, any improvements they make are only done so to placate their customers.
      Does having the source code make something more of a security risk? The answer is really, only if it was hidden to begin with. The benefit to having everyone staring at your code, is that the people who intend to use the code will make sure that youve done a good job coding it and will point out the grevious errors youve made. Opening up closed souce is going to allow people to suddenly find all of those flaws at once because noone ever pointed them out before. Open source code is in a constant state of having its (if any) flaws fixed, and stable releases of such software should be significantly more bug/error/flaw free than similar closed software (again this all varies depending on who is writing the code).

      --
      "I have great faith in fools: Self confidence my friends call it." ~Edgar Allan Poe
  10. Re:Oh great by cybermace5 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Why don't you provide a link to some of your auctions? Do you talk and hawk OpenOffice and GIMP but fail to mention that they are free programs that could be downloaded if the poor modem user wanted to spend the time?

    I've seen some really bad examples on eBay. One guy was rebranding everything, QCad was LuxuriosityCAD, and then there was Luxuriosity Office. Basically, trying to profit from the work of others, or trick people into buying something they could have gotten for free.

    If your eBay blurbs do state that you are distributing open-source software for free, and only charging for media and shipping costs, then I'd consider you to be an exception to the rule.

    --
    ...
  11. Re:Fred Fish by tttonyyy · · Score: 2, Insightful
    and aminet, yeah nice memories... The difference though is that you rarely had source with the programs (they were mostly shareware) whereas you _must_ have them now because of the GPL. This is an order of magnitude better in my view.

    Oh, I completely agree. Not that there would be room on the disks. :) But back then the Fish Disks were invaluable for legally spreading around good free/shareware software at a time when the internet wasn't so commonly available.

    I think TheOpenCD is a good idea for increasing OSS availability/awareness, though I question it's validity in this day when everyone is used to just "downloading and installing". Also, everyone seems to want "the latest version" and OSS apps go through versions rapidly, quickly outdating the CD.

    --
    biopowered.co.uk - catalytically cracking triglycerides for home automotive use since 2008. Just say no to big oil!
  12. Re:Bittorrent sucks ass! by Wehesheit · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Not knowing how to use the program properly is not the programs fault. The problem is between the keyboard and the chair.

    --
    This P.I.G. will walk on the water, This P.I.G. will walk on the sea, This P.I.G. will walk whereever he wants.
  13. Re:convince...? by An+Onerous+Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    With 3200+ comments under your belt, you should be able to write your own rebuttal with half your brain tied behind your back, even if you don't believe it.

    Nevertheless, because I'm avoiding studying for finals, I'll dish out the standard reply:

    There are two reasons to choose a piece of open source software. The first is the pragmatic, is-this-the-best-fit reason. You choose an OSS app because it does what you want better than any of the alternatives.

    The often low-to-zero price is sometimes a big advantage from this perspective, but it is just one part of the overall fit. The availability of source code is another. Availability from multiple vendors and adherence to standards can also be attractive from this viewpoint.

    The second reason, of course, is all about freedom. This is the one that causes many people to embrace open source applications even when the proprietary world is kicking its butt as far as features and ease of use go. The freedom to explore, to experiment, to use in virtually any way you see fit. The freedom to modify and redistribute. Also, because anyone can take the product and fork it if they're unhappy, OSS packages generally have to avoid doing nasty things to annoy the user base. Spyware, malware, ad-ware, all becomes virtually impossible. Why? Because people don't want it, and because it's *free* nobody can force it on them.

    Look at the web browser situation. When IE doesn't have stiff competition, everyone writes HTML with an eye towards IE, not towards accepted standards. This gives Microsoft a great deal of control over how most of us experience the Internet.

    This is just one of many examples of how ordinary software users are affected by their choice of tools, and why software can be considered a worthwhile cause for non-developers.

    --

    You want the truthiness? You can't handle the truthiness!

  14. Re:Oh great by Snoopy77 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    If you would have read the whole advertisement on Ebay you would have seen that he clearly states that all the software on the CD is may be freely downloaded off the internet and that this CD is being provided simply as a convenience to those who don't have the time or bandwidth to download them all. And at $6.98 delivered to your door I don't think he's exactly ripping people off.

    --
    "She's a West Texas girl, just like me" - G.W Bush Iraqis
  15. Re:convince...? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    That's like somebody advocating the use of torx screws as opposed to phillips head.

    Oh yeah, TOTALLY the same thing as Free software versus proprietary software.

    Because, you know, phillips head screws come with 8-page LICENSES that tell you what brand of screw you can use, and how many toolboxes you can move it between, and, oh yeah, here's a 16-digit SCREWDRIVER ACTIVATION CODE! If you need to move to another room in your house, you have to re-enter to code. It only takes 30 minutes, tops!

    For me the best tool is the one that doesn't have strings attached. If I can't find one, I'll take the strings-attached version, but it better be *GOOD* (Photoshop, Mac OS X, VMWare .. that's about it).

  16. Re:Mirror here by FireBreathingDog · · Score: 2, Insightful
    To mail me: echo wgz2pxf4zg11lbjlwyxbhyb3q | tr bfghjlpqwxyz1234 .@acdeikmnorstuw

    I guess you don't want Windows users e-mailing you (unless they have Cygwin installed, that is).

    Sounds like a good plan if you ask me...