Xandros Recruiting Beta Testers

An anonymous reader writes "Looks like the folks at Xandros are getting ready for a new release of their Linux desktop. They're recruiting beta testers so those of you who like to try something new, you can sign up from here. No details about when or what to expect in the new release. Xandros always lets the other distros get the bugs out of the latest bleeding edge software before they do a new release so this should be another solid release with updated KDE, kernel, X, drivers, etc. Can't wait. Gotta get me on that beta list."

Comments

pointless

[Coneasfast]

why would i want to give my phone/address/etc information, to do a beta test, for a linux distribution that isn't even free!

Re:pointless

[Anonymous Coward]

why is the parent flaimbait? it is a legit question? what is this offering that other distributions aren't, why go to all the trouble?

Re:pointless

[Anonymous Coward]

so u can receive penis enhancement pills not only from email but thru ur mail.

Re:pointless

[ezHiker]

Xandros Business Edition offers a greater level of integration in Windows environments (particularly Active Directory environments) than any other distribution that I know of. It has Windows AD domain logon out of the box. It has a file manager which makes sharing files, changing domain permissions, and sharing files as easy as in Windows (if not easier). It also ships with Crossover Office. There a lot of other KDE customizations and enhancements that make migrating from Windows much easier.

These things might not be important to you, but for businesses looking to migrate form Windows to Linux, Xandros offers the best option out there right now that I'm aware of.

I wish the features in Xandros were available in the free distributions, but it doesn't seem that Windows interoperabilty is as great a priority with the other distros.

Re:pointless

[spagetti_code]

Because finally someone really *gets* what the problem is with linux - the damn thing is uninstallable by the rest of us. Sure - propeller heads can twist linux every which way, but if we really want to create a broadly acceptible, viable alternative to Windows, we need a distribution like Xandros.

If I had a $1 for every time a linux-head answered a question with "thats easy, you just... " and then typed a sequence of line noise... well, I'd be doing ok.

Xandros provides a simple way to get a user up and running with all the *main* needs met - word processor, browser, a well laid out control panel etc. Sure, down the track I'll figure out how to install that weird app I really want, but I'm up and running without so much as a mod-probe or apt-get.

Go Xandros!

Re:pointless

[sponger]

the problem with this way of thinking is that a network admin who should be adding machines to LAN should be able to setup these things on there own without any of these "config tools"

alternatively for the home user this is a good idea to help get people away from m$

Re:pointless

[Osty]

Because finally someone really *gets* what the problem is with linux - the damn thing is uninstallable by the rest of us.

IMHO, the "installation problem" has been solved for quite some time now. Most Linux installers (Debian excluded :) are easier to install than Windows. Therefore, it's also my opinion that distro developers are still spending too much time on initial installation and not enough time on the real problems. As I see it, the real problems right now are two-fold:

1. Linux is still hard to come by pre-installed, so in that case you're correct - installation is difficult. That's relative, though, because the installation of a pre-installed Windows PC is 0, while installing Linux will always require some work so long as it's not pre-installed.
2. Everything else. Applications. User interfaces. Hardware support. GNOME and KDE have made great strides in the desktop area, as have a number of applications, but there's still no coherent UI guidelines. As a developer, you get to make the choice between GNOME's guidelines, KDE's different guidelines, or something else entirely. Too often, applications opt for the "something else entirely" route (Mozilla's XUL, for example). That results in applications that don't share a common look & feel even within the same desktop environment. Part of that is due to the large number of environments (competition is a good thing, but it has plenty of downsides), part is due to the open source process itself (most developers have no UI sense at all, and the lack of oversight for UI cohesiveness doesn't help), and part is due to the fact that GNOME, KDE, etc are not cross-platform (Mozilla won't follow GNOME guideliness, because then it won't be right on Windows or OS X).*

I don't have the answers to solve these problems, but I'm confident they are solvable. The biggest requirement I see is a coherent user experience, which is where distributions become very important. However, so long as distro makers continue to focus on installation (face it, how many times have you seen a "review" of a Linux distribution that focuses only on the installation of that distro?), they're going to get nowhere fast.

* To be fair, Windows has problems with this as well, and it stems from a large, diverse, and active development community. It also can result from ego. For example, Microsoft makes excellent Macintosh software, and they generally follow Apple's guidelines whether the software was for OS 9 or earlier, or OS X. Apple, on the other hand, is either completely ignorant of Microsoft's UI guidelines for Windows, or they don't care. Therefore, you get crap like Quicktime or iTunes on Windows that don't follow any of the standard Windows interface guidelines. They're not "bad" applications, but the best that can be said about them on Windows is that they're Mac apps wrapped in a Windows frame. Not good for the overall user experience, and shame on Apple in my opinion.

Re:pointless

[Anonymous Coward]

"for businesses looking to migrate form Windows to Linux, Xandros offers the best option out there right now that I'm aware of."

Thats why they whent bankrupt once ( as corel ) and are loosing money everyday ( search linspire vs xandros ) , no one with a brain will use xandros in any type of environment.

Re:pointless

[ezHiker]

I agree. But even with if you know how to join a Linux box to an Active Directory domain, the integration with that environment is normally very poor. No one wants to have enter their domain logon and password over and over again when trying to access Windows shares. Even if you save the password in a mount script or something (which, btw, is somewhat insecure), what does the user do when their Windows password expires (our passwords expire every 30 days) and the script no longer works? Xandros handles this for the user.

I've manually configured Samba for winbind logon to AD domains, and while I know how to do it, I consider it very kludgy and not very fun after having to do it several times. Config tools are not inherently bad, and I really appreciate when someone develops a tool to make my life easier. I love Linux, but we Linux geeks have got to get into the 21st century and get out of the mindset that config tools are always bad thing.

Re:pointless

[wrook]

I'm going to have to go with the parent poster on this. I've met a couple of the developers that work on Xandros (both past and present). Generally they are smart bunch of guys. I also used to work at Corel where this thing started, so I know the management as well. I will repeat the same question I asked back then...

Why on earth would I switch from a Proprietary Windows world to a Proprietary Linux world? It makes no sense. Perhaps you get a brief respite from viruses, etc. But without the benefit of a free (as in speech) distribution, what is the point?

Here's a Linux distro that's geared to look just like Windows. And it's proprietary to boot. Plus it's backed by a small company from Ottawa who could go under at any minute (although last I heard they were actually doing OK).

My point is, if I wanted a desktop solution that looked like windows and I was willing to put up with the assinine licensing that comes with it, why the hell wouldn't I choose the defacto standard in the desktop computing world and *choose windows*????

Re:pointless

[Fnkmaster]

Okay, but MEPIS already gives you this. It was much easier to install (at least on my hardware) than Windows XP, since it actually had up-to-date drivers for everything. On a desktop system, it takes about 20-30 minutes to install. Even on my laptop, it took me maybe an hour and a half to get it installed and set up properly (with about half that time spent Googling to figure out how to get my widescreen display working). As the other replies said, the installation problem is already solved. Though I will admit, Mandrake, which used to be the easy-to-install distro of choice has declined in build quality over time and the last time I tried it (a couple releases back) it didn't work with my NVidia graphics card out of the box, which is a major tick against it for me.

Give MEPIS a try if you have half an hour to spare. It's a bootable CD distro, so you can try it with no effort at all, and then just click on the Install To Hardrive icon if you want to keep it around (but unlike Knoppix, it's actually been designed as a daily use distribution). Also, you don't have to figure out apt-get, since it comes with KPackage conveniently located in an obvious spot in the default menu configuration - a couple clicks and you have a list you can search for that weird application or library you need. I have pretty much not come across anything except the really obscure stuff that I needed that wasn't two clicks away.

If you are a company and need support, I'd go with Xandros right now. But for personal use, MEPIS is great (there IS commercial support forthcoming for MEPIS, but it doesn't really seem to be "quite there" yet on that front).

Re:pointless

[epyT-R]

That all sounds nice, but if I'm going to be subject to restrictive licenses, I might as well just run windows in the first place and be done with it. Xandros may or may not have a 'killer-app' linux, but its worthless to me because it sacrifices the core philosophies that make linux worthwhile.

Re:pointless

[oddfox]

Why on earth would I switch from a Proprietary Windows world to a Proprietary Linux world? It makes no sense. Perhaps you get a brief respite from viruses, etc. But without the benefit of a free (as in speech) distribution, what is the point?

They're not marketing to you, pure and simple. They're marketing for people who want an easy-to-use and easy-to-maintain desktop that is a pretty seamless (From the looks of things, I signed up for the beta but I've kept tabs on Xandros ever since it was announced) transition from Windows. That's great that you don't want to buy it, they don't want you to buy it because it's not for you, obviously. Xandros releases the sources that they need to, and they keep the sources that keep their desktop unique and more useful. That is not a crime, and it is not something to frown upon. I'm sorry, but seriously, program your own stuff if you don't like it and make your own distro. Besides, just because it's not free doesn't mean it's not worth the money for someone other than yourself.

Why do distro-haters always have to make it out that everybody's trying to get them to switch? Stay in whatever distro you're using, by all means, I'm a regular Gentoo/Slackware user myself. Like most everything else in this world, a distro's value depends on the end-user's needs.

Re:pointless

[smeat]

Mandrakelinux offers all this in a free (as in speech) Linux distribution. So what makes this special again?

smeat!

Re:pointless

[Anonymous Coward]

2 is easily solvable by using KDE and only KDE. The last GNOME application is Gimp, and in the future you can use Krita. The final application people wants is OpenOffice, and you will be able to get a KDE-ified by this spring.

Windows is worse: For example Microsoft Office, is completely uncoherent with the rest of the desktop. All widgets are different etc.

Re:pointless

[Osty]

Windows is worse: For example Microsoft Office, is completely uncoherent with the rest of the desktop. All widgets are different etc

This is really only true under the default Luna XP theme. Under classic or other visual styles (uxtheme hack), the widgets are not visually different from other applications. More importantly, however, the widgets and other functionality work the same. If I copy a selection in an Office application (and not just text!), I can expect to be able to paste it into any other application (that supports pasting from the clipboard, of course -- you can't paste a Word document selection into the Windows Calculator, for example :). Right-clicks, keyboard commands (for text selection and standard accessibility shortcuts), standard menu entries, and so on are all there, in the right places, working as you would expect from a Windows application. The toolbars may be a little fancier, and there may be icons in the menus, but I can live with that. Apple's applications, on the other hand, don't. Buttons do different things depending on what keys (ctrl, shift) are held when they're clicked, the gridview doesn't honor the "standard" (for Windows) menu key keyboard extension, and the interface itself adheres more closely to Mac guidelines than Windows guidelines, which is not acceptable in my opinion. In contrast, take a look at Microsoft's Office applications for OS X. They follow the OS X guidelines for look and feel. You know you're using an application designed for OS X when using them. When using iTunes in Windows, it doesn't feel like I'm using a Windows application, but a Macintosh application that just happens to run on my Windows PC.

Microsoft is not perfect, but they by and large follow the published guidelines for the platforms they support (building your own widgets isn't necessarily a bad thing, so long as they work as you expect). Apple is not perfect either, and they follow their own UI guidelines regardless of platform. In this case, I'd call Microsoft the better "digital citizen".

BTW, I'm not picking on Apple in particular. They're just a highly-visible example. iTunes has some great features, and QuickTime isn't all bad (when proper care is used, of course). There are plenty of other examples I could draw upon as well, but Apple's software is well-known and boldly flaunts Windows guidelines, so I pick on it here.

Re:pointless

[ThogScully]

That's useless reasoning. If you're going to be subject to restrictive licenses either way, then you go with the solution you think is better. So go with Linux if it suits you or Windows if it suits you better. Having to pay for software anyway is not reasoning just to go use MS products. In this case, that restrictive license with Xandros is a step into an OS that has no restrictions from the OS with the most and most good businesses will be willing to pay for software if it helps them.

Some of us use Linux because it's better, even if you apparently only use it because you're cheap.
-N

Re:pointless

[Taladar]

Config Tools ARE a bad thing if (and only if) every distribution uses a different config-tool for the same app. If you try out new distros every once in a while config-files stay 99% the same but config-tools are 100% different which is quite annoying.

Re:pointless

[lokedhs]

Mozilla won't follow GNOME guideliness, because then it won't be right on Windows or OS X

It certainly doesn't look good on OS X either. If it did, I'd be running it instead of Safari.

For example, Microsoft makes excellent Macintosh software

Well, that is certainly true for Office, which most people (Windows users included) is better on Mac than Windows. But The horrible abomination called MSN Messenger for Mac is not a good OS X application. For example, it doesn't support any scripting.

Re:pointless

[Technonotice_Dom]

To be fair, Windows has problems with this as well, and it stems from a large, diverse, and active development community. It also can result from ego.

I'd also like to add to that paragraph, Microsoft themselves. Compare buttons and menus in say, the latest version of Office (XP?) to the ones you get in Explorer.

Some distros are doing great work with themes so that Qt and GTK look identical out of the box, which is brilliant. The only other point is the guidelines as you mention...

Re:pointless

[Anonymous Coward]

Because finally someone really *gets* what the problem is with linux - the damn thing is uninstallable by the rest of us. Sure - propeller heads can twist linux every which way, but if we really want to create a broadly acceptible, viable alternative to Windows, we need a distribution like Xandros.

Actually, the problem is worse then that. People keep getting dumber. So we keep lowering the required level of intelligence to use software, so people become dumber, so we lower the required level of intelligence. Its a vicious circle. It's the same reason that newspapers are written at a 4th grade level. The general population isn't any more intelligent then that. So we've got people with 4th grade levels of intelligence who are windows "power users" who cry because Linux expects them to think.

If we really want a broadly acceptible, viable alternative to Windows, we need a distribution like Xandros to dumb down Linux for society.

Re:pointless

[RodRandom]

Not installable? Ever tried Knoppix (or any other live CD distro)?

Yer info's outta date, pard!

Re:pointless

[sponger]

which is why every UNIX ADMIN should know how to read and write config files by hand and not unix linuxconf (or some of the like)

maybe my ideas are just relics but i sure remmeber writing my entire httpd.conf by hand and using m4 to manualy write my sendmail.mc file....

Too many tools = too many morons configing boxes

Re:pointless

[adamfranco]

Why on earth would I switch from a Proprietary Windows world to a Proprietary Linux world? It makes no sense. Perhaps you get a brief respite from viruses, etc. But without the benefit of a free (as in speech) distribution, what is the point?

Just because Xandros is 'propietary', most [if not all] of the proprietary stuff is the CrossoverOffice/WinX/Windows glue, the rest is all standard GPL/BSD/etc. By moving your operation to a 'proprietary' Linux, you get a system made with 99% open-source code, with a little proprietary glue on top to make your transition from the Windows world easier. Don't need ActiveDirectory or Office2003? switch to the Free 'Open Distribution Version' of Xandros and redistribute to your hearts content.

The point is, by switching you can start using all the open-source apps where they exist or have the features you need, all running on the Free kernel/GNU OS, and still keep SPSS/Photoshop/what-have-you running until/if replacements are availible or good enough for your needs. Once that is the case, just drop the Codeweavers tools and you are all in the Free.

Xandros Motto

[capz loc]

From the Xandros website: Xandros: Making Linux work for you So apparently Xandros uses the Soviet Russia PR Firm.

Re:Xandros Motto

[thephotoman]

No, in Soviet Russia, YOU work for Linux.

Re:Xandros Motto

[Anonymous Coward]

Actually the real name is the Zardos linux desktop, it is in reality just a tweaked fairy tale distro.

Re:Xandros Motto

[Anonymous Coward]

No, it is the GOP itself.

Re:Xandros Motto

[eraserewind]

No, that's the default in the rest of the world. The grandparent is correct.

Their form

[dephiance]

how much personal information do i have to give? this is absurd.

Re:Their form

[Indy Media Watch]

Then don't be involved.

No one is forcing you to take part. Before you write off their requirements, perhaps you should consider why they might need them. Commercial reality would be one example.

Re:Their form

[Garg]

Most of the info they want is about your hardware, which seems reasonable considering they're wanting to see where problems might occur with their upcoming release. I know it's a 'personal' computer, but don't identify with it so much... :-)

Garg

Beta Test?

[Anonymous Coward]

Ummm, this is a linux distro right? Why do they need a private beta? Just give me the damn images, and you better give me all the source code too. Information (and music) wants to be free!! (As in movies!!)

Re:Beta Test?

[bogie]

Not to defend Xandros but what the heck is wrong with a smaller focused beta? Perhaps they find that to be more productive than just throwing a beta out into the wild hoping that people actually test it out and report bugs. I see nothing wrong with this on the surface and its a Very common practice. Quit your bitching already.

Re:Beta Test?

[jest3r]

try completing the application form. there is easily 40+ questions . by the end of it they know more about you than you know about yourself.

Re:Beta Test?

[Anonymous Coward]

Information (and music) doesn't want anything. People want things.

Linux and Free Software has bred a whole generation of cheapskates. Xandros isn't for the cheapskates. It's for the crowd who wants things to Just Work(TM)

FYI, Xandros does not have to give you images, and they do not have to give you all the source code. Read the damn GPL. You're only entitled to the source code for which you've bought binaries from them. So lay your money on the table if you want the source code to it. Otherwise go someplace else and play with your free shit, and quit bitching about it.

Re:Beta Test?

[Anonymous Coward]

What a silly statement. Yes, there are 40+ questions, but almost ALL of them are questions about your machine. Buck up. If you dont want to give your home address (Which is all they really want), then dont do it.

B

Re:Beta Test?

[Anonymous Coward]

Actually, it seems like they might also be throwing the beta out as a bit of free advertising. Most of us are not going to pay $40-$90 to try this distro out (in full form), but we might give it a try as a beta tester.

vs. Ubuntu?

[LittLe3Lue]

A friend of mine almost got a coop job working for Xandros. Would have been interesting to know from the inside what it is that they are doing over there.

As it stands, I havent used the distro, but I have heard that it would be very comparable to Ubuntu in terms of target audience. And both debian based too. With the VERY quickly growing Ubuntu community, and what seems to be bleeding edge software that is incorporated with it, does Xandros even stand a chance?

Sure, the article sais that they wait for other distros to make it bugfree.. but Ubuntu might get there soon, and it would seem to me, that no one uses such a distro for mission critial tasks, only as desktops. Most tasks/users of these two distros are likely already stable enough.

Anyone know what Xandros could offer that Ubuntu cant?

Re:vs. Ubuntu?

[thephotoman]

Well, honestly, given that Xandros costs some money to obtain (unless you want the watered-down free version) and that Ubuntu doesn't (full disclosure: I use Ubuntu), I'd say that Xandros' days are numbered.

But then, that's just me.

Re:vs. Ubuntu?

[child_of_mercy]

Xandros has been around a while, and they really iron bugs out and make life simple for the user.

they have a completely free (as in beer) open release which doesn't include things like codeweavers wine gear.

I use vanilla debian on my servers but for the desktop xandros is what gets the job done, for the work I need to do anyway.

(just my 2c)

Re:vs. Ubuntu?

[pr0c]

Well I'd say

1.) Xandros has crossover office, very important for many businesses (whether you like it or not), it also has StarOffice (deluxe version)
2.) Xandros has more than just community support
3.) Xandros has more liability than Ubuntu for how the product behaves
4.) Xandros, when purchased, comes with a VERY nice manual.
5.) Xandros has a very nice installer, much easier to use than Anaconda, debian, suse, etc IMO.

Having said all that, I dislike Xandros, I dont' like KDE among other reasons...

Re:vs. Ubuntu?

[LittLe3Lue]

Okay, that pretty much answers the question.

I know that many companies that want to try linux have been going to Red Hat for one reason. Not because they read that it was better, or had more support, or that it was easier to install.

It was so that if it crashed, the guy who decided to buy it can point the finger at the company, and not at a group of hackers puting together a (better?) distro in their garage>

paying the few bucks for the distro will sure be worth the company names, support, and few 'nicer' programs in comes with to people in a possition of either mistrust towards linux, or mistrust towards themselves using it.

As far as my oppinion, I use Debian Sarge, and beign a long time windows user, long time wanting to change, I tried Ubuntu, Red Hat, and many others, always getting mad at how 'windows' they are. But, it also made me happy for the linux community that they have gotten to that point. Its not as easy as windows, but I wouldnt mind letting grandma use it. so long as she didnt do anything other then surf the net. just like on her win machine.

Re:vs. Ubuntu?

[kwr2k]

Go read the article of SuSE v/s Ubuntu to see how much empty hype is this thing called Ubuntu: http://www.shallowsky.com/blog/index.cgi/linux

Re:vs. Ubuntu?

[jdub!]

Note that Ubuntu is a commercially supported distribution.

Re:vs. Ubuntu?

[Stevyn]

"and what seems to be bleeding edge software that is incorporated with it, does Xandros even stand a chance?"

Alright, so pretend I'm "a business guy." Should I care about bleeding edge software for my employees? Why bother? If it works for them, it works for me. This is why I never understood the complaints that Sun's Java Desktop was running a 2.4 kernel. Who cares if it up to date? In the business world all that matters is if it works. When it doesn't work, you're out big bucks.

Alright, I'm not in the business world but in the academic world so anyone can flame me to their heart's content. But I don't see the cost of a desktop operating system as an issue. I see it as how much it will cost the company when it doesn't work. And what are companies looking into now? The cost of windows spyware and worms. So I think a company like Xandros could have a good future in providing the "easy desktop that works" to many businesses.

That's the beauty of Linux, IMHO, you can be a geek and tweak it, or you can be a "regular person" and "just use it."

Re:vs. Ubuntu?

[Anonymous Coward]

Completeley free edition? Do you mean the standard edition? That one is not free.

Re:vs. Ubuntu?

[Anonymous Coward]

Never mind, you meant the open circulation version I just found. I'm so stupid.

Re:vs. Ubuntu?

[pr0c]

Interesting, I hadn't noticed because it is VERY hidden on their site, its what.. 3 links deep and then just says "...or you can get formal support from Canonical Ltd or other companies.", doesnt' seem like they are, at this point, interested in supporting it commericially; I can't say that I blame them since it is a very new distro..

Oh goodie!

[Anonymous Coward]

Now Jerry Pournelle can write another DDJ article about how easy it was to install MS Office and IE on Xandros.

File manager != distro

[anonymous cowherd (m]

It looks like this desktop is nothing more than KDE modified to look even more like Windows than it already does. The question is, do we need this?

Okay, we, the readers of /. probably do not, but does this type of Windows-alike desktop environment really add anything to Linux? In my opinion, it does not. Windows users will find that Linux is a worse Windows than Linux, and experienced Linux users can install their own DE that is customized to their needs, either by tweaking KDE/Gnome, or installing a more minimal environment like Fluxbox, XFCE, FVWM, and adding apps as needed. This distro seems to target Linux noobs whose only previous OS experience is Windows, yet in a way that encourages them not to learn about Linux! I had that same experience with Redhat when I installed it, and I don't think it benefitted me in the least.

I admit, the Xandros File Manager looks pretty slick. But, a file manager does not a distro make. The summary notes that Xandros lets other distros "get the bugs out" first, making for a quality, bug-free release. If I wanted that, I'd just run Debian. (Xandros is based on Debian Sarge.)

I might download their file manager to check it out, but I'm not going to download the whole distro. It's just not worth it to me.

disclaimer: I run an ~x86 gentoo system here at home and love it.

Re:File manager != distro

[anonymous cowherd (m]

Whoops. Of course, that should be "Windows users will find that Linux is a worse Windows than Windows."

Re:File manager != distro

[Chrax]

Well, if they're offering a stable, easy to use operating system that has a wide internet support base, what it might add to Linux is a broader user base for those that want to escape Microsoft bugs without paying a ton for an Apple. Even if it costs some money, if it's well made and user friendly, it very well may attract the casual computer users away from their Windows machines.

Re:File manager != distro

[Stevyn]

You're missing the point. They're targetting it for people who don't want to learn about linux. Not everybody shares your passions of computers. Don't think of them as being lesser than linux geeks like ourselves (gentoo, a few ~x86).

I think Xandros has a viable future if they can come through and make a desktop that's easiest to use.

Re:Bah

[hendridm]

Ugh they even have an IE icon on the desktop of one of their screenshots, as far as I know it's not even legal to run IE on Gnu/Linux! & why would you want to?

IIRC, they have CrossOver Office installed. You can go into the wizard thing and have it install Internet Explorer for you. Before it does, it will ask you to provide a legal copy of Windows to get the files from. It's a pretty slick setup. Might be nice in an office setting, which is what it's marketed towards anyway.

has anyone read the cathedral and the bazaar?

[patjenk]

I thought that book was required reading here. Eric Raymond discussed that linux has been successful because it was released early and often. This compared to comercial software built in the cathedral style which takes months to get to a buggy release. This beta signup sounds like a cathedral style.

Re:has anyone read the cathedral and the bazaar?

[Anonymous Coward]

1996 called and it wants its Cathedral back. That arguement was and is simplistic and lame. So what are open source workers in large corporations? People who copulate in the Cathedral? And what about commercial vendors contributing to open source - are they throwing their sacred shrines and implements out onto the street bazaar? This is the same sort of bullshit fad thinking that lead to the .com boom and bust.

Linux works because:
1) There is a good accessible model to base it on - UNIX.
2) It attracts extreme types who generally have little social skill but lots of technical skill. Instead of sitting around bored they decided to write software - oh and look there's some free projects out there. These people are motivated zealots.
3) A lot of people jumped on the bandwagon and thought they could make a ton of cash out of Linux
4) The alternatives are damn expensive to own and run, and give you no control if you're a tech headed geek. The alternative is something where you can fix and change the code if something goes wrong...oh and it costs next to nothing. It requires techy skill but shit they already have that and it'll keep their friends and family talking to them even though they smell funny.

Cathedral and Bazaar peh! Religion and BS.

Re:has anyone read the cathedral and the bazaar?

[DarkSarin]

I think you have missed some of the point of an analogy--it is a simplistic comparison by nature. Almost EVERY analogy falls apart under in depth scrutiny. Accept it for what it is--an educational tool to let people understand the open source philosophy a little better.

I do agree with why linux works, even though that is hardly the whole of it. Remember, unlike unix or windows, if a single linux vendor dies, it won't matter because there are many others, and lots of people contribute. At some point, linus will need to hand over control of the kernel, but that isn't such a big deal--there are lot of very competent people who are already maintainers that could do the job with ease.

No, linux can't be killed, because of its bazaar-like qualities. It may have to evolve, and mutate, but overall, it will survive. The same may or may not be true of windows. IF windows survives, it will be by taking bits of the linux philosophy and latching on.

Enough said.

Back to Xandros--yes I signed up, and why not? If I can help them make their distro better, then I will! Everything we do to help any portion of the linux community is good. Even Xandros

If I wanted to run Windows.....

[rel4x]

....I'd run Windows.

Wow, it's so innovative... a real break away...

[Anonymous Coward]

These guys sure do know how to blow everyone away with an operating system that is slightly less functional that Windows for the average user, and only half as attractive! All of this for a price too. If it weren't for the virus/spyware factor (which is honestly nearly enough... sadly) this sort of distro would have absolutely no foothold.

When I run Linux, I run WindowMaker/GNUStep. It's really nice to have someone actually wonder what OS I'm running... instead of the chameleon act of a desktop environment that nearly all major Linux distros go for today.

Why doesn't anyone work toward developing something beyond Gnome/KDE Windows look & feel emulation? If only the Linux community adopted the slogan of "think different," there might be some more compelling reasons for people (read: people who use Windows out of a percieved lack of options) to switch. Until then, the only reason is to NOT experience some nasty things. Rarely have I heard someone sing the praises of what their desktop Linux distro can do, besides run Windows games in WINE!

Cool!

[commodoresloat]

Does it cost $500 to participate in the beta test?

Re:Cool!

[mrgreen4242]

Heheh, beat me to it! And to the other responder, get a sense of humor!

Re:Cool!

[Bill Dimm]

Does it cost $500 to participate in the beta test?

No, it costs $699. Make check payable to SCO.

Re:Cool!

[Anonymous Coward]

Mac-head elitism at its finest.

Re:Cool!

[Kristoffer Lunden]

Woah, way to support the developers for your platform!

-- Other non-article-reading moron, at your service.

Zathras OS

[syousef]

Every time I see an article about Xandros, I can't help but think of Zathras from Season 1 of Babylon 5.

Slashdotted

[Anonymous Coward]

Hah! Slowing down already! I guess they must be running Xandros linux on their servers!

Hahahahaha-- huh? ... what do you mean that's not how it works here?

Xandros KDE rocks.

[Anonymous Coward]

I am a KDE convert. Converted from GNOME to KDE and must say that I find KDE absolutely usable. I have the feeling to work under a true Desktop Environment and I detect new stuff with every minute I am using it. I am impressed about the consistency, speed, interoperability. I today found out that you can drag&drop files from konqueror (be it local, webdav, ftp, http or whatever) to your kconsole and voila it downloads them exactly in the dir where you have kconsole. These are the things that make life easier.

Also Krita is growing fast and hopefully will become a full GIMP replacement.

Re:Xandros KDE rocks.

[Anonymous Coward]

> I am a KDE convert.

No, you are a KDE konvert.

Would you recommend this for a noob?

[jmcmunn]

First, the question...then some background. Would this be a good version of linux for me to try to convert to as a replacement for WinXP? (not necessarily the beta...)

I am a relative novice to the Linux world, but have installed various versions of linux over the past few years to try. The ones I have used briefly are Suse, Mandrake, and RedHat.

I found each had their own little quirks and bonuses just from the short time I used each, but I have never gone to the trouble of finding drivers for things like my scanner, my digital camera, and my printer for any of them. Would it be worth my time to try this version, or is there a better package out there for someone like me who wants to possibly dual boot for awhile while making the switch and learning the ropes?

thanks to anyone who replies.

Re:Would you recommend this for a noob?

[Anonymous Coward]

I seriously recommend you to go for Knoppix.

Re:Would you recommend this for a noob?

[anonymous cowherd (m]

If you want to use it "as a replacement for WinXP," then I need to ask: What do you use WinXP for?

If it's games, forget it. Stick with XP.

If it's office-type apps, then any distro really will do. If you want something that will install and "just work," then I'd use something like Mandrake or Fedora Core. If you want to get really frustrated doing your first install, but come out of it having learned something, then Gentoo or Linux From Scratch are good choices.

(This isn't to imply that other distros aren't good; these are just the ones that came to mind immediately.)

Re:Would you recommend this for a noob?

[jmcmunn]

Yeah, I have run Cluster Knoppix, KnoppixStd, and regular Knoppix. I want to have a full fledged system install...that I can use my CD drive with. :-)

Re:Would you recommend this for a noob?

[jmcmunn]

I do game a bit, but have another system to use for that if I need to. This one would mostly be for surfing the web, playing around with various things, and probably some coding.

This will be my laptop (ThinkPad T42) so wireless connectivity is a concern, but I would be willing to buy a card that is supported so it's not a huge deal. I figure the hardware should be standard enough to work in linux, since it has always worked in Knoppix.

Re:Would you recommend this for a noob?

[ozmanjusri]

If you're already comfortable with Knoppix I'd suggest you just install it. You can see the FAQ here http://www.knoppix.net/docs/index.php/FaqInstall.

What that gives you is a fairly complete Debian system, so once you have a net connection you can use apt to update it.

Re:Would you recommend this for a noob?

[Anonymous Coward]

Xandros is excellent for newbies. Everything works. If you make a mistake, you can correct it through their tools. Networking configuration is near perfect. However, it is last-year's technology and support is craptacular. Your best bet for solving a given problem is through the forums which are populated with newbies and a couple of apt-get aware guys. Suse, I think, is a much better option. The base configuration is very tight and almost bug-free. Contrary to other distros they fix bugs, and there is a lot of help on the web should you need it. I don't much care for yast but I think there are definite improvements coming.

A little known fact is that Suse actually offer a xandros-like product, Suse Desktop, with crossover and staroffice. That product is ideal for migration purposes and new users (it is geared towards businesses that wish to migrate from Windows to Linux and works with Openexchange) but has a very slow development cycle.

Disclaimer - I own a company that is a Suse and Novell business partner. I have also been a Xandros customer.

Re:Would you recommend this for a noob?

[Geek_in_Marketing]

From personal experience, I think this is a brilliant first distro to try.

I installed Xandros Desktop 2.0 on a spare machine as I didn't have the courage at the time to go for a full Debian installation.

I've since installed Ubuntu on another box - but for day-to-day use, Xandros remains.

It has worked fine with all my hardware, including two different printers and two different thumbdrives, all with no tweaking or downloads.

I would strongly recommend it as an introduction to Linux.

And no, I _don't_ work for Xandros or represent them in any way.

Re:Would you recommend this for a noob?

[Skevin]

> I need to ask: What do you use WinXP for?

I should answer this from the standpoint of a geek who has tried time and time again to convert all his loved ones away from the dark side. Most Mom and Pop computers have uses that have very little to do with games or office apps.

A musician friend of mine prints all his CD labels and covers on some Windows App that I can't get playing nice with Wine and CUPS. He also uses bleeding edge MIDI interface and sampler hardware that's way too new to supported under ALSA. I've had to tell him to simply stick with WinXP.

My Fiance prints a crapload of greeting cards for friends and family using Hallmark software for Windows. It doesn't play nice with Wine. I don't see other any other Cutsey Graphics Apps for Linux. I've had to tell her to simply stick with WinXP.

My engineering company uses Intools to lay out and design process plants (oil refineries, power plants, etc.) and Wine doesn't like it. Codeweavers doesn't make a plugin for it, and the original company doesn't want to port it. I've had to tell them to simply stick with WinXP.

Even Codeweavers is not always the solution. My sister's construction company tried a brief migration away from Windows, but they could not leave behind Quickbooks. They tried Codeweavers, but it crashes after a certain amount of network traffic. I've had to tell them to simply stick with WinXP.

In short, I've had to swallow my pride and tell a lot of people to stick with Windows. It's interesting to see all these attempts to put Linux on the Home Desktop, but I still highly doubt it's there yet (nor even close). My manager has hammered me with the words, "Linux is not yet ready for the desktop." I'm throwing in the towel: he's right. </rant>

Solomon Chang

Re:Would you recommend this for a noob?

[XnR'rn]

For a linux newbie, that has a box that can be 'sacrificed', that is, fully converted to Linux (or bsd, but for a newbie that doesn't matter, unless its OpenBSD, which is very newbie unfriendly. It is good, it isn't hard to install, but -very- unfriendly, that is an imho and is as of version 3.5). I would suggest doing it a double/tripple booting box.

But not a Windows/Linux one. Doublebooting Linux distros. Actually, just as the guy in this same thread I would suggest SuSE (and nope, Im not affiliated in any way) as your primary newbie friendly distro. Just wait a month or so till 9.2 is out if you're getting a commercial version (which I do suggest, even as I haven't used it... yet, I am also waiting for 9.2) and get a 'hard' distro as your second boot.

I would suggest gentoo or slackware for that (or even, if you are comfortable with it the LFS. I have no experience with it, but supposedly it has, or rather is, a superb guide on building your own system just as you like it). Perhaps even, have SuSE (but leave some diskspace unpartitioned), use it untill you feel comfortable, then install Slackware and tweak it as and till you like what you see, and at some later point, say remove the slackware and put gentoo there.

Counting the time I was using Linux on my home machine(s) I can be considered a Linux newbie (although I had some experience with *nix way beforehands). I switched to Linux after I was forced to two upgrades on short notice, both of which killed Windows XP (mobo switch did it most probably). First time I reinstalled, then I given up and went and got myself a Linux distro. I was in kind of a hurry, and the first and only thing I found was Slackware 9.1 (it was a couple of weeks before 10 release).

Afterwards I got myself Gentoo and lived happily with it untill three or so days ago (and I am still happy with it). Before I installed SuSE (their free version) for 'just works' system, that my mother can also use. Now I am using SuSE for most stuff, and Gentoo for testing most recent neat stuff, betatesting stuff I like (i.e. XFCE 4.2beta1, which is sweet!). I also suspect that once I get back into programming swing, I'll go back to Gentoo. I am not sure yet.
In any case, good luck with it!

Xandros is for

[Anonymous Coward]

pointdextros

Re:Gmail invites!

[PenGun]

Sweet ... I like the shuddering browser effect as the google bar pulsates ... tasteful.

Poor

[mistersooreams]

I swear this is not a troll, but honestly, this is really poor. For a start, I thought Linux was supposed to be at least partly about freedom of information? Now I don't want to tie a philosophy to tightly to a product, and Xandros sure is one of those, but seriously... what is the point of all this harvesting of personal information? They can sell that for a mint as personal information of a cross-section of the market (the tech-savvy) to which it's usually very hard to target ads.

Then, even if you get involved in the beta test (I gave up with all the pointless personal details so I don't know), what do you get? A free copy of a potentially very bug-ridden distro. You then find the bugs (probably the sharp end thereof), suffer the consequences, and they sell the resulting fixed-up distro. I have nothing at all against paying for Linux distros if I'm getting something for my money, but this doesn't seem to be a whole lot more than a bundle of otherwise-free apps.

I can't help but feel there's a cynical "... PROFIT!!!" in there somewhere.

(As I say, I really feel this is NOT what Linux should be about, and I hope I'm not trolling.)

Re:Poor

[Anonymous Coward]

xandros and other manufacturers of Linux distributions do a hell of a lot of work to offer pre-compiled & packaged linux to people (mostly for free)

if you care to try and make your own distro you can go to www.linuxfromscratch.org/ and roll your own

Re:Poor

[oddfox]

What in the world were you expecting from a beta test, a flawless distro that you are going to have the time of your life with? You seem to have missed that part of the story. This is purely for those interested in assisting with making Xandros a better distro, and there's nothing wrong with that.

And everyone that says it's a bundle of otherwise-free apps keep forgetting that you get Crossover Office as well, which is most certainly not free. The cost for just Crossover Standard as a download is $39.95. The Deluxe Edition of Xandros can be had for $89 online at the store, and that's not too bad, really, it's cheaper than Windows XP Home edition, even, which is $94 at Newegg.

Re:Poor

[gl4ss]

then use some free distro, with linux YOU HAVE CHOICE.

some people really like the way xandros does things, and are willing to pay for it too(or give their name to get on a beta).

**but this doesn't seem to be a whole lot more than a bundle of otherwise-free apps.** and that's where you're wrong(you get support and some commercial, non-free, stuff integrated tightly into a working package).

User friendliness, DOH!

[Spy der Mann]

Windows users want things to be installed as easy as they installed windows (but without the inherent security complications, heh).

As a dummy average Joe-user Windows hobbit, I just want to insert a CD and let it do what it has to do. I'm NOT supposed to know about filesystems, nor the directory structure and how to configure the xf86watchamacallit in case the GUI blows, nor what cryptic combinations of keypresses to do to make the frigging ctrl+shift+numeric keypad arrow work as it SHOULD.

I just want a friendly box which lets me open my apps and play my music without having to mess around and compiling an ALSA XMMS plugin because XMMS takes about a minute to play because some by-default misconfiguration in the KDE.

I want to be able to download a program from the internet, press a few clicks, and get it installed in the appropriate directory without having to enter the command line.

In other words, I want to be able to run my favorite apps, word processor, stylesheet, multimedia apps, without having to know ONE SINGLE DETAIL of how Linux works.

Ok, let's summarize this in two words.

IDIOT-PROOF.

Sure, Linux is much more stable than winblows, it doesn't get viruses, etc. But what use is this rock-solid stability if the user has to go to the command line 10 times per day, become a super-user, and navigate in the creepy branches of the directory tree just to adjust something? (Linux Parody here)

Look at windows. You just open the Control Panel, click on an icon... and adjust a few sliders. Is that too hard?

Yes I know, being a windows lamb is dangerous. But not all people were born to be hax0r leaders. You may know how to download a plugin and install it in your OS, but I betcha the 99.99% of Windows users don't know even how to configure their Windows.

And you want them to open a command line, type ./configure, make, make install and a bunch of NEEDLESSLY COMPLICATED things that an automatic program SHOULD provide? And what if the compilation breaks something? Do you really expect a common housewife to burst in tears, frustrated just because some stupid misconfigured .h header file got a line (i.e. an application path) wrong?

It's the lack of standarization that makes Linux (i'm not talking of a particular distribution, but Linux as a whole) scary for your average windows hobbit. I mean, can't the Linux guys get together, form some kind of "ecumenic council" as seen in Lord of the Ring movies, and decide a "user-friendliness Linux standard" that all Linux distros should follow? The web guys did it with the W3C Web Content Accesibility Guidelines, what makes people think the Linux guys can't? I don't want to think that they're just lazy about it.

Maybe I'm asking the impossible. But think about this. If Linus Torvalds could make Linux, what makes it so difficult for his successors to agree on some points?

As I said, I (and I bet the 99.9% windows hobbits) just want a nifty idiot-proof Operating System that lets me do what I want.

And if Xandros is offering that to me, what's so wrong with it? (Too bad they want to charge for it, but that's a separate matter).

(Update: I'm looking at the 142 Ubuntu Linux Screenshots and it looks JUST LIKE what I wanted to express.

Hmmm. 146 images are worth a thousand words ;-)

Re:User friendliness, DOH!

[anonymous cowherd (m]

Joe User is in real trouble when something does break, if he does not understand [insert OS here]. Inevitably, by Murphy's Law, something will break. This is true whether Joe runs Linux or Windows.

As for usability, note that 33 of those screenshots appear to be from the installer, which looks like it could have been taken from Debian (not sure on this). The remaining 109 appear to be from GNOME. Those could be duplicated on any Linux system having GNOME installed, including mine.

I think what you are looking for with respect to usability standards is available here: http://www.freedesktop.org/.

Re:User friendliness, DOH!

[NtroP]

Heh.

I have been [very] idly following Ubuntu since it was mentioned on slashdot a while ago. I need an easy, stable distro to deploy on several hundred PCs in my school district. So, this time, since I have time on my hands, I throught I'd actually check out the screenshots of the parent post.

(BTW, this was the actual order I selected the screen-shots in.)

• Screen 1 (of 142): pretty mundane boot prompt.
• Screen 2: Text-based install screen - no problem, the students won't see the install process anyway, let's skip ahead and see the distro...
• Screen 21: Heh, still text-based installer - this is a pretty detailed set of screen shots! let's skip ahead a bit...
• Screen 33: Text box: "Setup complete: Thankyou (blah, blah, blah, etc.)". Good, finally to the good stuff!
• Screen 35: Holy Crap! There are naked people on the log-in process! This will go over great with my 7th-graders! Let's skip way ahead!
• Screen 118: Ahem! There is a naked white guy holding a naked black chick as the (default?) desktop wallpaper? I will definitely get buy-in from the students, but I might have some 'splainin' to do to my boss!

I wonder how many other places these "gems" will pop up in the distro...? After a little more poking around at the screenshots it appear obvious that the "theme" is "diverse people getting along" (or something), but I don't think my Mom would be comfortable with this and I'm pretty sure the superintendent wouldn't. Which means, now I have to download and install the distro someplace just to get that desktop picture to put on my Fedora box!

Re:User friendliness, DOH!

[ender-]

Just an FYI, there have been an ungodly number of posts in the ubuntu-users list regarding this. That splash-screen/wallpaper combo has been removed as the default. It is still in the distro, but is no longer what is displayed when you install.

I'm currently using Ubuntu on my main desktop, as well as testing it on a G4. It's ok, it has a lot of potential, but does need a lot of work. Plus, I've not cared much for Gnome since they stopped using enlightenment...

DT

Re:User friendliness, DOH!

[matvei]

Sure, Linux is much more stable than winblows, it doesn't get viruses, etc.

What about trojans? Your average Joe Sixpack will double click his GreatSrceensaver.sh, and happily enter the root password when it asks for it - Linux will not be any more secure for ignorant users than Windows is.

Re:User friendliness, DOH!

[seanmeister]

there have been an ungodly number of posts in the ubuntu-users list regarding this.

Yeah, funny how all of that controversy surrounding the "human" theme cropped up a week before the official Ubuntu release. Nothing like hot chicks, naked even, to reel in the geeks right before the release!

I'm not knocking Ubuntu - I think it's a great distro, and it's the first one I've tried where everything "just works". But I do think the timing of the "controversial" theme graphics is a bit suspect.

Re:User friendliness, DOH!

[Sicnarf]

That was the best summary I've heard!! (of the problems of a joe window user migrating to linux) On the one hand, linux users feel comfortable since they're used to their system. The majority are computer hobbyst / IT professionals having enough time and willingness to learn an OS. i think the linux/bsd folks need to either make their offering "idiot proof" as you said, or not promote their OS, without mentioning effort in configuration and useability. most end users don't have the time to tinker with linux/bsd, they need solutions that work out of the box.

Xandros, your mothers distro

[Anonymous Coward]

As an avid Debian user I wanted to move my parents from XP hell to a linux distro. But not having used (daily) any other distro in a long time I went looking for a polished debian based distro. After a quick trial of Knoppix I tried Xandros.

Basically I was amazed at how simply the install went. Four clicks, amazing. Way better than any other distro or OS for that matter. They love it. No problems.

So while Xandros may not get a thumbs up from hardcore linux users it's definately the most polished and the easiest (IMHO) distro to switch a windows user to.

btw, hint for ppl trying to install Firefox on Xandros, 'xhost +' ;-)

Re:Xandros, your mothers distro

[Anonymous Coward]

Except doing an 'xhost +' is potentially horribly insecure on a networked machine.

Re:Xandros, your mothers distro

[lemox]

Except for having your machine set up to listen for external X connections at all is horribly insecure on a networked machine.

Everyone has SSH, use it.

Re:Xandros, your mothers distro

[adamfranco]

About a 8 months ago I had a hard drive fail and decided to install Xandros to replace the RedHat 9 that was on my dead drive. I had been happily using apt-for-rpm thanks to the great guy[s?] at freshrpms.net and had long since grown to love the Debian software management way:
1. $ sudo -s
2. # apt-get update
3. # apt-get upgrade/install xxxx
4. there is no 4, its done everything is up to date, nothing else to do.
The web server that I inherited was running Debian, so I had general idea of where to look for configs and things and thought I'd try Xandros for myself as well as try it out in preparation for setting up for my mother. The mother test is yet to come yet as I've spent most of our brief visits socializing instead of messing with the computer. This will happen soon though since I must say that using Xandros has been far and away the most pleasurable Linux experience that I have ever had.

The good:
- As little battling with hardware as I've ever experienced.
- Auto recognizes CDs, my camera, other USB stuff. Finally plug and play without having to write shell scripts to mount/unmount the CD!
- Unlike the rest of the Distros, Xandros cleaned out the 'start' menu, organized them, and got rid of the dozens of choices for every kind of app. This is probably on of the most confusing things about most distros, you pull up the 'Applications' menu and see 2 office suites (KOffice and OpenOffice), 5 email clients, 10 text editors, and 4 sound players. I'm all for choice, but its overwhelming for first-timers and cluttered for everyone else.
- Everything I love about Debian, in a friendly package.
- A 'fast user-switching' button like OSX and winXP so that you can easily switch between X-Sessions without having to know the ALT+F6/ALT+F7 keys

The not so good:
- Its not the most blazing distro, but does [barely] function with KDE on a Pentium200. I am running Xandros without KDE on my laptop/picture-frame.
- It takes up about gig, but I guess this is pretty standard for distros (with apps included).

The 'not good, but problematic elsewhere' dept:
- have to manually configure things to get all 5 buttons working on my mouse. This IS doable though, and I have made up a step-by-step install guide for beginners wanting to set up Xandros. It includes all the little steps I did to get the mouse, DVDCSS, nVidia drivers, etc going. I wrote this up for a friend, but it might help others beginners too, since these things seem to beyond the scope of most distributed install guides.

All in all, I've found it to be VERY user-friendly compared to everything except OS X. At the same time, its Debian, so when I wanted to set up PostgreSQL, PHP, Perl, and Apache so I could do some work, it didn't get in my way.

I like Xandros

[HangingChad]

The question is, do we need this?

Need may be a relative concept around here but I can tell you from experience I really like Xandros. It's a breeze to learn for Windows users and is easy to network with Windows machines. Printers, scanners, Windows domain...click, click done. The supported version comes bundled with CrossOver Office and runs most of the MS Office suite fairly well.

It makes a great stepping stone distro for business users and makes a very nice introduction to non-Windows machines.

Doesn't sound like you need it but there is quite a lot of value in it for the transition users.

Re:Gmail invites!

[Anonymous Coward]

So here's my question on moderation. If AC's start at 0, we're assuming that the post is likely to be awful or trollful or whatever. Logged in users start at 1 so we'll assume they might have something good to say, since they have at least identified themselves (to a degree). Good posts can get modded up to 5, so therein lies a range of goodness that one can be within. So why can't mod scores go lower than -1? I know logged in users can apply personal scoring modifications but as I see it it's still -1 at the lowest. Good posts have somewhere to go to make them more than simply moderately good. Shouldn't bad posts also have an equivalent range of badness than can be obtained by simply getting a single -1 Troll off a starting zero post??? Inquiring minds want to know. It takes 5 mods to give a +5 on a good post, but only 1 to give a -1. There should be a -5 Really Shitty so you have a better idea how bad it *really* is. Sheesh. I explained that one to death.

Re:Um...

[DarkMantle]

Actually no...

It also includes Crossover Office which is similar to but more powerful then WINE. I was even able to install visual studio .net on it for a test, had the .net framework going and everything.

Even (just for fun) installed IE 6.0 so I could do "windows updates" for IE and visual studio... it was quite impressive and seamless.

No. We need people that can...

[Man in Spandex]

That is not the problem with Linux and Xandros haven't even pinpointed the problem.

There are various problems on why Linux is "hard" for new users. The simple one that I can say is "UI". Everybody sees computer, that computer better have an interface like explorer or they are doomed! Let me go into detail with some points.

- no unified DE.
The silly "competition" of kde and gnome isn't helping too much. Having distributions lately taking preferences of a DE over another makes a user think that distro "A" sucks because distro "B" does not use what "A" use. In the end, they don't understand that it's all linux no matter what you choose.

- No universal "format"
This I'm afraid will take a long friggin time. Having rpm's for some, deb's for others, tgz for slack does not solve the main problem. Companies/organizations taking preference of a format/package over another. Look at ATI who take in favor of RPM-Based distros to provide their drivers (I am aware that they suck. This was simply an example). It's great to see that some provide .deb's and specific rpm's but it's not enough.

A bit out of context but just to tell people that, yes Xandros may seem easy for some people but it's still Linux. You will have to face a challenge sooner or later. Linux isn't windoze where you don't need to understand what a certain action does in the background or how we can improve it. It's still an enthusiast "Operating System" (or Kernel. call it whatever you want) if you ask me which requires nonstop tweaking and you won't manage to do all of that from exclusively clicking your mice.

Until we find a perfect "format" (??), different people will always take a preference over another.

- package managers
We need a way to track down what we install, modify or remove. In other words, something like apt but more global. This again I'm refering to the last point I made. Maybe if we had a universal format, maybe then we'd see various package managers available to almost all distributions to make the user's life easier. YES COMPILING "MIGHT" BE FUN FOR SOME But in a world like today, does every user care bout gaining those extra secondes on optimization which they aren't even aware of? Why should they care. They want to know how to install/upgrade/uninstall programs. This is why I show people new to linux the Debian distribution. They don't regret it.

If I made mistakes of I need correction, please go ahead :p. I'm sure there are other reasons why it's hard to meet the needs of a migrating end-user and it would be interesting to know other people's point of views for me and you and YOU.

Re:No. We need people that can...

[Coryoth]

We need a way to track down what we install, modify or remove. In other words, something like apt but more global. This again I'm refering to the last point I made. Maybe if we had a universal format, maybe then we'd see various package managers available to almost all distributions to make the user's life easier.

Apt is fantastic for managing a core set of distribution provided packages. Throw a nice frontend like Synaptic on it and it's user friendly too. Apt works fine for both deb and rpm packages, so you really have the majority of distribution provided packages covered. Those that aren't covered are source distributions like Gentoo, or other fairly hands on distributions like Slackware.

The problem comes when users want to install something outside of their ditribution provided set. Sure, Debian has a very large repository, but it'll never have commercial software. Meanwhile Fedora has a very small repository (comparatively). For non-distribution provided packages I'd suggest you check out Autopackage. You download a packages, run it, and it will check dependencies, resolve them if at all possible, and install itself - it's like installshield but nicer and with dependency resolution. Autopackage isn't done yet, but it already has working packages - its just lacking nice to have features like integration with rpm and deb package databases etc.

Given a combination of Synaptic and Autopackage for base and third party software I think Linux has a very bright future for installing and managing software.

Jedidiah.

Re:No. We need people that can...

[Osty]

Apt works fine for both deb and rpm packages, so you really have the majority of distribution provided packages covered.

The format is not really the problem, and it's great that apt can handle both deb and rpm. The problem is that different distros put things in different places and use different naming conventions. It's not bad enough to confuse a user who knows what he's doing, but it means that you don't get a single RPM package that works on all distros that support RPMs. Instead, you get one RPM for SuSE, one RPM for Fedora/Redhat, one RPM for Mandrake, etc. Things are similar with deb, as well, where you have one deb that works for Debian, but a deb for another Debian-based distro may not work on plain-vanilla Debian.

The problem comes when users want to install something outside of their ditribution provided set. Sure, Debian has a very large repository, but it'll never have commercial software. Meanwhile Fedora has a very small repository (comparatively). For non-distribution provided packages I'd suggest you check out Autopackage. You download a packages, run it, and it will check dependencies, resolve them if at all possible, and install itself - it's like installshield but nicer and with dependency resolution. Autopackage isn't done yet, but it already has working packages - its just lacking nice to have features like integration with rpm and deb package databases etc.

Yet Another Package Format is not what Linux needs. There's absolutely nothing that prevents commercial developers from building debs that will work on Debian, for example. Have a look at Microsoft's MSI installers. Microsoft builds MSIs, third parties build MSIs, and they all work (assuming the developers aren't idiots, of course), they all integrate into the Add/Remove Programs applet, and they all can benefit from built-in features of the MSI software like package repair. The problem is that they have to build one for Debian, and one for Xandros, and then an RPM for Redhat, and an RPM for SuSE, and so on. If distributions could all agree on a standardized filesystem (yes, there's been a project dedicated to this for years, but for years nothing has happened) it wouldn't matter if commercial software is shipped as a deb, an rpm, or even a tgz so long as the package software can handle each format.

Given a combination of Synaptic and Autopackage for base and third party software I think Linux has a very bright future for installing and managing software.

A good interface is a must-have feature, but another package format is not. Focus on standardizing what already exists rather than building Yet Another Package Format!

(BTW, looking at the Synaptic screenshots (I've not used Synaptic), it looks like it still has a long way to go before it will be "user-friendly". The average user just wants to know, "What is already installed?" so they can remove it if necessary. Giving them the option to install other stuff is nice, but the UI for Synaptic is too cluttered up with that. The Windows Add/Remove Software applet is good in this respect, because while you can install new software through it, the functionality is secondary and not in-your-face all of the time.)

Re:No. We need people that can...

[captwheeler]

grandparent said:

We need a way to track down what we install, modify or remove.

parent said:

Apt is fantastic for managing a core set of distribution provided packages.

Top down configuration and package management from IT seems to be lacking. How many copies of {proprietary app} are installed? How can I force a sub-group of machines to install software? There are solutions to these issue: but they are FAR from the those available on windows.

Re:No. We need people that can...

[IamTheRealMike]

Yet Another Package Format is not what Linux needs.

autopackage isn't "yet another package format". It's one that is universal - you can build one autopackage, and it'll install anywhere. Just like an MSI will install on any Windows (with the appropriate runtime, except that autopackages will install the runtime for you on first use).

It's not necessarily easy, mind you. Developers have to put a bit of work in to ensure their software is easy to install. But it can be done.

Re:No. We need people that can...

[Stevyn]

I agree completely about package formats. I got so sick if trying to deal with compiled RPMs for Suse and Mandrake I switched to gentoo. So now I spend hours compiling from source code. However, I get a much more up to date system, larger package selection, and the packages almost always work with no dependency problems.

However, I can't expect even most technically inclined people to spend this much time installing and configuring software. I switched to gentoo to get away from Mandrakes horrid URPMI. I now use gentoo for other reasons, but I don't want to make this another gentoo zealot post.

My point is if you don't want to pull your hair out installing binary packages, installing EVERYTHING from source seems to be the only solution.

Yeah, flame me about apt and all those other tools that people claim are godsends of managing .debs or .rpms, but I got so frustrated with them.

Computers have two functions for two groups of people. The first group doesn't care how they work and want it to just work because to them it's a tool. It should be a time saver! That's their purpose!

The second group, some people here and most linux users want their computer to be a tool, but they also want to be able to dick around with it for hours. They like fiddling and tweaking around with this stuff because it presents a new challenge for them.

No group is "better" or "smarter" than the other. The second group developed linux and now they're trying to get the first group interested in it (backed up by business in some cases). However, they first must understand what the first group wants and expects before Desktop Linux (TM) will take off.

Not even a sucure web site

[wifitek]

Name,Address and other vitals not even a secure web site "NOT A CHANCE IN HELL!"

Xandros? Oh, you mean Xandros!

[Murmer]

Xandros gone! Xandros warned Xandros, but Xandros never listened to Xandros. Xandros was quiet one in family. SO! What can Xandros be doing for you? Everyone always coming to Xandros with problems. Great responsibilities. But Xandros does not mind. Xandros trained in crisis management. But only Xandros have no-one to talk to. No-one manages poor Xandros, you see. So Xandros talks to dirt. Sometimes talks to walls, or talks to ceilings. But dirt is closer. Dirt is used to everyone walking on it. Just like Xandros, but we've come to like it. It is our role. It is our destiny in the universe.

Re:Xandros? Oh, you mean Xandros!

[mikelieman]

OH, *WHERE* are my mod points!

Re:Gmail invites!

[HoneyBunchesOfGoats]

probably so that it's easier to correct unjust moddings, i.e. if someone gets modded to troll for making an unpopular but valid point.

But Ubuntu has a partial boob shot...

[Anonymous Coward]

You can look down a chick's blouse on the Ubuntu site. I'm totally there, screw Xandros...

Free torrent

[Leikhim]

There's an "Open Circulation" version on the website http://www.xandros.com/products/home/desktopoc/dsk _oc_download.html I installed a 30-day demo of Xandros a while back, and it kicked ass. It installed flawlessly, all my hardware worked, and the Crossover Office was very useful. Also, the version I used was (somewhat) compatible with debian apt repositories, if you were willing to work at it. In fact, I'd say getting apt running on Xandros is easier than getting debian running =p

Formerly advertisements, now news!

[Anonymous Coward]

Many Free distros have on-going beta-test periods, why doesn't Slashdot mention them? Hell, go over to Distrowatch and make a few more announcements.

It's not pointless, and proprietary != lock-in!

[cbreaker]

Even if they use some special config tools to manage the systems, even if it's not free, and even if they outright closed sourced all their own code - it's NOT pointless and it's NOT lock-in!

It's Linux. What is the biggest thing holding people to Windows? Applications. If you run your entire company off of Xandros, and run a bunch of Linux apps on it that people become dependant on - where does the lock-in happen that's implied by your use of the word Proprietary?

You could switch off of Xandros to something else fairly easily at that point. Once you're off Windows, which Xandros helps you do quite a bit more then some of the other distributions, you can then take another step onto, say, RedHat, or Mandrake, or SuSE, or whatever.

There's no lock-in, therefore there's no problem, in my opinion. I believe the core operating system and libraries need to remain open, GPL or what-not, in order to keep things going. But I don't believe that every single little aspect of the system is required to be GPL or even Open Source. I'd prefer it was GPL, for real. But it won't kill the market if it isn't.

You can choose to use it, or not. Either way, the software that runs on it will run on any Linux, and that's what seperates it from the Windows monopoly.

my experiences

[darthpenguin]

I feel that I should express my personal experiences with various "easy to use" distros. My mother, who is quite unskilled with computers (what a surprise), kept on complaining how her computer wouldn't work properly. It was always down to spyware, or other background programs eating up resources, etc. I decided that enough was enough, that I didn't want to spend several hours per week cleaning the same crud off her drive.

I tried installing Xandros on her system. It installed fine, configured everything, and in general worked great out of the box. BUT, it was rather painfully slow, on a duron 1.6ghz + 256MB ddr box. There was not too much I could do in terms of optimization, without breaking the packaging system, and after several months of using this, I *did* manage to break it beyond reasonable repair. IIRC, it was something to do with trying the actual debian kde packages, and finding that reversing the situation was more trouble than it was worth.

I took the opportunity to try whatever else I heard was looking good, and installed yoper. It ended up working fine, quite a bit faster (probably due to the 2.6 kernel), but still had strange issues which seemed to appear out of nowhere: using the accelerated nvidia driver caused random lockups, and before long, trying to apt-get dist-upgrade would freeze up with no error messages, and would continue to do so in different places in subsequent runs.

I wiped it, thought "enough is enough," and installed slackware. It installed perfectly. I honestly don't think that the installation is significantly more difficult than the "easy" distros, unless you choose to make it so (eg. selecting to install all packages rather than individual selecting). I installed the 2.6 kernel from testing/, ran swaret to update all the packages, downloaded the nvidia driver, and it just *works*. No random lockups, VERY FAST performance, easy administration, and my mother has now moved on to complaining how the connection to hotmail is too slow.

After ranting for so long, I think the point I'm trying to make is that maybe these new distros are making things too complicated in their quest to make it more easy. To me, that's ultimately the wrong way to do things. You'll end up with "only one way to do it", unless you want to risk breaking whatever system the distro designers decided to prop the system up with.

With the slackware style, I seem to get more simple, *more transparent* packaging and set-up, while at the same time getting updates within the packaging system reasonably quickly (unlike with Xandros, which was often hopelessly out of date). Shouldn't it just be that simpler==better?

Re:my experiences

[smacktits]

[...] it was rather painfully slow, on a duron 1.6ghz + 256MB ddr box.

That's strange. I installed it on a P3 700MHz with 256mb of ram and it was fast.

Re:my experiences

[Anonymous Coward]

I picked up Xandros as a CD on a magazine in Australia. It booted right into a dual setup on my P3 Gateway desktop with W2K - no problems. It has been running for 3 months so it is stable enough to allow me to learn Linux. Getting software on the internet was easy with the builtin Network software.

My only mistake was a dual boot with NTFS drives. I should have gone full Xandros.

I am heavy into Windows software so the emulator upgrade with CrossOffice has appeal however the free magazine software meets my online and educational needs while learning.

I looked at the Beta signup. It asks a lot of questions (about hardware) but no one should seriously expect me to use my real name or main email account on the signup. Do you? Why?

Since then I have used live CDs of Knoppix and Suse and some small specialized builds. Basic desktop is obviously viable. Power ripping is not there. Notebooks are iffy especially on WiFi when I am moving away from desktops.

cn

Re:my experiences

[adamfranco]

I have Xandros running on a Pentium 200 laptop and it is painfully slow, but workable. I installed it (the open-circulation edition) on a friends P3 600MHz system with 128MB of RAM and its not lightning, but it a lot faster than the Win2000 that was on it before.

The application signup for beta testing is stupid

[ninti]

I mean, seriously, they ask for the make and model of every single piece of equipment in my machine, and they require an answer. What make and model is your DSL modem, what make and model is your monitor, what make and model is your fucking cd-rom drive...what the hell, it is a standard fucking IDE cd-rom drive, what the fuck do you care what make and model it is! Screw this shit, I was going to try it out but I got better things to do then answer a billion pointless questions.

Brilliant

[Anonymous Coward]

That was truly brilliant. Bravo. I love your style. Keep up the good work.

I liked Xandros the first time I used it.....

[Anonymous Coward]

....when it was called Windows 2000.

Seriously, go look at the screenshots. All the Windows 2000 interface components just blatently ripped off. Stuff named just a little differently, but in the same place. (e.g. "Control Center" vs. Control Panel).

Cmon guys, if people were totally ripping off some program or worse yet an entire OS that you wrote, you'd have to be angry about it. M$ or no M$, this copying/stealing/whatever stuff is getting downright ridiculous.

Oh, and let me get this straight - I'm going to try to use this thing and throw another layer of complexity into my environemnt just to try to run my Windows programs, and as an added bonus I have to pay for it? Thanks but no thanks.

lovely, stable beta beta test?

[LordIvan]

"Xandros always lets the other distros get the bugs out of the latest bleeding edge software before they do a new release so this should be another solid release... ... Can't wait. Gotta get me on that beta list."

Hold on... You're telling us that the reason you love xandros is because of its non-bleeding-edge stability... ... and you can't wait to get on the _beta_ test? :)

Re:That's what the *latest* Linux desktop looks li

[Enucite]

I don't care for Xandros either, but you could at least open the screenshots before you comment on them.
The text is anti-aliased, the icons are 32-bit and 3D-perspective, and the dialog boxes look the same as any other Linux distro.

Did you just feel like complaining today?

reply or mod - the eternal debate.

[Pandora's Vox]

As someone who has just switched to GNU/Linux full-time from Mac OS X (ASUS M6BNe - barebones, with no Redmond tax!) I have to say, you hit the nail on the head point by point. I can't copy and paste between GTK2 and Qt apps unless I'm running KDE and Klipper. I'd be much happier running Fluxbox, but it's this kind of basic BASIC non-functionality that just annoys the heck out of me. And installation / global management.... yeah, I'm currently one of those for whom compiling is NOT fun.

Back to getting Suspend working....

-Leigh

Re:reply or mod - the eternal debate.

[IamTheRealMike]

Copy and paste between Qt and GTK 2 apps should work fine, if it doesn't there is a bug in your setup somewhere. But yes I agree, software installation is a pain.

Re:reply or mod - the eternal debate.

[Pandora's Vox]

it works under KDE and Gnome (IIRC) but not under any of the *boxes, which i'd rather be running when i'm mobile.

-Leigh

Re:Gmail invites!

[Scud]

Damn, if I just had mod points...

Why I use it

[child_of_mercy]

OK, here's a screenshot of my own desktop a moment ago (it's an old version big upgrade in the pipe, it is very heavily locked down and firewalled).

Over in desktop 2 I've got two xandros file managers tiled to give me views of 4 locations on the network.

Two of them are samba mounts, one is local, and one is ftp.

But this way, in use, those network distinctions are transparent.

In windows world I used to have two or three explorers open at any given time plus an ftp client.

moving files around, and putting them in the right place is a big part of my job.

it is so very much easier both to set up and run in xandros than anything else I've tried.

It's not set up for a hard core geek but all the power is there if you need it.

I've got a co-worker on identical hardware running XP pro and trust me I'm a lot more productive.

Re:Why I use it

[bondjamesbond]

Nice. I like how you backed up your reply with a screenshot.

pre installed

[zogger]

I notice on their site they have a link (in news) to pre installed linux laptops. Several models, the cheap one is 1099$, your choice fedora or lindows, if you want xandros it is 99 clams more. You could get one without xandros, save the 99$, add more RAM with that loot, and sign up for the beta test and get the xandros free that way. 40 questions, cross over office and star office comes with it, about two bucks a question to you to answer it, if you want to look at it that way. I'm not in the market but thought I'd point it out if someone else might be.

just a FWIW, pre installed is a *good* idea, I wish more places did it. I don't know if those are good laptop prices though, but knowing the hardware works is nice.

Have you participated in any OSS betas?

[msimm]

Just keep in mind Xandros (or whoever) isn't Linux and couldn't possibly be. I don't think your cathedral comment holds weight if you think about the thousands of hackers/developers working across the globe that enabled Xandros to do their beta. It boggles my mind when I think of how much work goes into any distro and I'm not even talking about the work done creating the actuall distro! Beta indeed! :)

Beta is when you CVS into the developers site, download; configure; make; make install and then take the time to politely post feedback about any tweaking you might have had to do to get the stuff to work on your system. And it can be a lot of fun (and sometimes you might have an idea that the developers decides might actually be a good idea and it get implemented).

And for what it's worth I did read the book, years ago. Most of these guys aren't as anti business as you might think they are. The idea being, even after the vendors have lost interest (if they ever do) we still have all the code. The Bazaar doesn't need the cathedral.

I'm supposed to know all the hardware ???

[advocate_one]

I've just signed up... to trial it on a laptop, and they wanted to know all the hardware details??? I haven't got a clue what all the hardware details were... and I'm damn sure the vast majority of potential purchasers won't know what all the ins and outs of what chipset and what northbridge etc. they've got either... especially with a clone manufacturer with no real manual for it. To get those details, I'd need to fire knoppix up. I just want to stick the disk in and have it work... and I want suspend to work as well... and powersaving... those are the killer things I'm worried about that so far I can't do with my current Suse 9.1 setup.

Re:I'm supposed to know all the hardware ???

[poohsuntzu]

They aren't asking normal users to give them the information.

What good is asking a complete beginner to Linux their exact model and make numbers? None at all. That's why this is a -beta- test and not a final release. They have to collect the model numbers so that when people ask (and they WILL ask) if their specific model of hardware is supported, they can say "Yes" or "No", instead of the typical Linux answer "Try it and see".

Beta testers is for people who know how to test a system, not for people who are learning to use a computer.

Xandros is very good, just not for us geeks

[Tools1911]

I used Xandros 2.0 for over a few months, and I loved it. Everything worked, I beat windows users at there own game, new hardware? plug-in and play, say why are you looking for drivers?, starting applications?, nice menu, Internet->Browser, Office->Writer, why are you looking at Start->Programs->MS Office->Word?
Really while running Xandros, I beat the snot out of any windows instalation, it is that good, I loved that part, and hated it most of all, because I felt that I lost my Linux Control, so I'm back to Debian and Gentoo.
But where not importand here, most of the Slashdot crowd has no problem using a distro like Debian and reading some manuals, where already using Linux.
Now enter my Girlfriend, who hates, I state here, hates PC's, if they don't work, if they slip, she gets mad, real mad at the PC in 5 seconds flat. She kept screaming at here MS Windows, and I kept saying, hey, Xandros is on another partion give it a try then. And after getting mad she did, now she still get's mad at Xandros once in a while, but that's mostly websites that don't work because there IE only, and she's more pissed that she as a customer isn't getting respected for using an OS that does work.
Since she can complain about absolutly everything, I signed her up for the beta test, because I believe she can saddle up the Xandros people with enough things the "average" user cares about that they have enough for Xandros 4.0! :)
She found plenty of things she wanted "fixed", now ofcourse I fixed it, using "IT Ninja Tech Support" ( SSH ), but I think she sees the stuff we, the geeks miss.
I don't care what system someone else uses when I don't have to fix it, but if the average user starts using Linux, we win also, because hardware will get Linux support, we can demand open source drivers ( hey, you want native support for 15% of the market and growing?, then you better get of you horse and give is stable debuggable code ).
Not to mention that websites start taking care of there HTML code, maybe even force IE to be standards compliant, force MS Office into supporting KOffice and OpenOffice.org documents
We might not like it, but we need these average users to be seens as Full

Re:Xandros is very good, just not for us geeks

[adamfranco]

I fixed it, using "IT Ninja Tech Support" ( SSH )

I love that line! :-)

but I think she sees the stuff we, the geeks miss.

I work in educational technology (developing software for humanities profs amongst others) and working with absolutely clueless users has led to some great interface improvements. We spend weeks or months writing up some interface or feature, but its the feedback from those who haven't seen it before that allows us to make things discoverable and usable by other new users without having to train them. Plus, those interface improvements that allow newbies to do things often make the software easier for everyone to use, experts included.

Re:The application signup for beta testing is stup

[Anonymous Coward]

>> I mean, seriously, they ask for the make and model of every single piece of equipment in my machine, and they require an answer

yes they do. How do you think they get all the posters here who said "oh it found ALL my hardware first time..."

don't you think they have to try it out on as wide a number of platforms as possible.

It looks like XFCE ...

[Jammet]

Actually it looks like XFCE4 with a new Launch button and a slightly customized Panel, and a desktop manager from KDE or something. Of course, not having seen KDE at work in quite a while I could easily be fooled into thinking that.

Personal Info

[pekoe]

I hear a lot of complaints about the level of information required to use Xandros. Whilst the ones concerning data mining are valid, the ones that bitch about having to provide your hardware configuration are just plain stupid. Xandros are providing a beta free, which represents their hard work. The pay-off is that you do a little bug testing for them. In order to know what works, they need to know what hardware you're running out of the millions of possible configurations. I mean, how many Linux BBS tech support questions are ignored because the poster doesn't state what their system is? This is the same, but it would be a nightmare to have to manually extract the system configuration out of every bug report. Go figure.

Re:The application signup for beta testing is stup

[Anonymous Coward]

wait... you're on slashdot and you don't know your hardware specs to the model # detail???

get off the site, you poseur.

as far as Xandros goes, it looks nice. what harm will it do to try it? Damn -- too many people are willing to pooh-pooh things without giving a chance. Where's your sense of adventure, o Man?

Installation probems are a thing of the past

[nurb432]

There are MANY distros that make it brainless to install these days. ( sure some older style ones still are around too, just dont choose one of them )

While there are other issues slowing the migration of 'the masses', installation woes is no longer one of them...

This is 2004.. things have changed...

Re:The application signup for beta testing is stup

[ElementCDN]

I got better things to do then answer a billion pointless questions.

But lots of time to post your rant on Slashdot.....

What do the beta testers do exactly?

[edxwelch]

Is there any information availble about this, like what tasks are involved being a beta tested, will you be sent the CDs, or do you have to download, etc?

Re:Would you recommend...Yes, definitely

[Finsterwald P Ogleth]

I run Dual Boot Xandros2.0 w/ Win98. I also run SuSE 9.1 on a server, with Samba. With four family computers we have a nice network and space to share files. Xandros *installed* very easy as a dual boot, found and configured drivers for my HW. After initial boot, X2.0 found and set up our HP 7140 printer/scanner/copier/fax. It was also quite easy to set it up to login as a network share. The default SAMBA workgroup was "WORKGROUP", I just added our network neighborhood name. All the shares were available. Just as in Windows, I could easily share one of my directory as a shared drive and my wife could access it from her machine (a Compaq WINXP portable).

And the Xandros file manager is very similar to the Win XP interface, but about 30% faster (unless my XP at work and my wife's XP at home are special cases). You can also select a file, or drag/drop one on a "CD-BURN" folder and manage a burn from that folder. Like running Nero...

If you want an easy transition from WIN-xx, I would suggest XANDROS 2.0, or wait a few months for 3.0, which will (hopefully???) be based on the 2.6 kernel.

I've been using Xandros since 1.0 and installed it on some pretty quirky machines, and have had only a video card ID problem -- it was an old Fujitsu lifebook 735DX, with a Triton 93xx video chip. I just set it to boot into "Safe Mode" video as a default and it works fine.

So, have at it.

Frog at the bottom of the well...

[Finsterwald P Ogleth]

What an egocentric opinion.

Geez, man!

If you are a beta tester, doesn't it make sense to you at all that they would like to record what components you have installed, so they can *at the least* be able to know what configurations work???

Oh, wait, I see, you would rather NOT know that and just raise hell again when it sends that info without your knowledge. What a shill.

Regardless of what we may think of their business practices, or their prorietary type components they may include in the distro, at the least give them credit for being up-front.

A far more constructive approach would be to fill out the form with all that stuff, then go to the last box, where they ask for any additional info, then politely and professionally suggest that they put at the TOP of the form the reason behind their request.

Guess that never occured to you, did it?

FPO

Re:Gmail invites!

[chawly]

Go find a busy freeway and play football on it. Dozy twerp - got nothing else to do ?

Re:Fonts

[Anonymous Coward]

Look at lycoris

For their most recent release, they licensed bitstream font renderer. They use this instead of the open source font rendering libraries that can't do certain things because of patents.