Slashdot Mirror
Test-Drive a Linux Desktop From Windows
debiansid writes "The Open Soucre Region Stuttgart is now offering a free demo of the Linux Desktop to users through their web browsers. They had earlier launched a German version before which received more than
100,000 responses, after which they decided to launch an English version. The website requires you to download and run an exe - it does not install anything on to the hard drive. The demo system is Debian based with a v2.4 kernel and KDE."
"Open Soucre" or "Open Source" ?
"Sorry - too much users on the system. Try again later !"
It worked on the 4th try though. Got a full working desktop.
"The website requires you to download and run an exe - it does not install anything on to the hard drive."
How is placing a copy of an executable binary on your hard disk, with the intention of copying said binary into RAM and executing its instructions, not installing something on your hard drive? Am I missing something here? Are they assuming your browser saves to a RAMdisk or removable media or something?
does it run under Wine?
My question is " How is this different from NoMachine's NX Server?"
NoMachine and their NX server also allows you to testdrive a linux desktop on windows, over a remote connection. I found my FreeNX server usable even over dial-up, and could show my parents what my linux desktop looked like, and think it might be a useful migration step for some users. It's even bundled with Knoppix.
"What do you think?" "I think 'What, do you think?!'"
I'm increasingly seeing the words, "Test Driving" associated with Linux. I think it is all the live CDs out there, as well as these web accessible desktops. Ways to try out Linux without installing anything.
O'Reilly even has a new book called Test Driving Linux: From Windows to Linux in 60 Seconds that appears to be written for people trying out a Linux desktop for the first time. It uses the Mandrake Move live CD as the basis for the book, and practically everything covered in the book can be done using the live CD. That is why it only covers KDE.
Though the book lacks an installation chapter (one isn't needed when using a live CD) it provides coverage of all the other typical desktop chores like web browsing, file management, email, OpenOffice.org, and even GnuCash for money management. It is the only introductory book that I have seen that goes into great detail on how to accomplish tasks or use interesting features of the programs. Most other introductory Linux books gloss over how you actually work with the program.
This is just a remote connection to a Linux server using the Secure Global Desktop Enterprise Edition from Tarantella.
Is it a coincidence that Sun just announced yesterday they are buying Tarentella?
There is a Linux distribution called DamnSmallLinux which is a Knoppix derivative, takes only 50Mb and can be booted from CD, installed on a USB key, your hard drive, etc. One of the cool things they do is include QEMU and a "bat" file so you can boot DamnSmall in QEMU and be running Linux as a process under Windows. I have a Pentium M 1.7Ghz system and it runs pretty well.
Is this a possible new type of terminal services for Linux? I'm looking for an alternative to LTSP. Or am I just flame bate? CLUELESS!
Sig: BEEeeeP,,Please press pound, so I can get on with my fucking life!
Users need to know that just because a program doesn't come with another program which "installs" it doesn't mean that the program isn't put on their computer and can't do some sort of harm to it. People have a false sense of security about downloading programs. Users should know what "running a program from the Internet" really means: copying the instructions to the hard drive, and then to memory, and then executing them. Period. Registering (or not) the software in some list maintained in the operating system or placing the software in a temporary file path or in a designated program file path makes no difference as to whether the software can effect malicious ends - that's what I'm saying. The whole concept of what it means to "install" something needs to be clarified to the end user.
I could accept that the software is not "installed" if it were sandboxed in some way.
Native binaries executed from a web browser should always be sandboxed.
Boot a Knoppix CD. Now install it to the HD. Without prior techie experience, with nothing more than the directions in Knoppix Hacks. Go on.
As great as the book is, as helpful as it is, most non-tech people aren't going to be able to make the leap from playing around in a live CD to installing, configuring, and using Linux.
Now if the desktops are on a massive multi-user server remote from them, with paid techie admins, and they simply log in remotely and use it that way, well a lot of these people do that at their corporate jobs every day with Citrix and MSTermServ.
It's like testing a fully functional SUV versus buying it, and having to put part of the engine together and reinstall the sound system and rotate all the tires yourself before you can make any use of it. Why do that when you can get an econobox ready to roll?
Linux-based MSPs might be a good way to get Linux desktops in front of users, but other than that...
If my grammar and spelling are off, I am [distracted/tired/careless] (take your pick)
I ran yes for a while but decided I was being wasteful; now I'm using it to run seti.
SEO Firefox Extension