Mandriva Buys Assets from Lycoris

ulteus writes "For months after the acquisition of Conectiva, Mandriva moves further with the following announcement: "Mandriva today announced an agreement to purchase several assets from Lycoris, a major North American Linux distribution for home users. As part of this agreement, Lycoris' founder and CEO Joseph Cheek is joining Mandriva to develop a new and advanced Linux desktop product.". This is exciting for all Mandriva and Lycoris users, but I'm wondering: who's next?"

Comments

I see no problems with this

[justforaday]

I'm looking forward to having to explain why I have a CD labeled "Manlyca" laying around...

Re:I see no problems with this

[NotFamous]

It actually ManLyConnect...

Re:I see no problems with this

[Amiga Trombone]

Well, you have to give them credit - about 2 years ago they were in bankruptcy, now they're swallowing competitors like guppies.

I always did like Mandrake's desktop (mostly). I never used Lycoris, but what I've heard, their desktop was even better, so hopefully they'll be able to painlessly merge the greatest strengths of both of them (although we all know things don't always work out that way).

I hope they decide to do business under the Lycoris trade name. "Mandriva" sounds like something a dentist would use on you.

Re:I see no problems with this

[Anonymous Coward]

This is exciting for all Mandriva and Lycoris users, but I'm wondering: who's next?

Well, with names like Conectiva, Mandriva, and Lycoris, just pick a company with a gay-ass name.

Maybe consolidation is good

[FlyByPC]

Perhaps what Linux needs to become competitive with Windows in the desktop-OS market is for several Red-Hat-like companies to come out with competing Linux desktop products. Once the way is paved (keeping it Open Source, of course), I think a critical mass will eventually make Linux or a similar Open Source project a no-brainer choice for the desktop.

Re:Maybe consolidation is good

[AKAImBatman]

Linux doesn't need consolidation as much as it just needs to address the existing usablility issues. I touched upon this in the Symphony OS story, and I hope to get a new blog entry up on it in the next day or two.

The long and short of it is:

1. The packaging system is user-unfriendly.
2. The locations of programs are user-unfriendly.
3. The folder layout of Linux systems is user-unfriendly.
4. The lack of a standard base of installed libraries is application (and thus user) unfriendly.

If this can at least be solved at the distribution level, then we'll be good to go. But right now a given distribution means different things to different people depending on what packages are installed.

(P.S. Speaking of my blog, I get a kick out of the fact that the story I submitted on my last entry is still pending. Since Saturday. Guess the editors just think it's cool to look at or something. :-P)

Re:Maybe consolidation is good

[Anonymous Coward]

Sure. Now for Mandrake + Conectiva, we got the obviously silly name "Mandriva". With Lycoris in the mix, it'll have to be ...

• Mandroris?
• Lydriva?
• Landrivis?
• Conedrakis?

Any way you slice it, it sounds like a bad Dungeons & Dragons monster.

Re:Maybe consolidation is good

[sjaskow]

No, what Linux need to become a prominent desktop OS is for a major VAR (Mike Dell, I'm talking to you) to start selling Linux-based desktops for a significant cost-savings over Windows XP.

Also, an AOL client would be very nice as well.

Re:Maybe consolidation is good

[Anonymous Coward]

OT, I know: Since Saturday is nothing. I have one pending since last month (almost 30 days now)... but wow, just checked, and it's been accepted. Cool! My hit/miss ratio improves steadily!

Re:Maybe consolidation is good

[tomhudson]

Maybe they can steal a page from SuSE, and call it YALinux (Yet Another Linux). Anything's better than Mandriva.

Of course, if they buy Wombat Linux, they could be called Woman-driva, but that would just scare everyone else off the road.

Re:Maybe consolidation is good

[Coryoth]

1. The packaging system is user-unfriendly.

It's actually pretty good at what it is - a means to package a diverse system that can be tailored to the user. Things like Smart (a Conectiva/Mandriva project even) and Autopackage help a lot. To get the packaging systems you want you need to fix #4, and I don't think that's likely to happen (at least not successfully).

2. The locations of programs are user-unfriendly.

Really? Any program that actually supports the freedesktop.org desktop entry file is readily accessible to the user unless they use some WM or DE that doesn't bother to use them - which means they've gone out of their way to complicate their lives. As for where the programs are stored on disk ... well, that doesn't really matter does it? You want a searchable tag/label based system, so why not consider the package database as such a label view - you can see all the programs on your system with ease through the "package label" view of your filesystem, does the physical location really matter that much to you?

3. The folder layout of Linux systems is user-unfriendly.

To some extent I agree, but we're dealing with legacy here... even OS X and windows have some odd folder locations and names carried over. Besides, there's always GoboLinux, which I presume you already know about.

4. The lack of a standard base of installed libraries is application (and thus user) unfriendly.

This is the big one really. If you want a fixed mandated core set of libraries that the user is forced to install... well, grab yourself a nice mandated controlled system like OS X, because Linux probably isn't what you're looking for. In theory you could just set up a distribution that has such a guaranteed base set of libraries, and in a sense some already exist - try Linspire, or Xandros. The catch is that people write applications for "Linux" not "Debian, stable" or "Linspire 3.1" or whatever. Given a random open source application it will make whatever assumptions about libraries it cares to - it's up to the packages to make sure those dependencies are met. FOSS applications tend to be coded against "whatever system the developer cared to use" rather than specific distributions and versions. Commercial developers maybe? Well they do have requirements - Oracle requires particular versions of Redhat in standard installs. Other commercial developers can do that if they like. Alternatively they could accept that the Linux world is a diverse world and restricting yourself to the one distribution that is guaranteed to have everything you want where you want it is a little limiting. You can always use Autopackage and handle the dependency issue elegantly in a way that's effectively invisible to the user.

The fact is that different distributions are different. You seem to be asking for all (or most) of the distributions to agree on a firm fixed set of base libraries. Distributions are different competing companies often however - you may as well ask Apple and Microsoft to hammer out a combined base set of libraries that you can be guaranteed to get in both OS X and Windows. Maybe that's a good idea. Maybe CoreImage on Windows and DirectX on OS X is what you'd like to see. I'm not so sure it will happen though.

Jedidiah.

Re:Maybe consolidation is good

[naelurec]

No, what Linux need to become a prominent desktop OS is for a major VAR (Mike Dell, I'm talking to you) to start selling Linux-based desktops for a significant cost-savings over Windows XP.

Nah.. sell it for MORE than WinXP .. then people will be like "whoah.. Linux costs MORE than WinXP .. it must be much better!!"

Which of course, you can market it that way.. no spyware issues, virus issues, better default security model, more/better included software, default theme-able interface (KDE), free software updates to new major versions, etc.. :)

Of course, we do need to address the "but does XYZ[1] software app run under Linux?" question..

[1] quickbooks, quicken, turbotax, photoshop, particular video editing software, certain game, etc..

Re:Maybe consolidation is good

[mandrake*rpgdx]

"The folder layout of Linux systems is user-unfriendly"

Don't you mean usr/friendly? (and also- no it's not, sit any joe schmoe user in front of a hierarchy of folder with bin, sbin, usr, local, etc and watch them get confused fast. That's why OSX hides these system files)

Re:Maybe consolidation is good

[einstein]

(P.S. Speaking of my blog, I get a kick out of the fact that the story I submitted on my last entry is still pending. Since Saturday. Guess the editors just think it's cool to look at or something. :-P)

generally that means it's not anything urgent, and they are saving it for a slow news day.

Re:Maybe consolidation is good

[jweric]

Not really. For one reason: Who is this critical mass you talk about? Their are 4 generealized groups of PC users that are relivent to the linux world that we want:
1.)Current Linux users, these guys are set and probibly wont go anywhere any time soon
2.) Buisness class users that use windows
3.) Educational users that use windows
4.) Home users that use windows

3 & 4 are typicaly the same, and are considered the "critical mass" since their are more in this group.

The problem I see is not linux but the DE that comes with it. The average person will not care one bit about what linux does, because thats the way it is with windows. That is the main problem with DE's today, you have to worry about what linux does too much for it to be useable to grandma and grandpa. Once you make it that seamless then you have the stuff you need to go after the critical mass.

So now you will ask me:"How does this effect the reason why consolidation is good argument?"

It isnt distros that need to consolidate but more of an interaction with each other and with the DE makers.

To beat Microsoft in this arena, their needs to be more of a weaving between the DE and the kernal. I could be wrong and the only way this can happen is consolidation. This is my view, but most likely I am looking at things wrong.

Re:Maybe consolidation is good

[Master of Transhuman]

And watch Joe User - or even me, since I haven't bothered to analyze them all - look at the plethora of Windows folders under the Windows folders and get confused.

Yes, finally, Windows XP hides those folders automatically (and I of course unhide them instantly since I'm not a dumbed down Windows moron who needs to be "protected" from his own system.)

The bottom line is that whether you hide those directories or not, you still have them and any user confused by them should comprehend that he doesn't need to be looking at them anyway if he doesn't know what he's doing.

As for explaining where things are to a new Linux user, you simply go through the File System Hierarchy concept and then point out that he doesn't need to know where everything is as the package manager will tell him and handle things automatically (or at least as far as the app developer allows it to - and lazy programmers are a problem with Windows, too. Stuffing everything in the Registry is NOT a solution.)

Re:Maybe consolidation is good

[jedidiah]

> 1. The packaging system is user-unfriendly.

This is utter hogwash. They are simple even in
their console versions.

> 2. The locations of programs are user-unfriendly.

If a Unix app program is properly set up. THE LOCATION IS ENTIRELY IRRELEVANT to the user.

> 3. The folder layout of Linux systems is user-unfriendly.

It's remarkably better than the alternatives.

> 4. The lack of a standard base of installed libraries is application (and thus user) unfriendly.

"application unfriendliness" has squat to do with user friendliness. The whole point of applications is to mask the sharp edges of an OS.

Re:Maybe consolidation is good

[poptones]

1. The packaging system is user-unfriendly.
2. The locations of programs are user-unfriendly.
3. The folder layout of Linux systems is user-unfriendly.
4. The lack of a standard base of installed libraries is application (and thus user) unfriendly.

What? These are "user" issues?

In windows there are a dozen different installers and they do not all behave or interact well. Installing windows 2000 OOTB on a system and then trying to get their own visual studio installed on it once involved me spending HOURS online looking for answers to problems that were all caused by that idiotic installer and the "upgrades" they had made to it. Even installing the latest service pack at the time didn't fix it, and yet microsoft couldn't be bothered to include this stupid udate program on the CD itself or even to just install THAT package if it was needed.

I have never had the problems installing any linux software that I have had trying to install much windows software. From a user perspective it's a matter of choosing what you want to install and clicking a button, and most distributions do a great job of integrating some form of management software into their desktop.

Locations of programs is NOT A USER ISSUE. install the program, uninstall the program. Most users I know are hard pressed to even navigate the concept of "folders" outside the BDI prodivided by the various "My blah" shortcuts provided on their desktop.

Lack of standard libraries? See my comments about the development tools in windows. Meanwhile most desktop distros give you a full office suite, browser, newsreader, and generally all the other little crap most users have come to expect, and you get that without paying extra for it or having to buy it all bundled.

Re:Maybe consolidation is good

[Master of Transhuman]

Good points.

Especially this one:

"Alternatively they could accept that the Linux world is a diverse world and restricting yourself to the one distribution that is guaranteed to have everything you want where you want it is a little limiting."

This basically brings up the basic point that you have a spectrum of users. Most users of (large) corporation machines do not (or at least should not) install software unapproved by IT. Users of small corporation machines and home users might. But if those users know enough to use the package manager, it doesn't matter - the package manager handles it in most cases - at least if the user only knows enough to get his software from his distros repository.

And a user who knows MORE than this is more than capable of figuring out where stuff is or should be and where it should go on his machine.

I get tarred and feathered by /. morons for painting all politicians as bad, but it seems no one cares if all Linux users are considered either idiots or nerds. There is a spectrum of users, and Linux can be made to fit most of them with either some minimal training or external IT control - exactly the same as Windows.

A modern Linux distro is powerful enough to be compared to a Windows Server in terms of functionality - not to Windows 95. Try handing Windows 2003 Server to a naive user - or even your average sys admin - and have him set Group Policy. effectively.

I've said this before: I had to learn Windows and Linux simultaneously over the last three years - and I have found NO difference in usability or learnability between the two. No modern OS is "intuitive" - beyond knowing that clicking the mouse does something and what a menu is. What I HAVE found is a difference in reliability, security, and COST (cost for apps - I got all my Windows OS free as well as Linux - in fact, I actually spent money to get Red Hat 7.3 in the past.)

Re:Maybe consolidation is good

[jedidiah]

Even under SunOS, there's no reason to venture into "the mess" unless you insist on doing so.

Re:Maybe consolidation is good

[Master of Transhuman]

"To beat Microsoft in this arena, their needs to be more of a weaving between the DE and the kernal. I could be wrong and the only way this can happen is consolidation. This is my view, but most likely I am looking at things wrong."

You are.

The biggest security problem in Windows is that the desktop (AND the browser, AND the applications) have connections to the kernel (that's "kernel" BTW to be /. pedantic.)

The last thing Linux (or Windows) needs is more interaction between the desktop and the kernel.

Re:Maybe consolidation is good

[Anonymous Coward]

3. The folder layout of Linux systems is user-unfriendly. I'm using Gnome under Debian and the only folder I, as a user, have to care about is $HOME. Everything I do or have is under $HOME, even the desktop. That sounds friendly to me.

Re:Maybe consolidation is good

[Anonymous Coward]

The fact is that different distributions are different. You seem to be asking for all (or most) of the distributions to agree on a firm fixed set of base libraries. Distributions are different competing companies often however - you may as well ask Apple and Microsoft to hammer out a combined base set of libraries that you can be guaranteed to get in both OS X and Windows. Maybe that's a good idea. Maybe CoreImage on Windows and DirectX on OS X is what you'd like to see. I'm not so sure it will happen though.

And this is what is preventing Linux from catching on main stream. While choice is good, framentation on standards is not. Especially if you're talking about trying to gain marketshare.

To the average joe, there is Windows and Mac, period. A more education person will know about Windows, Mac, and Linux, but "Linux" doesn't really mean anything.

It is a very small percentage of computer users that know that Red Hat and Slackware are two different collections of libraries that happen to use the linux kernel.

Re:Maybe consolidation is good

[AKAImBatman]

Go install VLC on say... SuSE. FEEL the pain and anguish of trying to install something and having the system reject it. Then FEEL the pain of trying to do all the updates through source compiles. FEEL the pain of tracking down every dependency. FEEL the pain of having the program not work even after you compile it. FEEL the frustration of having no menu icon for the program, and having no easy method for setting up a menu icon. FEEL the angst as you have to browse through thousands of little /bin programs looking for VLC to make an association.

That is the pain I've gone through (and every user goes through) every time they try to install something outside of what the distribution provides. You know how I install VLC on Windows? 1)Run Installer. 2)Run Program. You know how I run it on my Mac? 1)Download and Run program.

So don't give me any fanatic crap about "it's all just the same LALALALALALA!" Pull your fingers out of your ears and PAY ATTENTION. Issues exist that are blocking Linux from being a viable desktop platform. If you'd rather ignore them, fine. But don't even TRY to tell me that it's all in my head.

If you really wanted Linux adopted in the home, then you'd recognize where issues exist, and realize that good solutions are being worked on.

Re:Maybe consolidation is good

[swv3752]

Mandycoris or Mandycra or Mandyva would be worse. :-P

(be sure to remember correct pronunciation that dyc is dick).

Re:Maybe consolidation is good

[Coryoth]

To the average joe, there is Windows and Mac, period. A more education person will know about Windows, Mac, and Linux, but "Linux" doesn't really mean anything.

It is a very small percentage of computer users that know that Red Hat and Slackware are two different collections of libraries that happen to use the linux kernel.

I don't think this is quite the problem you seem to think. What we have to get past is the belief that there is a single system that is best for everyone. Once you are open to the existence of a plurality of systems then the different distributions seem far less frightening: hopping bewteen Fedora and SuSE and Ubuntu is far less daunting that moving from Mac to Windows or vice versa.

Is the diversity of Linux distributions holding Linux adoption back? Yes, probably a little. I think lack of critical mass in mind share is a far bigger issue however. And in many ways diversity of distributions helps Linux too, by providing vitality and competition: Look at what the arrival of Ubuntu has done for desktop linux.

Linux is making slow and steady inroads on the desktop, and that's fine. It will never be the dominant desktop OS because it's FOSS nature precludes the sort of mandated controlled consistency that a truly "Joe User desktop" really requires. It could easily garner a large share of the desktop market though, providing a good desktop for technical people, and other niche markets.

Let's be honest, no OS can be everything to everyone. If you want a consolidated, controlled, consistent OS where everything is simple because standards are locked down then I think OS X is great. If you want a little more flexibility and ready access to a fast evolving system then I think Linux is making good strides toward being an excellent desktop OS for your needs. If you want to something that has the majority of developers and commercial applications right now then Windows is probably a good option. I think there's plenty of room for in the market for a variety of different desktop OSs to suit the needs of different desktop users. All that really matters is that they play together and interact easily and well (it's on this last point that Windows falls down for me).

Jedidiah.

Re:Maybe consolidation is good

[Com2Kid]

• > 2. The locations of programs are user-unfriendly.
• 
  
  If a Unix app program is properly set up. THE LOCATION IS ENTIRELY IRRELEVANT to the user.

Braindead viewpoint. Hundreds of applications are installed on my system, not all of them get put in my WM's app menu, so I drop to console to start them.

IF I can remember what the program I want to run is called!

Under Windows I can root around the /Program Files/ directory for a bit until I find what I want, under Linux, I have something like 3 or 4 Bin directories, each with literally hundreds of executables in it.

Often times it is easier to Google around for some verbs that describe what I want to do and try typing in different program names that come up as a result.

Like the P2P program, Valknut. Do you know how hard it is to remember that name? For the first week I had that program I had to Google for "Linux DC client" every time I wanted to remember what it was called!

Re:Maybe consolidation is good

[suitepotato]

1. The packaging system is user-unfriendly.
This is true. As good as RPM is, I have two words that have not and show no signs of going away: DEPENDENCY HELL.

2. The locations of programs are user-unfriendly.
Also true. /etc/what? /usr/bin/what? A simple easy to follow standard for placement of apps and all associated code is badly needed. Anyone remember pre-Win95 when apps went wherever the developer felt like putting them? I don't accept it when someone ignores standards on Windows and puts their stuff right off of C:\(whatever) and I shouldn't with Linux. We have standards for apps you say? Fine, MENTION them and RUTHELESSLY ENCOURAGE them.

3. The folder layout of Linux systems is user-unfriendly.
Unfortunately also true. And one important thing is overlooked. WinXP handles spaces in file and folder names. Having to type /home/jcurtis/my\ stuff/my\ pictures/my\ vacation/ may seem elementary to Unix geeks, but the casual user wants to type the way he does every day. So Gnome and KDE have file managers which don't show the \ take-the-space-as-literal underpinnings but when they get brave enough to go to the prompt... Oops. /home/jcurtis/my stuff/my pictures/my vacation/ returns no such. Linux has inherited most of the idiotic defects noted decades earlier in Unix and this is one.

4. The lack of a standard base of installed libraries is application (and thus user) unfriendly.
Again true. Windows MFCs, .DLLs, etc., etc., ad nauseam, give much in the way of standardization to Windows and its third part apps. This gives a regular and reassuring environment. If cars were designed as Linux apps, then every one would have the steering device be put in a different place and require that some other third party part be installed at the same time. I like my steering wheels to always be mounted from the dashboard so I can face forward. I don't need a steering joystick mounted in the trunk with a dependency on a gas button mounted under the car and an 8-track stereo in the back seat.

In short, Linux still suffers from useability issues. Why? Because the people driving the forces behind it overall believe that complicated is better than easy? Yes, but that goes with the whole geek-nerd psyche-defect thing of always trying to show off their smarts. I got tired of that in junior high.

The real reason is that the platform isn't being pushed as much for its own survival and its own greatness as hatred for the other guy. Microsoft, IOW. And where is Microsoft leading everywhere? The consumer desktop. And has the hatred blinded people to sober honest analysis of why it still leads? You bet. Even veteran support techs still forget that Windows is being used in huge numbers by people who want easy, sensible, etc. and not hard, incorrect, scattershot.

Mandriva, Mancos, Lydriva, you can call it whatever you want. We could merge Fedora and Suse and get Fuse. What we need is to head towards the ease and sensibility that Windows has given the end users. THAT more than anything is what will begin to compete with Windows and inspire true competition. Ask yourself, is Firefox as hard to install and use as so many other Linux apps? No. It works exactly as it does with Windows minus minutae. And the extensions install with a click and a click without rpm -i this.rpm or emerge that or, shudder, make theotherthing.

Firefox is a perfect example of what Linux should be: easy, consistant, workable. Anyone manages a distro like that, especially during a dangerous market lull for Microsoft like right now pending Longhorn, they'd have something to really challenge Windows. Now that I could get behind.

Re:Maybe consolidation is good

[PakProtector]

Oi! That's what I'm calling my MUD!

Re:Maybe consolidation is good

[shahruz]

I have recently made the jump from Win98 to Mandriva 10.1 and it was a surprisingly pain free experience. I have installed other distros in the past and after a while ended up paving over it with Windows for one reason or another (generally one of the reasons above). This time I don't see any reason why I would go back. My system is far more stable, robust and dare I say easy to maintain that it was as a Windows based system. Granted that my geek quotient is somewhat high, but if you take into account that my wife, my 8 year old and 4 year old are using it as well you cannot say it is incredibly difficult.

I am preaching to the choir on Slashdot and my point is not that Mandriva or any other distro is superior for its ease of use. My point is that traditionally all these were excellent reasons why the average computer user would not use Linux. I think that these are now no longer necessarily valid reasons. In my most recent experience:

• Install fast and easy, I went from windows to XWindows in an hour or less, and my computer is a Duron 700 with 128MB of RAM.
• Directory structure is not familiar but the majority of what I use was already set up for me in XWindows so I could use it out of the box and dig in deeper later.
• Free support is only a Google away.
• I have been able to find and install RPMs and archives of what I need. When it is not on the CD I have been mostly successful finding it and installing it. What I have not been successful compiling/installing would not be considered common sofware and I would not expect to get it running under Windows either.

I recently read In the Beginning Was the Command Line by Neil Stephenson. It is now 6 years old but I think that it explains the phenomenon better than I can.

Re:Maybe consolidation is good

[Conanymous Award]

Very good points, AKAImBatman. As a Joe Windoze-user who has tried Linux several times with various distros I can sign and verify each of those four claims.

1. The GUI is in many aspects better than that of Windows, but I still have to use text commands to unpack (or whatever it's called) a tar file? What the heck? Or have I somehow missed the app that handles tar packages thru a GUI? (This reminds me of another problem: the apps aren't named after their function, but instead have some "funny" names, vague acronyms or KThis and KThat, in the case of KDE.)

2. The programs are thrown hither and tither into folders located here and there. And to top that, the folders/directories names are vague, hard-to-remember (remember, I'm a Windows user) abbreviations. Confusion abounds. Of course, you could say that this gives you more freedom, you don't need to care about the location of the app. Well, I like to keep my file system orderly and uncluttered. And when I want to make a shortcut to an app I'd like to find it easily, preferably through knowing exactly where it is located. This is made easier by a Program Files style folder.

3. What I said about the naming of the folders, see point 2.

4. Yes. As if the installing of new apps wouldn't be enough of a pain in the @$$, with all those tar files and weirdly-named, weirdly-located folders (not to mention the fact that the "Install new programs" function on at least SuSE and Mandrake only includes those apps that came with the distro - why aren't the downloaded apps added to those lists?), I have to fight with ever-occurring library problems. Even on Windows people often don't know how to install applications. How do you think they could do that on Linux?

I must say that all the Linux distros I've used have improved in leaps and bounds since the first time I tried Linux (Red Hat in 1998 I think), but there are still some of these big issues that have to be solved before Linux can conquer (or should I say konquer) Joe User's desktop.

Re:Maybe consolidation is good

[Al Dimond]

Even on Windows programs often install straight onto c:\ by default (the nerve!), and sometimes within Program Files they're within subfolders related to the vendor, which can sometimes be non-obvious.

It sounds like you would have spent much less time just adding an entry to your WM's app menu, or possibly a symlink in your home directory, after figuring it out the first time. Tooling around the Program Files directory is not an intuitive way to find anything.

Re:Maybe consolidation is good

[mr_shifty]

I like Mandrivoris, myself. :-)

Re:Maybe consolidation is good

[pllewis]

4. The lack of a standard base of installed libraries is application (and thus user) unfriendly.

This is the big one really. If you want a fixed mandated core set of libraries that the user is forced to install... well, grab yourself a nice mandated controlled system like OS X, because Linux probably isn't what you're looking for. In theory you could just set up a distribution that has such a guaranteed base set of libraries, and in a sense some already exist - try Linspire, or Xandros. The catch is that people write applications for "Linux" not "Debian, stable" or "Linspire 3.1" or whatever. Given a random open source application it will make whatever assumptions about libraries it cares to - it's up to the packages to make sure those dependencies are met. FOSS applications tend to be coded against "whatever system the developer cared to use" rather than specific distributions and versions. Commercial developers maybe? Well they do have requirements - Oracle requires particular versions of Redhat in standard installs. Other commercial developers can do that if they like. Alternatively they could accept that the Linux world is a diverse world and restricting yourself to the one distribution that is guaranteed to have everything you want where you want it is a little limiting. You can always use Autopackage and handle the dependency issue elegantly in a way that's effectively invisible to the user.

In response to that is LSB. Linux Standard Base sets a set of libraries so if an app is released under LSB, it should work on any distro that supports LSB. Mandrake/Mandriva support LSB, and is LSB compliant. There is an optional package on installation for LSB system stuff. See picture for picture.

Re:Maybe consolidation is good

[poptones]

That is the pain I've gone through (and every user goes through) every time they try to install something outside of what the distribution provides.

And this is why you are comparing apples to oranges. If the folks at ubuntu or mandrake or wherever would take the time to package it then it wouldn't be this mess it is.

You want a fair comparison? OK let's pick any given package for windows of equivalent complexity - say, the gimp - and intall IT without any binaries. Whoops! We don't even have a compileryet to even make it to step one!

Fine, so let's try it this way: I'll send you the gimp in executable form but without the installer! And you can try hacking it in, putting the DLLs all where they belong and creating the program group folders and REGISTERING those DLLs so it all plays together with the shell as it's supposed to.

You know how I install VLC on Windows? 1)Run Installer. 2)Run Program. You know how I run it on my Mac? 1)Download and Run program.

So try this: download that VLC installer, unzip it manually, and install all that crap yourself. Without someone from the relevant distribution (mandriva, ubuntu, WINDOWS, whatever) doing this that is exactly what you would have.

Issues exist that are blocking Linux from being a viable desktop platform.

It took me about a month to get used to using linux after several years of sucking on the windows teat. Now every time one of my friends asks me for help I just chuckle about how easy it would be to fix their problem if only they had a decent command line or a decent set of tools installed by default.

But I hear Microsoft is planning a whole new shell language on the next release, so maybe there's hope - maybe given just a few more years, Microsoft will produce a viable desktop platform.

Re:Maybe consolidation is good

[AKAImBatman]

If the folks at ubuntu or mandrake or wherever would take the time to package it then it wouldn't be this mess it is.

And this is as poor of an argument as ever. Why should the user be restricted to only software officially supported by a Linux distro? VLC isn't supported by Microsoft or Apple. VideoLan provides it. Why should I have to ask Ubuntu, Mandrake, Fedora, SuSE, Uncle Bob's Linux, or any other distro to compile and repackage every piece of software in existance?

And what if I *do* want to run a commercial piece of software? Wait, we're supposed to attack them for not giving it to us at no cost, then make them release the source for Football Linux, PenguiHeads Linux, and Turbine Linux to repackage.

Wouldn't it be a smidge easier to allow the program writer to target a given set of APIs, and place his program in a place where it's unlikely to interfere with other programs?

It took me about a month to get used to using linux after several years of sucking on the windows teat. Now every time one of my friends asks me for help I just chuckle about how easy it would be to fix their problem if only they had a decent command line or a decent set of tools installed by default.

I'm long past that stage. I just tell everyone to get a Mac. That way they can manage their own computer, and if something *does* go wrong (which is pretty rare on Macs), I have a command line in front of me.

Re:Maybe consolidation is good

[Anonymous Coward]

i'm gonna have to agree with the OP on this one.

This is utter hogwash. They are simple even in their console versions.

compared to what? typing the binary code by hand? look at linux software installation vs. other desktop operating systems.

Windows -> go to website of www.AppName.com, download the installer. Open exe. It's now installed, available in the Start menu, probably even gave an option to put a shortcut on the desktop. Done.

Mac OS X -> go to website of www.AppName.com, download the disk image. It mounts on your desktop, pops open a folder, which you drag into the Applications folder. Done.

Linux -> not gonna get it from the source website most likely. ok, let's hope our distribution has decided to include it. open up synaptic or do an emerge or apt-get... whatever, and it MIGHT be there. Obscure/new program? Sorry, it's probably not available yet. Good luck with the makefile. Using someone else's computer and they're using an oddball Linux distro? Good luck installing software! There is no unified, user-friendly packaging system in Linux.

Now, this might be simplifying the issue but seriously, the OP's complaint is not without some justification. You are at the mercy of the community to include your app for most of the existing package managers. Of course, if you only want to use software that is regularly maintained by the community, then sure, you can easily keep your system up-to-date, do doubt more easily than Windows or Mac OS X.

Re:Maybe consolidation is good

[jwhitener]

[quote]well, grab yourself a nice mandated controlled system like OS X, because Linux probably isn't what you're looking for.[/quote]

What are we talking about here? I thought it was why Linux isn't popular on the desktop, and things that need to change to fix that?

The above quoted statement is far too typical a response to very legitimate concerns.

As a relatively new user to Linux, I downloaded and installed several major apps. Not one created an icon or executable in my 'start menu', nor correctly placed themselves in my bin (not that I would know what to type anyways).

You might argue that it is the applications job to tell you, or to create that icon, but I'm sure the original poster is correct in that, the wide variety found is distributions makes developing user friendly linux applications a major pain.

Without apps, an OS is nothing. Continuing to shrug off pursuit of some sort of standardized library base and directory layout is a sure way to guarantee that Linux-based distributions will never be a popular on the desktop.

Re:Maybe consolidation is good

[m50d]

Mandrake is /there/ when it comes to the DE. Really, use it. KDE with their lovely galaxy theme, and gnome set up to match it so you barely notice the difference in applications. Menus set up with descriptions over program names, so you just need to look for "web browser" or whatever. GUI package management that, while far from perfect, works wonderfully if you stick to Mandrake repositories and well enough if you get a few programs from elsewhere. It's good enough to go for the critical mass. All that's keeping them off it is inertia. However, it's starting to ship with cheap PCs, so even that may be about to change.

Re:Maybe consolidation is good

[poptones]

Why should the user be restricted to only software officially supported by a Linux distro?

DUH! because distributions are all different. They provide different things for different people. I use ubuntu because I love the way it looks and feels but I cannot just install kwrite (an app I like very much more than the gnome text editor) or even the very popular k3b because I do not want to install all the extra kde crap that goes with it. Is this the fault of the folks who make k3b or the folks who support ubuntu?

On what version of windows did you install videolan? XP? 2000? Does it work in windows 98? I have downloaded SCADS of software that claims to work on 'Windows" but didn't work at all on my particular version. I bought American McGee's Alice on closeout about a year and a half ago and still have never played it because I have NEVER been able to get it installed on a single machine! I have tried 2k, xp, and ME. I don't have a serial number for 98 and I'm not about to try it, too much work just to play a game. I have tried it on WINE and it didn't work there either, though. Anyway I forget... what were you saying about how easy it is to install windows software?

Different distributions need support. If videolan doesn't have the time to do this for you and you refuse to learn to DIY, then look around. My bet is you will find someone who has done the hard work for you and put together a step by step.. which is more than I ever found for the closed source, corporate produced "Alice."

Re:Maybe consolidation is good

[99BottlesOfBeerInMyF]

Any program that actually supports the freedesktop.org desktop entry file is readily accessible to the user

Any program can be run by the user, and probably uninstalled? How about edited? Docs? Resources?

Coming from OS X, where this has been solved very elegantly I can say there are definite advantages to having self-contained applications that can be moved and organized anywhere, installed by dragging from a remote volume and uninstalled with a quick drop in the trash. It is nice to not have to hunt for resources. Want a picture or sound used in a game, well it's all in one place. I never realized what a pain applications that are scattered in bits and pieces around my directory structure was until that pain went away.

Re:Maybe consolidation is good

[Coryoth]

Without apps, an OS is nothing. Continuing to shrug off pursuit of some sort of standardized library base and directory layout is a sure way to guarantee that Linux-based distributions will never be a popular on the desktop.

Applications are indeed the key, and that is, in some ways, exactly why rigourous standardisation won't occur in Linux.

Let's be honest, the reason Linux is as popular as it is is because of the huge number of applications available for it - FOSS doesn't seem to be struggling to find developers willing to write new applications for FOSS OSs. The reality is that Linux is not going to be short of applications anytime in the near future.

Will Linux standardise? To some extent. There are some fairly loose standards like LSB, which give some rough guidelines for directory structures and libraries (and there are also distributions that don't follow LSB at all). Loose standards like that are not what you want. What you want is a firm mandated set of libraries that all distributions must install and synchronise versions of. That simply isn't going to happen - the distributions just won't do it: they compete to have the most stable (Debian) or the most bleeding edge (Gentoo) or the best mix (Mandrake, Ubuntu) or the most coporate oriented (SuSE, Redhat) versions of libraries; they compete as to which libraries are available, and which are default. Get Microsoft and Apple to agree on a common set of libraries that they will both always install, and will keep synchronised versions of, and I'll consider the possibility that you'll get some agreement from distributions... let's be honest though - it just won't happen.

So the other option is to start your own distribution and have mandated libraries that stay at fixed version numbers for healthy periods of time. You know what you'll get? A lack of applications. FOSS developers tend to code against the cutting edge. There are some great new applications that require recent versions of Mono (like Beagle and F-Spot) - you'll be out of date and unable to get them. Look at how much trouble Debian is in due to their slow release cycle - you're talking about basing a distribution on the concept of forcing such a slow release cycle. You'll get no developer support, and no applications, and the distribution will sink into utter obscurity.

I'm not foolish enough to pretend that Linux is and open source is the best for everything, there are some things that other models are better suited to - and OS X is, whith it's rigid enforced cathedral style model, much better suited to the desktop of someone who isn't prepared to trade off a little ease of use for some of the benefits of existing in the purely FOSS space. There's room for everyone.

Jedidiah.

Re:Maybe consolidation is good

[AKAImBatman]

DUH! because distributions are all different. They provide different things for different people.

Okay, good. It's *starting* to percolate through your skull a bit. Let's see if we can help it along.

I use ubuntu because I love the way it looks and feels but I cannot just install kwrite

And why not? Because...

because I do not want to install all the extra kde crap that goes with it. Is this the fault of the folks who make k3b or the folks who support ubuntu?

Ubuntu. If Ubuntu wanted a distro useful to all, they would have a minimum version of all common Linux libs, including the KDE classes. Or they could decide to just say "KDE programs will not be supported in our spec." At which point programs intended for KDE would need to be statically linked or distributed with the KDE libs if they are to work on Ubuntu.

But the common Linux choice is "none of the above." The user can install any mishmash of libraries and versions that he chooses, making "Ubuntu" a useless definition for a base of standard APIs. The fact that the user can destroy their system by installing a new version of GLib as required by program XYZ that they really want, is not a good thing either.

On what version of windows did you install videolan? XP? 2000? Does it work in windows 98?

Windows 2000. Not that it matters. Does Gnome 2.5 work on a vanilla RedHat 5.0 distribution? No? That's because you're confusing versions (i.e. a minimum platform level) with a base of standards for a given platform. APIs should move with the platform. As a result, the application developer can then say, "This program requires Ubuntu v5.2 and up" as opposed to, "This program requires a Linux distribution with Kernel 2.4, KDE 3.4, GLib 2.2, GCC 2.95, etc, etc, etc." At which point the user is supposed to track down each and every dependency. NO! If a dependency isn't offered by the OS, it needs to be included in the install.

Different distributions need support. If videolan doesn't have the time to do this for you and you refuse to learn to DIY, then look around.

I'm sorry, but what home user has time to mess around with trying to track down every last dependency? I know what I'm doing, and yet it was a PAIN in the ass trying to find every dependency that VLC required. Dozens of sites, one for each RPM. Not to mention that some of them where binary, some were source, and some I found in one form and had to use the other either because the package manager rejected it, or the source wouldn't compile. That's just stupid. A home user wants to click, click, done. If he runs into the problem like you have with Alice, he's going to do what anyone should do:

RETURN IT TO THE STORE

Pain and anguish can happen on all systems. But on the Linux Desktop it is treated as the norm.

Re:Maybe consolidation is good

[Blakey Rat]

Just as a frame of reference, have you tried OS X? You state "no modern OS is 'intuitive'," but it sounds like you're defining "modern OS" as Windows and Linux.

Re:Maybe consolidation is good

[Anonymous Coward]

Unfortunately also true. And one important thing is overlooked. WinXP handles spaces in file and folder names. Having to type /home/jcurtis/my\ stuff/my\ pictures/my\ vacation/ may seem elementary to Unix geeks, but the casual user wants to type the way he does every day. So Gnome and KDE have file managers which don't show the \ take-the-space-as-literal underpinnings but when they get brave enough to go to the prompt... Oops. /home/jcurtis/my stuff/my pictures/my vacation/ returns no such. Linux has inherited most of the idiotic defects noted decades earlier in Unix and this is one.

Or you could just get pissed at the idiotic defect who made a directory full of friggin spaces. Oh that was you wasn't it? Ever heard of TAB completion? LEARN IT AND USE IT, it's the only thing saving UNIX users from Windows tards who put spaces and crap characters in file names.

Re:Maybe consolidation is good

[Blakey Rat]

MacOS Classic did a pretty good job of this back in the day... you had a System Folder, of course, and it had System, Finder, a folder for fonts, a folder for control panels, a folder for preferences, and a folder for extensions. It was actually pretty damn easy for any naive user to go in there and do what they want.

Re:Maybe consolidation is good

[poptones]

If Ubuntu wanted a distro useful to all, they would have a minimum version of all common Linux libs, including the KDE classes.

Bzzzzt. This is what apparently cannot "percolate" through that skull of yours!

Linux is about freedom of choice

Do you get that yet? Read it a hundred times if you have to. If Ubuntu included all the crap that goes along with kde then I never would have leapt at the chance to switch to it, because i don't WANT all that crap on my system. Apparently you didn't hear that the first time I said it so I repeat it again: if I wanted kde AND gnome and all that other crap I could have just stayed with Mandrake (even though I think it kinda sucks) or I could have gone with about a skillion other distributions. The lack of certain packages in the distribution is not a weakness or a fault, it is a feature not provided by most others. Yet if it doesn't meet someone's needs they have the freedom and the choice to go somewhere else or to modify what they have. Try that with windows.. or even OS X.

Try installing a .NET app on windows without installing all the crap that goes with it. It's the same fucking difference but you don't seem able to see it.

APIs should move with the platform.

WTF does this even mean? If I want to install garage Band on my PC should windows just magicaly migrate over all the crap from OS X? Who should I blame for the fact it doesn't? Apple? Microsoft? Linus Torvalds?

I know what I'm doing, and yet it was a PAIN in the ass trying to find every dependency that VLC required.

Bully for you. I knbow what I'm doing too and yet the only "solution" I could get out of even the people who MADE "Alice" was that it flat out would not work on anything except windows98 using the proper nvidia drivers.

Pain and anguish can happen on all systems. But on the Linux Desktop it is treated as the norm.

This is really ignorant. I have been using ubuntu more than six months now, I have experienced no pain nor anguish past the initial installation - which is still much easier and faster than installing windows, even (or especially) XP.

I am a power user and I do a LOT of stuff you simply cannot do with windows. Well, maybe if you install windows and then all the linux shell utilities and wget and nessus and visual studio and...

Dozens of sites, one for each RPM. Not to mention that some of them where binary, some were source, and some I found in one form and had to use the other either because the package manager rejected it, or the source wouldn't compile. That's just stupid.

and did you document all this? Did you produce a package of the RPMs? Even a tar file? Apparently you have solved the riddle of running videolan on your distro of choice, so where can one download the RPM?

If you're not going to be part of the solution no one is going to care when you complain. And using tired and provably misleading inflammatory hype like "Linux isn't a viable desktop platform" when trying to make your case sure isn't going to win you any sympathy.

Re:Maybe consolidation is good

[Blakey Rat]

This is utter hogwash. They are simple even in their console versions.

I agree that they aren't that hard to use, but they ARE unfriendly towards commercial developers, and that's a problem that needs to be solved. If I put my Adobe Photoshop Linux CD (think big!) into my PC, and it updates some libraries, my package manager needs to know about that so it won't overwrite those changes and break Photoshop.

If a Unix app program is properly set up. THE LOCATION IS ENTIRELY IRRELEVANT to the user.

No it's not. What if one of my partitions is running out of space, so I want to move some programs to another partition? I need to know where they are to do that. (Of course, since Linux and Windows programs frequently use hard-coded paths, you can't really do that anyway... OS X does it right. PLEASE PLEASE don't hard-code paths into your program if at all possible!)

It would also help if installed Linux programs automatically inserted themselves into the GUI in an organized fashion so you could get a simple list of what programs you have installed... like the Start menu in Windows, or the /Applications folder in OS X.

It's remarkably better than the alternatives.

Better? In what way? "usr" is better than "System Folder" or "Windows?" Did you think this assertion through before making it?

Quick questions: Where do I put fonts in a Linux distribution? In OS X, it's System/Library/Fonts, in Windows it's Windows/Fonts... simple and obvious.

"application unfriendliness" has squat to do with user friendliness. The whole point of applications is to mask the sharp edges of an OS.

At the most basic level, if you make writing applications quicker and easier, you give the developer more time to worry about improving their UI instead of just making it work.

Additionally, you can almost force good application design by having good APIs... it's actually harder to build a badly-designed UI in OS X than to build a correct one, just because of the way Cocoa is designed. Therefore, a lazy programmer is more likely to have a good UI.

Re:Maybe consolidation is good

[Blakey Rat]

So... the standard reply when anybody points of a usability problem in Linux is to whine and whine about how the same usability problem exists in Windows. (And then in the next sentence, they'll say that Linux isn't about just duplicating Windows!)

Figure it out, man. It doesn't matter if the problem also exists in Windows. The point is, it's a problem and it needs to be fixed. Period.

Re:Maybe consolidation is good

[CableModemSniper]

Did you see the 'un' in there?

Re:Maybe consolidation is good

[CableModemSniper]

Just like to mention that I played Alice on an XP laptop with an ATi 7500 Mobility.

Re:Maybe consolidation is good

[poptones]

Can you tell me what "emulation" settings you used when you installed it? Nothing I tried worked and the official word from the developer (before they closed the support site) was it won't work at all.

Re:Maybe consolidation is good

[CableModemSniper]

I didn't do anything at all really. I believe it was XP pre-SP1. It just worked. Sorry I can't help more.

Re:Maybe consolidation is good

[pembo13]

As a relatively new user to Linux, I downloaded and installed several major apps. Not one created an icon or executable in my 'start menu', nor correctly placed themselves in my bin (not that I would know what to type anyways).

I am sorry to hear that. I use Fedora Core 3, soon to upgrade to Fedora Core 4. I 'yum install' or 'rpm -ivh', or if I am in the mood I YumGUI, I can't remember having to manually setup a shortcut in the main menu. I use KDE, but I doubt that this is different with Gnome.

Re:Maybe consolidation is good

[AKAImBatman]

Good God you are thick. Okay, have it your way. Linux is perfect, Linux is right, Linux is GOD. Well, your god at least. Some of us recognize that it could still use improvements. Especially since your idea of choice seems to be to not have any distributions that deviate from the perfection of your GOD. (i.e. fix the issues)

FWIW, I'm not saying that ALL Linux distros should move in a userfriendly direction, you are. I'm only suggesting that Home Desktop-focused move in that direction.

But Linux is your god. All hail Linux. Linux is perfect. Linux is wise. Linux is a stupid Operating System, not anything to worship. Oops, did I say that out loud?

Re:Maybe consolidation is good

[edxwelch]

I look on it a different way. For me Linux is Developer unfriendly. Because Linux makes things more difficult for the developer, this in turn, makes it more difficult for the user.
For instance, in Linux it's more difficult to make an installation program for your application, which means usually that the developer doesn't bother, just let the users build the application.
Also, there is no unified desktop, which means the developer has no function to "launch default browser", so the user has to manually specify the browser from the application.

Re:Maybe consolidation is good

[timbo234]

The problem with LSB at the moment is that it doesn't go far enough to specify all that's needed for a desktop Linux system. The reason you can install everything on Windows 2000 or Windows XP is that the whole Windows system is a monolithic entity from kernel right up to desktop. You can rely on a lot stuff being there and not changing for 3 or 4 years.

Having said that I disagree with the GP that installing software on Linux is user-unfriendly. In distros like Mandriva it is extremely easy and simple to install software - the catch being that it has to be packaged in one of the repositories for your distro.

Re:Maybe consolidation is good

[FlyByPC]

An AOL client? For LINUX?!? ...Talk about a disturbance in the Force!

Re:Maybe consolidation is good

[poptones]

FWIW, I'm not saying that ALL Linux distros should move in a userfriendly direction, you are.

No, I am saying that at least two very good distributions have ALREADY done this.

I'm only suggesting that Home Desktop-focused move in that direction.

And I'm suggesting you actually try a contemporary "home desktop focused" distributions so you will, perhaps, have an inkling of what you are talking about.

Re:Maybe consolidation is good

[AKAImBatman]

And I'm suggesting you actually try a contemporary "home desktop focused" distributions so you will, perhaps, have an inkling of what you are talking about.

Been there, done that, if you paid attention you'd know, and you're just trolling. Good day to you, sir.

Re:Maybe consolidation is good

[Too Much Noise]

If a dependency isn't offered by the OS, it needs to be included in the install.

Do you even realize why this is wrong? DLL hell rings a bell? multiple, even incompatible versions for THE SAME FREAKING DLL?

ok, backtracking ... you need a specific library. Say the official distro does not provide it for reasons of patent/copyright (you said VLC, right?) You have 2 choices: track it down yourself and compile/install (hopefully integrated into the package management system) or track down a packager for your distro. Surely you're not the only one trying to get VLC on SuSe.

And how is this different from a random unsupported package in Windows? Why, *I* want k3b in Windows and I want it yesterday. Where's my click-click-click-done procedure??? But I'm straying, as this was not about Windows. The point, that you seem to keep trying to avoid, is that unsupported software is unsupported for some reasons. You should be asking yourself the 'why?' question before bashing. Then, if you found the answer and don't like it, feel free to complain.

That's just stupid. A home user wants to click, click, done.

no, this is stupid actually. A home user has the right to expect click-click-click-done for something he/she purchases. You never purchased VLC. In fact, they are under no obligation to support the said procedure for your distro of choice - why, there are too many distros out there for any vendor to support them all. On the other hand, if SuSe would have employed a maintainer for an official VLC package, then you'd have had a click-click-click-done procedure for it as you do for everything that the distro supports. Or you can try paying someone at videolan to package it for you.

As a result, the application developer can then say, "This program requires Ubuntu v5.2 and up" as opposed to, "This program requires a Linux distribution with Kernel 2.4, KDE 3.4, GLib 2.2, GCC 2.95, etc, etc, etc."

I think you either never did any F/OSS programming or are deliberately trying to confuse the issues. Here are some pointers:

• a developer more often than not not have enough resources to test with significant linux distro version; if there are contributors for various distros, they provide packages exactly like that: for distro XYZ version number A.B
• if the distro packages the program/lib, then you get exactly that - a binary packade targeted to a specific distro version
• if you go into the 'bleeding edge' region, you should not always expect full support for a 'stable' distro.

and so on.

There are points to criticize about package management on various Linux distros, buy you need to bring up valid ones if you want to be taken seriously. And no, personally I don't believe the re are benefits in bundling everything with the app, or static linking. How would you like to have to update a whole bunch of programs just because there was a fix for the xvid version they all statically link against? But this is an ancient argument already.

btw, for SuSe unsupported stuff, you might want to try packman. They happen to have vlc here and you should be able to find all the dependencies there as well. All with "for SuSe version x.y" just as you seem to like it.

Re:Maybe consolidation is good

[AKAImBatman]

Do you even realize why this is wrong? DLL hell rings a bell?

Do you even realize why your response is wrong? Does Dependency Hell ring a bell?

Look, the guy I was fighting with was obviously trolling. He wasn't at all interested in an intelligent discussion. I, however, *am* intersted in finding a method for improving Linux on the Desktop. So instead of complaining here, read my articles on this, and comment there.

Re:Maybe consolidation is good

[taylortbb]

You'd actually be surprised and the mindshare of Linux. Most people I have talked to (average, not at all tech savvy people included) have heard of Linux, many know it is amazing, they know it has to do with their computer, but that is it. It companies could let people know what it is, people will start asking.

What the market is in need of is a really big player (not like IBM big, but multi-million dollar corporation, RedHat/Novell/Mandriva are the likely ones) to put some real money in as a part of a long term strategy.

First, polish the desktop to look good, as in good enough to show off. Doesn't need to be like OS X, but nice looking.

Second, do retail packaging, that means nice friendly, *explanitory* boxes on store shelves.

Third, do marketing! I have *never* seen a TV advertisement by a linux distributor. 1 SuperBowl ad would do it, probably get much more publicity than other prime-time ads. Just put in a sloagan like "Get your next computer with Mandriva Linux! for the best your computer can be." After that there would be millions of people asking the next time they buy a computer "Does it have Linux?" The returns will not be immediate, but suddenly you would have millions of people knowing what Linux is, that it is good, and that it is worth asking about. Everyone has heard of a Mac, everyone has heard of Windows, do that, just ones, and most of North America will have heard of Linux. People already like it, now they'll know why to like it.

Re:Maybe consolidation is good

[Too Much Noise]

Do you even realize why your response is wrong? Does Dependency Hell ring a bell?

Ok, this smells a lot like a troll, but I'll work under the assumption that you were honest and just over-reacted.

I never said 'go to the other extreme' - there's a balance point in between, where some things are safe to be assumed as stable and present on the system, while others aren't necessarily so. As with all balance points, it's hard to stick to it, with the amount of development going on. There's always some new thing that developers haven't settled for a standard way to deal with - and it's a natural evolutive process. You're bound to have some package to point to invoking 'dependency hell', even on stable platforms.

I still think you're framing things wrong. It's mostly an issue of convenience that you seem to be attacking, otherwise as a non-root user you can do a lot of things with well-packaged vanilla rpms (like maintaining an user-level package database, doing $HOME/whatever/ rpm installs and so on). What's missing is a tool to handle that nicely for the famous 'average user' whoever that is, but this is touching a different issue altogether - you still need to educate the user about the way the system works. Simple click-and-run is nice for a few packages, but does not scale well so it's not a one-size-fits-all solution. So while I agree that there's enormous space for evolution, I believe a little caution is in order, as to not throw the baby with the water.

As to your notes, they also seem to be work 'in progress' - and touch this from a different angle, so this post would have been rather off-topic there. I could throw in my $0.02 about some of the topics you raised, but with the current market I can't guarantee my comments would actually add so much value.

Re:Maybe consolidation is good

[AKAImBatman]

I still think you're framing things wrong. It's mostly an issue of convenience that you seem to be attacking,

Which is mostly what a Desktop user wants. A traditional Unix user is not going to be scared off by resolving some dependencies, or doing a compile or two. (Although the combination of those two is getting out of control!) Grandma, OTOH, will not be happy if she has to do these things. She just wants to download and run the program.

As to your notes, they also seem to be work 'in progress'

Indeed they are. However, the current article parts are on topic for this subject, which is why I mentioned them.

I could throw in my $0.02 about some of the topics you raised, but with the current market I can't guarantee my comments would actually add so much value.

I'm not quite certain what you mean about "the current market," but I always appreciate intelligent comments.

Re:Maybe consolidation is good

[nchip]

And this is as poor of an argument as ever. Why should the user be restricted to only software officially supported by a Linux distro?

If neither vlc developers support suse by providing a suse rpm, nor suse developers support vlc, how exactly would vlc know what to do on a suse system?

Next, you will probably complain on why there are so many incompatible distributions. Then, I may remind you about the whole news item is about distributions getting consolidated... Or something. I don't see this discussion going to change anything, since people love whining more than fixing things.

Re:Maybe consolidation is good

[Com2Kid]

• Even on Windows programs often install straight onto c:\ by default (the nerve!), and sometimes within Program Files they're within subfolders related to the vendor, which can sometimes be non-obvious.

Anything that installs right on into C:\ is getting booted, programs should not even be USING absolute path names.

Things like %SYSTEM_ROOT% (or whatever it is) are much appreciated!

And in fact the vast majority (well over 90%) of Windows programs behave properly! This is mostly do to the popularity of the Nullsoft installer, which is either dirt cheap or free (I forget which), and which has no problems installing a program even if your program files directory is on a different drive letter aside from C!

As for the vender subfolder thing, yah, that is irritating, but at least I can break the search task up into smaller directories, rather than having one just monolithic list of executable files.

• It sounds like you would have spent much less time just adding an entry to your WM's app menu,

You know what? I'd love to, but Linux Window Managers are stuck in the Windows 95 era when it comes to menu editing.

Seriously, RIGHT-CLICK-CONTEXT-MENUS PEOPLE.

Having to either run a separate application, or even worse, edit a text file, is just stupid. Why should I have to leave the base interface to accomplish such a simple task.

Oddly enough, Microsoft got this one right, their entire start menu is stored as a directory hierarchy, and as such is dirt easy to rearrange from explorer itself. (Just drag and drop shortcuts where ever you want them at!)

I don't even know exactly where it is stored at, I just right click on it and hit explore. So, freaking, obvious.

Gnome and KDE both have many usability enhancements over Windows (KDE, a gazillion and one customizations are available, Gnome, everything fits together nicely), but the App Menu is still one place that both lag so far behind in it is not even funny.

Re:Maybe consolidation is good

[Master of Transhuman]

Well, yes, but quite frankly I doubt OSX is any more intuitive than any other OS. It may have some MORE intuitive features, but in the end, the user has to click on menus and run programs, and nothing about that process is "intuitive" as I understand the term.

And I always hated Apple for doing the "drag the file to trashcan" bit to eject the disk or whatever that nonsense was in the old days. As soon as I heard that one, I knew Apple wasn't as intuitive as anybody was claiming.

Re:Maybe consolidation is good

[Master of Transhuman]

Yes, the nice thing about Apple was it didn't have any legacy UNIX stuff to worry about. DOS and Windows borrowed from UNIX, but Apple at least tried to name everything halfway rationally so an end user could figure it out.

We really need a new OS that doesn't do ANYTHING the "old way", but still doesn't do anything "stupid new" (i.e., learns from the past, but doesn't repeat it slavishly.) If I had the time, I'd look into things like the BeOS which supposedly was reasonably well done.

Re:Maybe consolidation is good

[Blakey Rat]

Well, in a way of explaining it, the Macintosh used to have two options for dealing with disks: Eject and Put Away.

Eject ejected the disk, but retained the icons for it in memory, and showed greyed-out on the screen. The original Macs had only a single disk drive, so Eject was necessary to copy files frmo one disk to another. To duplicate a disk, you would put the first disk in, then eject it, then put the second disk in. Now you can drag greyed files from the first disk to the second to copy them, and the OS will prompt you to enter the correct disks as needed. (This is a problem that Windows never even tried to solve, as far as I'm aware... it's all moot now, but back in the day this was important.)

Now, when you're done with the disk, you would use the Put Away command in the file menu. This command did exactly as it implies, ejecting the disk and unmounting it so that you could put it away in its box (or where ever you keep it.)

At some point, somebody at Apple thought this was too confusing for people, and so they made dragging a floppy disk to the trash can a shortcut to Put Away. It was a bad move, and the problem should have been solved another way. (And, frankly, very few people understood why after they ejected a disk, MacOS would sometimes ask for it back... they didn't get the difference between Eject and Put Away.)

Of course, that said, the person who explained it to you could have *correctly* explained that to finish using a disk you use the Put Away command, and then you wouldn't even need the 'drag to trash' shortcut and you'd have been just fine with MacOS. ;)

Re:Maybe consolidation is good

[nemostultae]

Not to nitpick, but you should not install fonts in /System/Library/Fonts. They should go in /Library/Fonts if you want all users to have access to them, or go in ~/Library/Fonts if you don't have admin privileges. Never mess with /System :)

Re:Maybe consolidation is good

[jedidiah]

THIS IS WHAT A HELP SYSTEM IS FOR.

Do you really want every little app and utility on a Windows box in your start menu? THAT would be a horrendous mess.

Unix in general, as well as VMS or even Windows have conventions for dealing with this situation. If a particular developer fails to follow them, that's a problem. However, that failure is no more the fault of Linux than if some Mac developer decides to violate those programming guidelines.

Re:Maybe consolidation is good

[jedidiah]

> Quick questions: Where do I put fonts in a Linux
> distribution? In OS X, it's System/Library/Fonts,
> in Windows it's Windows/Fonts... simple and
> obvious.

Where ever you want to.

Just update the font path afterwards.

What's this nonsense of hardcoding specific locations? That's not even acceptable at a CS100
level.

What happened to all of that NeXT style APP directory business?

Re:Maybe consolidation is good

[sumdumass]

Isn't that kind one of apples selling points.

Alot of apple user i know bought it because they thought it was better then windows based on the price. they have had no other experiences with apple or apple products that they were significantly aware of. They were alsop baffled when thier old MS compatible software wouldn't load. In the long run though, they were happy for the differences.

typo

[ulteus]

"For months" -> "Four months". Sorry!

Re:typo

[Anonymous Coward]

Don't worry, 20 slashdotters will point out the same thing and be modded insightful before long.

Re:typo

[Anonymous Coward]

Should not it be Forth months?

Re:typo

[Mad_Rain]

"For months" -> "Four months". Sorry!

Oh, no worries, that's what we have editors for...

D'oh!

What's so exciting about it?

[ScrewMaster]

I'm not sure that too much consolidation is good for the Linux market. I like the diversity available in the multitude of distros out there. Microsoft supports will probably argue that that is a weakness, but in reality it is one of Linux's greatest strengths ... something-for-everyone rather than one-size-fits-all.

Re:What's so exciting about it?

[aftk2]

As long as the code is open source, I doubt multiplicity will be a problem for Linux.

Re:What's so exciting about it?

[ScrewMaster]

Yes ... nothing like a good fork to keep things interesting. And I agree, there will always be specialized Linuxes around for various purposes, I just wouldn't like to see any single company (Redhat or anyone else) come to dominate the desktop market.

Re:What's so exciting about it?

[ifwm]

And of course you were modded straight up. No reason, no facts, just an unsubstantiated opinion that the other zealots agree with.

Hey mods, THIS IS NOT YOUR PRIVATE ECHO CHAMBER. Fucking retards.

Re:What's so exciting about it?

[toddbu]

Diversity is a great thing, but don't discount the value of standards. People want stuff that they can count on, and if Linux is really going to compete against Windows and the Mac then there needs to be a big push down that path. My ideal world is that there are a couple really big Linux vendors who cooperate on standards, and then a bunch of small guys doing customization for those who want/need it. The recent XFree86 fiasco shows that even an entrenched "vendor" can be booted pretty quickly if the community feels that their actions are counterproductive to the benefit of all.

Re:What's so exciting about it?

[slash_noodle]

Given the nature of Open Source Licensing, and the spirit of project divergence. I think the probablity of Linux becoming overly consolidated are very low.

The divergence of Linux to multiple platforms, and installation methods (FTP, ISO's, Live-CDs) are just a couple of many (and I mean MANY) of its strengths. (Windows recovery disk can't hold a candle to Knoppix)

Re:What's so exciting about it?

[corcoranp]

Microsoft supports will probably argue

I'm amazed by the stereotypical response here... You are actually creating an antithesis in which to argue your point. For the record, both Windows and Linux have there strengths and weaknesses, and yes one of Linux's greatest strengths is the distribution of its source code & developer base. However, in terms of market share, Windows has Linux beat. The question, that is more intriguing, is why? Why is an OS that is free, not have the largest market share? And unfortunately, the answer is consolidation. M$ is able to control what happens in the Windows "System", because it is closed (see System Theory.

In chaos theory, a butterfly that beats it's wings creates a tidal wave thousands of miles away (see Butterfly Effect), this is the way of the Linux "System", any number of develops beating there wings in order to contribute to the whole, it's an open system.

The best way for Linux development to complete with Windows is for business transactions (like with Mandriva and Lycoris) to occur.

One last thought, don't be blinded by and idealist views of Open Source and Closed Source. Although, Open Source is generally good, it's not above its deviousness. Try search for "google hiring Microsoft executives" in Google and see what the first listing is. Or take a look at this. Not to nock Google, I love it....my intention is to point out a major proponent of Open Source, doing whatever it takes to complete.

Re:What's so exciting about it?

[lspd]

I'm not sure that too much consolidation is good for the Linux market. I like the diversity available in the multitude of distros out there.

What does Mandrake really gain from this deal anyway? Competition among Linux distros is limitless, so any increase in marketshare is a temporary shift that the market will correct over time. If Lycoris users wanted Mandrake, they would be using it already. Eliminating Lycoris will just create a new niche for a Lycoris clone to enter the market.

Novell's purchases of SuSE and Ximian make more sense. SuSE users have no reason to switch since they're getting the same distro they've already grown to love and Ximian provides software and expertise, not a distro. I don't see how it's possible for a single Mandrivis distro to simultaniously meet the expectations of Mandrake, Conectiva and Lycoris users.

In fact, purchasing another distro looks like a bad idea all around. Why pay for developers on staff when you can simply take the best bits of their work for free? They don't really benefit from the Conectiva and Lycoris trademarks since they're not really using them, and if they need manpower they can cheaply hire developers from the non-commercial distros or from specific software projects. It just doesn't make sense. This isn't going to boost Mandrake's marketshare to be a real RedHat competitor, it's just pissing money away.

Re:What's so exciting about it?

[It doesn't come easy]

Unlimited numbers of distros, each which have some different list of compatible and incompatible apps, is NOT a strength.

Choice is good but there is a limit. One thing I hate about most Linux distros, they install 30 different programs that all do the same thing. Who needs 30 different text editors? I don't even want to try 30 different text editors. Give me one mainstream program to start out with and then let me go find the alternatives. That's right, make a choice for me. Don't load up the machine with hundreds of programs I know nothing about. Instead, make it easy for me to find them and read about them and then install them if I want to try em.

Yeah, I know...bitch bitch bitch, can't make everyone happy all the time.

Re:What's so exciting about it?

[rmm4pi8]

I think there are different skills involved in distro integration (making sure things play well together) than there are in development of a particular software package. After all, people aren't going with Mandrake because it ships a better openoffice or a better kde, but rather hopefully because it ties things together well. I think the idea is that Joe Cheeks is really good at this, and simply ripping off his code from Lycoris wouldn't do them much good since many of the problems there might already have been solved by Mandriva, and/or he wouldn't be coding toward their projects like urpmi and the *drak system of utilities.

Re:What's so exciting about it?

[Master of Transhuman]

There are HOW MANY DISTROS OUT THERE?

Mandrake buys two moderately sized ones (not the smallest, not the biggest), and the sky is falling?

This is modded "Interesting"?

OTOH, if you're commenting on how some people WANT consolidation in Linux (down to two or a half dozen distros), then you are of course correct - diversity is better.

Since such consolidation isn't going to happen, it's a moot point.

Mod this "Redundant". Wait, I HAVE mod points, and I'm posting? Oops.

Re:What's so exciting about it?

[Master of Transhuman]

"The question, that is more intriguing, is why? Why is an OS that is free, not have the largest market share? And unfortunately, the answer is consolidation."

Absolutely not.

Has absolutely nothing to do with "consolidation" - which means merging multiple versions into one which word has nothing to do with the simple fact that Windows is closed source.

Has everything to do with being first to market with an OS cheaper than UNIX USED to be, and then tying it to restrictive OEM contracts, and also tying the desktop applications to the OS.

Also, it is pointless to suggest that Linux should NOW be the only OS on the market simply because it is free. Anybody with a brain knows that corporation management is resistant to using "free" stuff because they view it as inferior simply by virtue of it not costing them an arm and a leg. Not to mention the problem of converting existing Office apps to OSS ones - which, while not insurmountable, obviously is not something that's going to be done overnight worldwide.

So to suggest that Linux is not the dominant OS NOW just because it is open vrs closed is ridiculous.

What is simply happening here is that one Linux distro with interesting and useful desktop features that make it easier to use for Windows users has been acquired by another Linux distro that wants to incorporate those features in its distro.

Really not much different than just grabbing the code - except that the distro being acquired was proprietary and so were the extensions, so the distro had to be bought instead of just downloaded.

I don't see the need for any huge reaction to this one way or the other - unless you're a Mandrake user (as I am) interested in what improvements in Mandrake this will cause.

Re:What's so exciting about it?

[Master of Transhuman]

"Competition among Linux distros is limitless, so any increase in marketshare is a temporary shift that the market will correct over time. If Lycoris users wanted Mandrake, they would be using it already."

It should be obvious to you what Mandrake gets from this. Mandrake gets more advanced work at making the Linux desktop compete with Windows. Lycoris and Xandros and Linspire are the three Linux distros that most compete FOR WINDOWS USERS. Acquiring Lycoris gives Mandrake several pieces of technology that they can use to make Mandrake more appealing to Windows users looking to dump Windows.

As for Lycoris users, presumably most of the features that made them choose Lycoris will end up in Mandrake, so it's a wash for them - depending on whether they have to shell out money for those features in the next Mandrake release or can get them from the free download version.

"Why pay for developers on staff when you can simply take the best bits of their work for free?"

Not if they're proprietary bits or licenses of proprietary software from others. Lycoris was a proprietary Linux distro with, not a free community one. Parts of its desktop capabilities are licensed from proprietary software companies. Now Mandrake can probably use those licenses to enhance its desktop to compete better with Windows.

I don't see this as helping Mandrake against Red Hat or other Linux distros at all - it's entirely a Windows desktop migration strategy.

Re:What's so exciting about it?

[AuMatar]

I like the happy medium myself- include the 30 different text editors, but pick a default (or a small number of defaults). Then in the install phase, I can either choose to install the default editor, or choose 1 or more specific ones.

for = four

[strongmace]

*four months ^^just to eliminate confusion not meant to nitpick

Consolidation of the commerical Linux vendors.

[CyricZ]

We are seeing the very same consolidation of the commercial Linux vendors that happened back in the late 1980s with commercial UNIX. Indeed, it will be interesting to see where this leads.

Re:Consolidation of the commerical Linux vendors.

[kfg]

Richard Stallman?

KFG

Re:Consolidation of the commerical Linux vendors.

[Rudeboy777]

Umm, not exactly. No offense to Mandrake, Connectiva or Lycoris but the only result of these mergers is that we went from 3 insignificant commercial Linux vendors to 1 insignificant commercial Linux vendor.

Re:Consolidation of the commerical Linux vendors.

[Leroy_Brown242]

This is a very good thing, for now.

Right now the good talent is spread out. When we see these players merging, maybe bringing the talent all under one roof, will see some magical results.

Re:Consolidation of the commerical Linux vendors.

[ifwm]

Ooooh, Jeopardy, I'll play.

What is a fucking moron, with ridiculous, unrealistic ideas about how the world works, and an irrational belief in failed ideology?

Do I win?

Re:Consolidation of the commerical Linux vendors.

[toddbu]

What makes you think that they're insignificant? They have a pretty loyal following, and they're definitely better positioned for the consumer market than most distros available today. They virtually always show up in major distro lists.

Re:Consolidation of the commerical Linux vendors.

[rpdillon]

Damn it, I had to bite.

I wouldn't call "Free Software" a failed ideology, considering Sun just open sourced Solaris, Microsoft is hiring open source software developers to understand open source, and public awareness of Free Software and Linux in general has only increased since Stallman began his work.

So, I guess, no, you don't win. =)

Re:Consolidation of the commerical Linux vendors.

[ifwm]

His ideology isn't about "free software". Do a little research about the guy before you post. He's the worst kind of inflexible zealot, and it's sad people like you are too lazy to do any research before jumping to conclusions.

Re:Consolidation of the commerical Linux vendors.

[Anonymous Coward]

...Microsoft is hiring open source software developers to understand open source...

That's something that is totally against Stallman's ideology. He thinks that all software should be Free-with-a-capital-F, and closed source companies should be driven out of business.

Re:Consolidation of the commerical Linux vendors.

[Anonymous Coward]

His ideology isn't about "free software". Do a little research about the guy before you post. He's the worst kind of inflexible zealot, and it's sad people like you are too lazy to do any research before jumping to conclusions.

Oh, shut the fuck up. He's a brilliant guy who probably suffers from Asperger's Syndrome, which among other things tends to make you fixate on things like language and want to see the world in clear black-and-white terms rather than shades of gray. Sadly this often gets mistaken for ego or bullying. I'm sure a considerable percentage of the population of Slashdot has the same affliction. His seemingly odd ridigity on a few points hardly makes him the monster you wish he were.

It's all about the "free software." The only real flaw in RMS's ideology (as opposed to rhetoric) is that he sees closed/proprietary software as somehow less ethical than free/open software. He compares it to academic science - open exchange and dialogue in science is clearly more ethical and better for humanity overall than everyone keeping their developments hidden for all eternity. But really, I'd like to see a well-reasoned argument that explains to me how closed source "proprietary" software is any less ethical than, say, the Colonel's secret recipe. I don't think there is such an argument. I'd be surprised if Stallman ever took a philosophy class.

Other than that, his views are pretty well thought out, and they've certainly had a tremendous impact on the industry. Put the ethics aside - it shouldn't be controversial that an open, "commons"-like approach is sometimes preferable to everyman-for-himself. Without such an approach we wouldn't have roads, hot and cold running water at the tap, a body of literature, academic science, western medicine, and much else... There's nothing inherently anti-business in such an approach; in fact it's generally good for business and consumers when used well.

Re:Consolidation of the commerical Linux vendors.

[rpdillon]

Actually, his ideology is all about Free Software. I don't need to do any research, I'm a big fan of RMS's ideas, and have been for years. Sure, he's inflexible on some points - I don't have to love the man to respect his ideas.

Speaking of research, the Wikipedia entry on RMS says:

For two years, from 1982 to the end of 1983, Stallman single-handedly duplicated the efforts of the Symbolics programmers to prevent them from gaining a monopoly on the Lab's computers. By that time, however, he was the last of his generation of hackers at the Lab. He was asked to sign non-disclosure agreements and perform other actions he considered betrayals of his principles, but chose instead to share his work with others in what he regarded as a classical spirit of scientific collaboration and openness.

Stallman argues that software users should have freedom -- in particular, the freedom to "share with their neighbor" and to be able to study and make changes to the software that they use. He has repeatedly said that attempts by proprietary software vendors to prohibit these acts are "antisocial" and "unethical". The phrase "software wants to be free" is commonly attributed to him; however, no evidence can be found to confirm this. He argues that the primary goal of freedom is to benefit users and society rather than to improve software. Consequently, in January 1984, he quit his job at MIT to work full time on the GNU project, which he had announced in September 1983. He did not complete a Ph.D. but has been awarded four honorary doctoral degrees (see below).

In 1985, Stallman published the GNU Manifesto, which outlined his motivation for creating a free operating system called GNU, which would be compatible with Unix. The name GNU is a recursive acronym for GNU's Not Unix. Soon after, he incorporated the non-profit Free Software Foundation (FSF) to employ free software programmers and provide a legal infrastructure for the free software community.

So, I'm still not understanding the part where RMS's ideology isn't about Free Software. It has everything to do with Free Software.

Oh, and if you want to see a new meaning for the term "inflexible", try reading a Miscrosft or Blizaard EULA sometime - then you can understand the type of thing RMS saw coming, and worked to avoid. Which he did - which again makes me wonder why you think his ideology failed.

Re:Consolidation of the commerical Linux vendors.

[rpdillon]

Indeed. But that is beside my point, which was Free Software has not failed or even lost ground, it is gaining ground. For comapnies to even begin to understand free software, they must first understand open source software.

It bears noting that RMS has no problem with selling software, either. So your second statement is correct: he objects to closed source companies, but not to companies that make profit from software in some way (Red Hat, Cygnus before aquisition, etc.)

ugh, marketing

[Oopsz]

Okay, Mandriva used to be mandrake.. What is lycoris's lineage?

Re:ugh, marketing

[gbulmash]

I was going to say Corel Linux, but then remembered that's Xandros.

According to docs at the Lycoris site, they used to be called "Redmond Linux" and News Forge has a late 2001 review of a beta of Redmond Linux. Founded as Redmond Linux in 2000, they changed their name to Lycoris in January 2002.

Couldn't find a history to see what distro it might have originally forked from.

Greg

Mandriva?

[Anonymous Coward]

Buying out another Linux distro makes about as much sense as buying out a little girls' lemonade stand.

Re:Mandriva?

[Rosco P. Coltrane]

at least to me, it reads "Mandriver" and just SCREAMS HOMOSEXUALITY.

I guess seeing things homosexual where there aren't any is your particular slant in life. Either that or you're a troll, which is more likely.

I read it as "mand-riva" (short i like in "river", not "driver"). I think most everybody read it that way.

Re:Mandriva?

[Codename_V]

Actually it rhymes with connectiva, making it a long e sound.

Re:Mandriva?

[fLameDogg]

I sound it out as "man-DREE-va", I guess because I always saw "Conectiva" as "con-ek-TEE-va", but for all I know that was wrong too.

I s'pose it doesn't matter what I think, which is good, because I've never been able to warm up to the name. It just seems too unhappily close to "drivel" and "trivia".

Re:Mandriva?

[ulteus]

But they buy the girl with the stand. The boy actually (Joseph Cheek).

Re:Mandriva?

[conteXXt]

well it might.

ConutryTyme lemonade was once purchased too you know?

Re:Mandriva?

[7-Vodka]

I think all of the associations they managed to come up with that word have been mighty homosexual.
To me, it sounds like Mangina. What a vagina would be doing on a man is an exercise best left for the reader.. But it does sound gay.

Re:Mandriva?

[gcatullus]

Pronounicng "mandriva" as "mandriver" is an example of rhotic dialect. Those of us in the Northeast part of the USA talk that way, and that is how I say "mandriva" if I am not thinking about it. See the wikpedia article if you are interested in it.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rhotic_and_non-rho tic_accents

Re:Mandriva?

[kdekorte]

I read it first as Mandrival... which leads to drivel.

drivel - a worthless message.

Re:Mandriva?

[swv3752]

I always pronunced Man-dreeva, which while better than Man driver, still seems to have a flavor (man-diva) of female impersonators (think guys dressed up like Gloria Estefan or Cher).

Many Mandrake Club members complained of the same thing, so the grandparent is not trolling nor is he necessarily in the closet. It is more likely that the parent is trolling.

Just think, Mandrakesoft could change thier name again to Manlyca. Think Man licker.

Re:Mandriva?

[Anonymous Coward]

I sound it out as "man-DREE-va", I guess because I always saw "Conectiva" as "con-ek-TEE-va", but for all I know that was wrong too.

That's quite right actually. Mandriva is a contracted form of "Mandrake + Conectiva", and being Conectiva a (former) Brazilian company, the pronunciation (is that a word?) follows the portuguese language.

Re:Mandriva?

[Anonymous Coward]

Does that mean you wouldn't download PoundYouInTheAss Linux? The interface is not considered "eye candy", but there is this odd release of satisfaction after using it.

Re:Mandriva?

[fLameDogg]

Here's an incredibly late reply, but thanks for that, it makes sense.

And in other news, yes, pronunciation is indeed a very fine word :O)

Lycoris Major Linux Distribution?

[StarWreck]

Since when is Lycoris a MAJOR Linux Distribution? I'm fammilar with and have personally installed and used Debian, Red-Hat, Gentoo, Slackware, Amiga-Linux, Fedora, SuSE, College-Linux, Mandrake, and Lindows/Linspire but I've never even heard of Lycoris before...

Re:Lycoris Major Linux Distribution?

[ulteus]

"College-Linux"... what's that??

Re:Lycoris Major Linux Distribution?

[strongmace]

It isnt one of the top20 distributions. It typically hangs at around 50th on the distrowatch rankings. Here is the distrowatch page for lycoris.

Re:Lycoris Major Linux Distribution?

[PenguinBoyDave]

You have not heard of Lycoris before because they are indeed not a major Linux player. I used them for a while, but the hardware support was lacking. Amazingly enough, their product had a strikingly similar look and feel to WindowsXP, but it never took off. When I did side-consulting, I tried to get about fifty of my customers who were looking at new computers to try Lycoris. forth-eight of them said "No" after taking it for a test drive. While it looked like Windows, it wasn't Windows, and that was what they wanted on their desktops. Sure...they bought a lot of Linux servers from me, but the desktops remained Windows.

Re:Lycoris Major Linux Distribution?

[StarWreck]

I also forgot to mention Knoppix (Always keep a copy of Knoppix on your person at all times) and YellowDog, YellowDog has been really useful for PPC machines like the Pegasos.

Re:Lycoris Major Linux Distribution?

[MisanthropicProgram]

Ahhh, you've come across the "Press Release Reality Field". In a press release, adjectives and adverbs take on a whole new meaning.

For example, I'm 5' 7" and white. But in a press release, I can become the next Michael Jordan.
Being broke is : "liquidity issues" or "cash flow interruptions", etc ...
It's the same on TV. A series that hasn't even been aired yet, is advertised as the "New Hit Series" of the season.

I think you get the picture.

Re:Lycoris Major Linux Distribution?

[man_of_mr_e]

Well, Lycoris was much more "major" a few years ago. Originally it was called Redmond Linux, and was using very Microsoft-esque imagery and logos. They were billing themselves as a clone of Windows on Linux.

Then, they abruptly changed their tune. Most likely they got some C&D's from Microsoft and they decided to change their name to Lycoris. While they were still going for a Windows-esque look and feel, they seemed to have lost some momentum, primarily after Lindows started to take off.

Re:Lycoris Major Linux Distribution?

[Rosco P. Coltrane]

MODS ON CRACK!

This is not a flamebait: honestly, who the hell knows Lycoris?

The parent is right: Lycoris isn't a major Linux distro. Period. I don't see why that's a flamebait, just the parent merely pointing out that the usual PR statement bullshit just doesn't match reality at all in this case.

Re:Lycoris Major Linux Distribution?

[birder]

As a top ranked moderator for the leading news aggregration site on the Internet, I concur.

Re:Lycoris Major Linux Distribution?

[ifwm]

It's not free (the supported version at least) which I guarantee is part of the reason.

How many of those other distros were sold at Wal-Mart?

Re:Lycoris Major Linux Distribution?

[Codename_V]

Distrowatch rankings are merely a count of the number of hits a particular distro's page gets on distrowatch. So please people, stop mistakenly using this as a measure of popularity.

Re:Lycoris Major Linux Distribution?

[AKAImBatman]

You have not heard of Lycoris before because they are indeed not a major Linux player. I used them for a while, but the hardware support was lacking.

I don't know if anyone else here remembers it, but I loved the LinuxWorld "review" of Lycrois. It was two or three paragraphs long and went something like this:

"I installed Lycoris, a Linux billed as an XP clone. My screen tunred a weird shade of green when using the Desktop. That sucked. Fin."

After reading that, I was just standing there with a horrified look on my face, then started muttering "but, but, he didn't even TRY to fix the issue, or even tell us anything ABOUT the OS!"

Ah, here it is. Gotta love journalistic integrity. :-)

Re:Lycoris Major Linux Distribution?

[strongmace]

It is the ranking based upon unique hits, so yes, it can be used to some degree as a measure of popularity.

Re:Lycoris Major Linux Distribution?

[MrCopilot]

they seemed to have lost some momentum, primarily after Lindows started to take off.

That's LinSpire now. Thank You, Judge whatever the hell your name was.

C & D using this blatant rip off of Microsoft's flagship product's NAME

You could tarnish or dilute their reputation of rock solid reliability & Visual continuity.

Ok, I give in, Sorry, Couldn't keep a straight face anymore! visual continuity Hah ha haaha

Re:Lycoris Major Linux Distribution?

[Anonymous Coward]

It's a forward looking statement in that they're looking forwards to it.

Re:Lycoris Major Linux Distribution?

[thrashbluegrass]

This is all part of Mandrake's master plan:

Now Mandriva, soon to be Mandriloris.

They'll soon snap up Debian.

And be called Mandalorian Linux.

Re:Lycoris Major Linux Distribution?

[MarkByers]

[Lycoris is] not free (the supported version at least) which I guarantee is part of the reason.

Windows and Mac OS X aren't free either but they are popular. Being good (in the eyes of the users) makes an operating popular. What do Lycoris offer that makes them better than the competition?

Re:Lycoris Major Linux Distribution?

[Anonymous Coward]

Is that you, Revan?

Hmmm

[Anonymous Coward]

Who is next?

Mandriva==Next Red Hat

[Anonymous Coward]

Expect Mandriva to become the next Red Hat.

This is what happens when suits get into the picture.

So... they have a linux distro...

[Mad Ogre]

That gives users a Windows ME look and feel. That's spiffy.

As a Mandriva user...

[seanvaandering]

My recent upgrade from 10.0 to 10.1 is riddled with problems, will this aquisition actually change the distro, or do the people who download FREE versions of the distro get screwed? I noticed that some software in RPM format asks you for a disk you never got in the download version, its almost why I switched from Windows in the first place all over again!

Needless to say running this Distro in 128MB of RAM is not recommended. :)

Re:As a Mandriva user...

[Rudeboy777]

How is it you're a Mandrake user if you didn't have the last disk :)

I'm was/is in a similar situation. I bought into the Mandrake Club about 13 months ago because 9.1 and 9.2 were quite excellent. Unfortunately, nothing in 10.0+ made it worth my while to renew the club subscription. Fedora is currently miles ahead of Mandriva and the price is right!

Re:As a Mandriva user...

[ulteus]

I'm afraid you didn't give a try to the LE2005. It's really way ahead of Fedora. And everything just works.

Re:As a Mandriva user...

[matt me]

Hey, try running Knoppix (where the OS is loaded into a RAM-drive) on my school computers, which I suspect have at most 64MB (possibly less, they might use server or something - yet to get connection in Knoppix). This is painful. That said, it's easily fast enough to "telinit 3" and "fdisk /dev/hd**". ha ha ha ha ha

Re:As a Mandriva user...

[techwrench]

I currently use the LE2005 (10.2) version, and found that it fixed a lot of issues that 10.1 had.

Re:As a Mandriva user...

[johnlenin1]

Agreed. I've been using Mandrake since v7, and LE2005 is the best so far. It is the first distro I've tried where everything just worked great right away, with no major tweaking, even my multi-display setup. And it seems a lot more stable than 10.1.

Re:As a Mandriva user...

[rmm4pi8]

I've had awful experiences with the community editions, but the "official" edition of 10.1 runs very smoothly for me, even on 128mb of ram. The trick is to upgrade to the Thac package of KDE3.4, which goes a lot easier on the ram usage.

As for the dependencies, I reccommend using "easyurpmi" (just Google for it if you don't know what I'm talking about, it really is easy), and add the PLF sources and such, and then you'll be fairly set as far as dependencies go.

Re:As a Mandriva user...

[sconeu]

LE2005 aka 10.2 is much better than 10.1

I couldn't even get 10.1 to boot on my machine (K7T266A), due to the infamous VIA USB bulk-timeout error.

I burnt the 10.2 ISO to a DVD and it booted up, installed, no muss no fuss. No problems with the NVIDIA driver either.

Re:As a Mandriva user...

[sconeu]

Yep, now if I could only figure out how to tweak my modeline so that I get 1152x864x75Hz on my Sylvania F74 without having to use xvidtune to right shift the picture, I'd be a happy man. Note: using the 7174 NVIDIA drivers.

That's the *only* issue I've had so far.

Re:As a Mandriva user...

[ReinoutS]

My recent upgrade from 10.0 to 10.1 is riddled with problems

You have recently upgraded from 10.0 to 10.1? You might have gone with LE2005 as well instead. And if you encounter any problems, there are countless Mandriva fora where people are eager to help you.

do the people who download FREE versions of the distro get screwed?

Have Mandriva ever "screwed" the people who download the Free versions of their distro? What makes you think they might do so now?

I noticed that some software in RPM format asks you for a disk you never got in the download version

Go to the Software Media Manager and remove any references to installation CD's. Then, add any random FTP mirror for Mandriva's main and contrib repositories (you might want PLF too) and you're all set. Quick instructions on how to do this: Easy URPMI.

Re:As a Mandriva user...

[shahruz]

I just did a fresh install of Mandriva 10.1 a month ago on my home PC with 128MB of RAM. My machine does not scream, as a Duron 700 it never did. But it is faster and more stable than Win98 ever was on it. In fact it is as fast as my work computer which had much better specs and is running XP Pro. Most importantly it runs Firefox and Thunderbird beautifully.

Re:As a Mandriva user...

[waferhead]

The only "major" issue I ran into is they enable hyperthreading by default (acpi=ht).

On at least MY NF2 MB (FIC Au11), this borks the USB, which is somewhat problematic with a USB mouse and keyboard.

No USB during the install, or after first boot. Have to edit lilo.conf and omit "acpi=ht"

This is a known issue... But it's the ONLY issue I ran into that I would consider an "issue" (several machines for family)

As to the extra disc they ask you for--- They ASK for it _IF_ you have it, and if you don't, it still works...

I still suggest leaving all the network/X11/printer config for after first boot.

I also suggest doing a clean install of 10.2//2005 LE, which has been out for awhile.

(I'm still running 10.1--- Mythtv works fine)

Re:As a Mandriva user...

[waferhead]

Also, it runs fine with 128m ram, as long as you set up swap normally.

Ran this way for quite some time whan I had a stick of RAM crap out, was shocked/surprised how WELL it worked.

(More IS better, but for std desktop stuff, 128 will "do". If you run OOo a lot, try one of the dozen or so "lightweight" WMs available, just set up your sources with easy urpmi.

I suggest icewm as a lightweight as it is sort of "windows" ish...

Re:As a Mandriva user...

[Anonymous Coward]

Ditto. I'm a looong time Mandrake user. Did Fedora FC3 on my new x86_64 machine. Installed 2005LE when it was available. MDK seriously is better than Fedora with 2005LE.

Re:As a Mandriva user...

[Mr. Hankey]

Look into the gtf command, it should already be installed. Basically, try something like this:

gtf 1152 864 75 -x

It outputs a modeline you can insert into your XF86Config/xorg.conf file in the "Monitor" section, since it uses VESA guidelines it might do the trick. Then again, it might not. It's worth a shot to avoid the annoyance anyway.

Re:As a Mandriva user...

[edxwelch]

I tried to upgrade to the Thac packages, firstly manually, which borked up my system completely. Then I tried using urmpi, but there's some dependancy problem that I can't get around.

Re:As a Mandriva user...

[seanvaandering]

Have Mandriva ever "screwed" the people who download the Free versions of their distro?

So where is that fabled 4th disk that isnt available in the download version but for some reason, when your trying to install software it suddently starts to ask for it? There is no 4th disk in the download version that I was aware of, so it struck me as interesting that it should begin asking once the OS is installed.

Re:As a Mandriva user...

[PianoComp81]

10.1 worked just fine for me. How did you "upgrade"? Typically, I'd just change the urpm sources to the new version and update everything - worked from 10.0 to 10.1, and then 10.1 to 10.2 (LE2005). Sometimes upgrading from CDs caused problems (been a while, though).

I've never gotten screwed on the free versions. The main thing is that they don't come with flash, acroread, etc. - but I can get those using the PLF sources (see the easyurpmi stuff in other posts). Maybe you missed a free CD?

The only complaint I have currently is that setting up external CRT monitor support on a laptop (Thinkpad R51) couldn't be done in a GUI - I could never get the refresh rate above 60Hz. Manually editing the xorg.conf file (with help from google) fixed this, but it'd be nice to have it in Mandrake's GUI like everything else. Even my wireless worked fine once I installed the firmware (2200BG, available from PLF)

As for running in 128MB of RAM, that's not distro-specific in most cases. It depends on what WM and desktop you use, and what programs (Eclipse and OO.o take quite a lot of RAM).

Do a clean install. You might actually like it!

Re:As a Mandriva user...

[ReinoutS]

The free download edition indeed consists of three ISOs. Like I said: in the Software Media Manager, remove the CD4 media and add the main and contrib repositories as explained on the Easy URPMI website. Then you'll have access to the same amount of RPMs as anyone else, except for the packages that don't come with a Free license- you'll have to be a Mandriva Club member for access to those.

Re:As a Mandriva user...

[sconeu]

gtf gave me the same as the stock modeline.

I figured it out though, I ran xvidtune until I had the screen the way I liked it, and copied the values shown in xvidtune into the modeline for 1152x864x75.

Re:As a Mandriva user...

[rmm4pi8]

Well, here's what I did. First, install the X version that Thac wants manually, I think that's the only thing that urpmi absolutely won't do. And then ask urpmi to grab something like the config file or whatever, which has all the basic KDE packages as dependencies. I think this is counter-intuitive and Thac should write a how-to, but I guess he figures if you can't figure it out you shouldn't be on the bleeding edge. Anyway, KDE 3.4 rocks my world. If you can't get it to work, feel free to email me for help.

Mandriva?

[Anonymous Coward]

Now who the hell came up with the name Mandriva?

It couldn't have been a native English speaker, because, at least to me, it reads "Mandriver" and just SCREAMS HOMOSEXUALITY.

I see

[KingBahamut]

Mandrivel + Lycorsh*t + Unconectiva = Unconnected Driveling Sh*t for 25 bucks.

Who's Next?

[youknowmewell]

Next Mandriva is buying Google. The new company will be called Mandrivarisoogle.

Re:Who's Next?

[Anonymous Coward]

Better than ManGoo. :P

Re:Who's Next?

[Anonymous Coward]

I think there's a DBA around here with that name...

Re:Who's Next?

[Anonymous Coward]

Your misssing one... it's lymandrivaoogle ;)

New name speculation...

[mgkimsal2]

Mandrivis
Lydraktiva
Condraktivis
Mancortiva

I know you guys can come up with more!

Re:New name speculation...

[Anonymous Coward]

Mandyke?

Re:New name speculation...

[TuringTest]

LicorIsSake
ConectManLy
EctCake

Re:New name speculation...

[ALecs]

Landriva

Re:New name speculation...

[Anonymous Coward]

conectiva + mandriva = con-man-diva

Re:New name speculation...

[Anonymous Coward]

Manticore?

Re:New name speculation...

[Anonymous Coward]

Mandrivly???

Re:New name speculation...

[sconeu]

I'll buy that one if they bundle Jessica Alba with it!!!!

Re:New name speculation...

[Cro Magnon]

Lymandriva!

Re:New name speculation...

[MrCopilot]

LicaMan
ManLycar
LayM-crysis
Favorite so far.
Mandilay (ind.)

Are these too Gay or just gay enough?

Re:New name speculation...

[Darius__]

Mancoris :)
or even Manticore (http://haven.loki.ws/ff/mons/manticor.gif)

Re:New name speculation...

[stud9920]

I know you guys can come up with more!

Slashdot attendance is not the best crowd to come up with STD names.

Clitoris?

[Kevin Mitnick]

Oh.. sorry.. Lycoris.. Haven't had my dose of pr0n yet this morning. Gotta wait 'till the co-worker goes for coffee.

Re:Clitoris?

[Anonymous Coward]

I don't think you really want to imagine mandrake's clitoris ...

Re:Clitoris?

[sharkey]

Why? Does she jiggle when she walks?

New name?

[Anonymous Coward]

Mandricis?
Mandrivis?
Lyandriva?
Lindrivis?

Re:New name?

[Anonymous Coward]

ManDrivaCoris? Sounds like a gay barbershop quartet.

Major?

[pherthyl]

Lycoris, a major north american linux linux distro? Hardly. Lycoris is in the same class as Xandros, they have some cool ideas, but no user base to speak of.

A major north american linux distro would be Redhat, and maybe Novell.

Re:Major?

[Otter]

Not sure why everyone saying this is getting modded down -- not only is Lycoris an interesting distro that is in no way "major", I'm amazed to see that it has enough of a zealot following to suport moderation abuse.

SUMMARY:

[Anonymous Coward]

Three linux distributions you have never heard of have merged together to form one big linux distribution you have never heard of

Manlyca

[ehaggis]

I sometimes take manlyca when my stomach is upset.

Re:Manlyca

[vsprintf]

I sometimes take manlyca when my stomach is upset.

That's good, because when they rename the distro Mandrivacoris, a lot of us will have upset stomachs - again. Let's just hope there isn't some Greek distro named Janopaparopalaus looking to be acquired.

Might give it a whirl

[miletus]

I used Mandrake from version 7.2 up until 10.1. I found 10.1 to be problematic with various hardware, and 10.2 just impossible. So I switched to Ubuntu and everything works pretty well.

Since I still have a Mandrake club membership, I might give the new version a whirl, since the font rendering and desktop stuff from Lycoris looks interesting. I seriously doubt they'll get away from the bloated, buggy mess they've turned into.

Re:Might give it a whirl

[Anonymous Coward]

When I accidentally reformatted my hard drive last month, I decided to do the same. Unfortunately, after three attempts I still couldn't get Ubuntu to bring up X.

Proper video detection seems to be one of Ubuntu's weaknesses. On three different machines, it failed to detect the video properly and defaulted to 640x480, which is useless because most dialogs don't even fit onto that screen resolution, I know I can go into xorg.conf and add HorizSync and VertRefresh, but come on, every other live CD's been able to properly detect the video on these boxes. But I digress...

It also gave me a slew of errors on critical packages in the post-install process, so something was really going wrong for me. After downloaded the CD again and two more installation attempts, I gave up. It's too bad, because I really what I've seen of the live CD. Maybe next time.

Instead, I went with PCLinuxOS, a Mandrake/Mandriva derivative. It's also got a live CD, but (unlike Ubuntu), you don't need a seperate install CD. As always, disk partitioning was a bit of a hassle (I dual boot), but once that was out of the way, everything was smooth sailing. Nice KDE environment, and everything stays up to date with apt-get. I managed to wipe out the boot manager at one point. I did a complete reinstall and got everything back.

One of these days I need to learn to do backups, through.

Re:Might give it a whirl

[samdu]

I had some issues with 10.1, but 10.2 has been running flawlessly for a couple of weeks now. I attributed the issues with 10.1 to the fact that I did an upgrade install (9.x -> 10.0 -> 10.1), so I did a fresh install of 10.2.

I've given Ubuntu (and Kubuntu) a whirl, but wasn't too comfortable with the permissions setup of the distro. It's probably not as big a deal as I made it out to be, but having no real root user, but giving a standard user root permissions just didn't seem like a good idea to me. :)

Re:Might give it a whirl

[Galilee]

You can enable the root account by setting a root password:

sudo passwd

After that I used visudo to remove the adm group from having full root priveleges with sudo, and added my own account.

Seen it...

[Anonymous Coward]

"Manlyca"

Jungle man sex videos?

Who?

[sben]

You're wondering "Who's next?". I'm wondering "Who?".

Perhaps the name could be LyMan

[ehaggis]

The Refreshing Distro with a twist.

Re:Perhaps the name could be LyMan

[IANAAC]

Actually, nobody outside of the midwest will get this, but there used to be a boat manufacturer called "Lyman" that made some pretty top-notch boats.

Well lycoris looks really nice

[zlogic]

However personally I don't like Mandriva's general look&feel. Some things look cool while others suck. Their website looks as if it was drawn in Paint back in the old Win98 days. There's no easy way of installing software like apt-get install foo or yum install foo. Or having segfaults all the time while using Mandrake 10.1. Or having to use KDE 3.2 when 3.3 is out just because the guys have screwed something up and nearly made a fork of KDE (or why did it take so long to stay up to date?) Hope they'll learn how to make their products look really professional, that's probably one of the main reasons which keeps me from using it. And is Lycoris Debian-based or does it use RPM?

Re:Well lycoris looks really nice

[mgkimsal2]

There's no easy way of installing software like apt-get install foo or yum install foo.

urpmi foo

Whoo, that was tough...

Re:Well lycoris looks really nice

[zlogic]

I haven't been able to find a decent GUI frontend for installing apps via urpmi. Personally, I think the Synaptic-like package manager would be better. IMO urmpi just doesn't feel right.

Re:Well lycoris looks really nice

[Anonymous Coward]

"There's no easy way of installing software like apt-get install foo or yum install foo"

unless you count 'urmpi foo'

Re:Well lycoris looks really nice

[Anonymous Coward]

IMO urmpi just doesn't feel right.

says slashdot user id #892404, barely entering pimple-age, who doesn't know good software from horse manure and derives his opinions from other people's postings on the innurnet...

urpmi is almost the same as apt feature-wise. It sports almost the same commands (different names, same actions), and works pretty much the same way. It doesn't feel right because you don't know it, that's all.

Re:Well lycoris looks really nice

[TuringTest]

What's wrong with the "install software" section in Mandrake Control Center?

Re:Well lycoris looks really nice

[zlogic]

> What's wrong with the "install software" section in Mandrake Control Center?

Well, the only things I could find were the software updates for the stuff which comes bundled. Maybe I was just being stupid and couldn't attach additional repos besides the 4 standard CDs, but that's the exact target audience Mandriva is targeting! People who don't want to know what their PCs are doing but rather just get the job done.

Re:Well lycoris looks really nice

[Anonymous Coward]

Not stupid, but badly informed, because it is very easy to install new repositories (among them PLF, with problematic packages, such as libdvdcss):

http://easyurpmi.zarb.org/
and this guide shows how to do this graphically:
http://www.zebulon.org.uk/ICML0.HTML

Re:Well lycoris looks really nice

[ReinoutS]

Obviously you don't know what you are talking about. Mandriva has urpmi, which is equally powerful as apt-get or yum when it comes to easy software installation.

And if you don't think KDE looks professional, well that might be personal taste, but you can choose from more than just that one desktop with Mandriva.

Re:Well lycoris looks really nice

[zlogic]

No, I'm not talking about KDE (KDE's great!), but if I see a component I can instantly tell whether it's from KDE or from Mandrake or some third-party bundled app. Like the tea-cooker thing which is bundled with KDE-Games. It just doesn't fit.
However Fedora Core 3's KDE looks even more inconsistent - some icons are from Gnome, some are Bluecurve and some KDE.

Re:Well lycoris looks really nice

[StormReaver]

"Not stupid, but badly informed, because it is very easy to install new repositories...."

As much as I like Mandrake (I'm not yet using a Mandrive distribution, so I'm using the name of what I have), installing new repositories is not easy. In fact, it's pretty hard because you have to know too much esoteric information about where things are located on the mirrors.

An easy process would be something like this:

1) MCC automatically connects to the Mandrake/Mandrive site and downloads a list of verified mirrors that is then presented to the user.

2) The user highlights the mirrors to add to the repository list, and says OK.

Done. All the RPMs on the selected mirror sites are now available.

As it stands right now, you have to know the mirror location ahead of time, and you have to know EXACTLY not only where the RPMs are stored on the mirror site, but where the synthesis file is located relative the the RPMs (which is frequently not the same place the RPMs are stored). If you don't get both of those just right, then nothing works.

The quality of the mirrors also varies greatly, as their conformance to the Mandrake master list is not verified. More often than not, the mirror sites are painfully understocked and the dependencies are unresolvable. Even the Mandrake Club reserved mirrors are frequently out of sync or just broken.

When a well made mirror is finally found, urpmi works seamlessly. However, well made mirrors are the exception rather than the rule.

Re:Well lycoris looks really nice

[Anonymous Coward]

You are right here, but as far as I know, multiple mirrors, mirror integrity and connecting to new repositories from the MCC will be added in the next version.

Re:Well lycoris looks really nice

[Anonymous Coward]

Actually there is already a mirror retrieval system in the MCC in 2005LE.
Just go to the media manager, and press "Add", it will retrieve a list of useable mirrors. However, integrating something like "easyurpmi" in the MCC would be very nice indeed.

Who's Next

[ronark]

from the 'not-going-to-happen-in-this-lifetime dept.'

"Mandriva announced today that they are purchasing the majority of shares in Microsoft Corporation. What does this signify to the Linux community?"

Re:Who's Next

[hal200]

In a similar, but probably somewhat more disturbing vein...

"Mandriva announced today that they are merging with search engine provider Google Inc. The combined company will be called Moogle. Said Moogle's new CEO, Mog, 'I believe the merger of these two industry giants will be absolutely *kupo*!'. Representatives of Square Enix were unavailable for commment."

--- mandriva user

[Azureflare]

I use mandriva and i've been verry happy with 2005LE (The speed improvement over 10.1 is amazing, I wasn't expecting that). It's nice to see a company I've been with go through bankruptcy and then emerge to start bringing together a lot of people who are oriented towards the desktop linux experience.

With all these people coming together, they should come up with something interesting. Who knows if it'll be good or bad, but I'm going to wait and see. I'm a little leery of Lycoris since I've never used it. Their site looks nice and slick at least.

oh I don't know...

[Anonymous Coward]

"but I'm wondering: who's next?"

Oh, I don't know, Google?

Doesn't hurt diversity...

[gbulmash]

I think a little consolidation is inevitable in any large marketplace. Mandrake and Lycoris both have big cred when it comes to user friendliness on a newbie level (easy install, easy basic set-up). I think it's a good pairing in the fight to develop a desktop distro with the legs to really take on Microsoft.

For all the people complaining about diversity... how many distros does that leave remaining? Fedora, Ubuntu, Knoppix, Gentoo, Slackware, Debian, CentOS... and those are just the free ones I can name off the top of my head. Additionally there are the more commercialized ones like Red Hat Enterprise Linux, Linspire, Xandros, SuSE, and Sun Java Desktop. Just off the top of my head, that's 12 distros. And they're just the better known ones.

That's still a lot of choice.

- Greg

Re:Doesn't hurt diversity...

[ColMustard]

There are still TONS.

Monopoly?

[pjwhite]

I think they're going to try to acquire all of them and create a monopoly on silly made-up company names.

Re:Monopoly?

[Genrou]

I think they're going to try to acquire all of them and create a monopoly on silly made-up company names.

Hm... let's see:

Mandrake
Conectiva
Lycoris

Makes sense. Next distribution must be one where the fourth letter is "p".

Not sure what you're talking about...

[Azureflare]

I've been using it from 9.0 and I've been very happy with the recent releases. 2005LE (10.2) was an incredible improvement over 10.1. Got any specifics on what happened? I've never had a problem with any installs... Did you try ##mandriva or #lfd on irc.freenode.net (in xchat or your favorite irc client)?

Re:Not sure what you're talking about...

[miletus]

I have 10.0 running fairly well on an HP Pavillion notebook, but 10.1 and 10.2 wouldn't boot after installation, even with APIC disabled. Asking for help on the Mandrake forums and Mandrake Club wasn't too productive, usually just suggesting things I'd already tried. But I don't really expect Linux to work well on a laptop.

The kicker was when I upgraded my main machine to a Shuttle SFF box. This was a model that I knew would run Linux, based on what people had written about it, and used a generic Realtek network chip. Neither 10.1 nor 10.2 could get basic networking to run! I tried numerous suggestions off the Mandriva support list, but nothing could get the network running, even though the driver would load. Needless to say, Ubuntu just worked right off the install. At this point, it's unacceptible for a major distribution to cause this many headeaches on something so basic as networking with non-exotic hardware.

Come to think of it, I WON'T be giving the next release a whirl; life's too short, and Ubuntu just works.

Re:Not sure what you're talking about...

[Newtonian_p]

I tried version 10.1 community edition on my friend's computer and it caused lots of problems. The ones I remember are the colors in any Xv output would get all screwed up after running the Totem player (but Mplayer didn't cause this problem), Starcraft didn't display properly under WINE (even when using the same version of WINE I have which works fine) and doing a search in kfind would freeze the dialog permanently.

To be fair this was a community edition and not a commercial release.

I'm still running 9.1 (with a lot of manual updates from the original sources) right now and it works perfectly.

Re:Not sure what you're talking about...

[timbo234]

In my experiences the 'community' distros were terrible - they were actually beta versions and should have been named as such. Fortunately the equivalent official versions were a major improvement when they came out.

Oh, no...

[solomonrex]

I'm sorry, you're going to have to limit yourself to one of the other 10,000 distributions available.

Welcome!

[dchamp]

I for one welcome our new Frenchy Overlords...

Maybe this will boost their brand image

[Iloinen Lohikrme]

I think it's definately a good thing that Linux companies are joining forces. Until now, the only major Linux companies have been RedHat, Novell (Suse) and lately Sun. If one puts one of these companies distribution to a solution offering, the customers atleast have heard about these, and with good luck they have good image about them.

In my mind Mandriva hasn't had that image. Few years ago they allmost went to bankruptcy. After that, I have to confess, I haven't been able to trust them. But now when they are merging with other Linux companies, it seems that they have got new blood in their veins. I have been looking their Enterprise Server offering with interest, and if they keep expanding and making their brand more known, their offer will become lucrative. Until then, I will continue using RedHat as the primary OS for production use.

And to those that think that it's bad that there will be less players, I have to remind you that you can allways fork if something goes into a bad direction. To me a future where there would be 3-4 well known and stabile Linux companies with dozens of noncommercial distros would be a perfect situation: innovation and competition together with option to have a stabile offerings.

Cheers to Mandriva!

Re:Maybe this will boost their brand image

[Erwos]

"But now when they are merging with other Linux companies, it seems that they have got new blood in their veins."

I would worry, a lot. Mergers tend to end very badly - just look at, say, AOL-TW. Two companies that were reasonably good at what they did - yet history will judge the results of their (unholy!) union unfavorably.

I should also point out that none of these are huge, successful Linux distributions. Lycoris is a bit player. Connectiva has a small following in South America. Mandrake was a player, but nearly died in bankruptcy. A bunch of small, relatively unsuccessful people getting together doesn't make for a sure-fire win in my eyes.

-Erwos

Lycoris...

[MsGeek]

The base of Lycoris is...wait for it now...CALDERA OPEN LINUX. As in The SCO Group.

This was something that had to happen after the SCO v. IBM blowup sometime or another. I stopped recommending Lycoris to friends and family after the SCO lawsuit, and I suspect I was not alone. Poor Joe Cheek was stuck in the middle of all this.

Mandriva is a good distro, and Joe Cheek is a really good developer. He created a version of Linux that was really good for retraining people with Windows on the brain. Maybe Mandriva will do a "Mandriva Switch" sub-distro geared to the same audience as Lycoris.

You forgot something...

[ifwm]

Well, my thinking on the subject is this.

Linux is itself a small user base, so claiming a distro is or is not "major" is a little silly.

However, IIRC, Lycoris was the distro installed on the computers sold by Wal-Mart (am I wrong?) so that makes it FAR more "major" than most of the other big players anyway.

Re:You forgot something...

[swimin]

Yes, Lycoris was installed on those Wal-Mart PCs, but I think Linspire was also

Re:You forgot something...

[Otter]

Looking at the Wal-Mart site now, I only see Linspire preloads, not Lycoris. Maybe they used to have Lycoris systems -- the Linux world has so much vaporous hype that I lose track of what did and didn't actually happen.

In any case, if either of those distros has reached a large userbase, it's not visible to the rest of the Linux world. I'm inclined to keep Lycoris filed under "minor", Wal-Mart or no.

Re:You forgot something...

[RailGunner]

Right - and this might be the market that Mandriva is targetting. They've bought and are merging with COnnectiva, a distro with a lot of fans and users in South America, and now Lycoris, who used to be the Linux distro on the (only available on-line) $299 Wal-Mart computers.

If Mandriva can use some of Lycoris's usability, and make it easy enough to use to get on a Wal-Mart shelf instead of on-line only, then Microsoft had better be worried (especially with the advances that OpenOffice.org is making with it's upcoming 2.0 release, and the leaps and bounds Firefox is making.)

Re:You forgot something...

[Anonymous Coward]

Then you are a fucking retard

Re:You forgot something...

[swv3752]

Well, Mandrake was on those Wal-mart computers too. I tried Lycoris and it had less usability than Ubuntu. If the default install was not good enough and Linuxconf couldn't configure it, then it was to the commandline you must go.

They did not have any specialized config tools like DrakeConf or Yast. This is the same failing I have heard others complain about thier golden child Ubuntu. You even have this problem with Linspire and Xandros.

Lastly, Lycoris susposedly came out with a pocketpc device distro. Last I heard it was vapor, and was just Opie with a few different icons and background. You can still find the page on thier server but it should only take a cursory glance to see it was vapor. If you search for it you will find some screen shots. Take it from a Zaurus owner, it is just OpenZaurus.

Recent???

[HermanAB]

Maybe you haven't noticed, but the current version of Mandriva is a 10.2LE. So you are complaining about old schtuff.

Oh fer..

[Ricerocket63]

The next thing you know, Microsoft will start snapping up linux distribution developers..

This just in: More companies with Lame names

[WillAffleckUW]

advertising firms must be working overtime, I can't even pronounce the names of EITHER of the two firms that this post is about.

Mandriva? give me a break. It's not english, french, spanish, so far as I can tell - maybe it's a kid saying "Moon River" and some exec who wanted to justify a bonus paid himself $1 billion in "consulting fees" to change all the letterhead.

Lycoris? same thing.

You want to do well? Stop using nonsense words for companies, we'll just make fun of them and never take your company seriously.

Re:This just in: More companies with Lame names

[Anonymous Coward]

Stop using nonsense words for companies

Um... Lycoris is the swirly red candy stuff, you might have heard of it. It also has that nasty black flavour.

Lic-o-rish

Re:This just in: More companies with Lame names

[odin53]

Mandriva is a combination of MandrakeSoft and Conectiva. The two companies merged not too long ago. MandrakeSoft doesn't seem like too strange of a name, certainly not a nonsense name. Conectiva was a Brazilian company, so the latin-ized word (is it Portuguese?) makes sense.

No matter what, keep in mind that from a trademark perspective, nonsense words are the easiest to protect. Makes better financial sense to pick nonsense words for trademarks. Imagine how much money was probably spent trying to protect Microsoft "Word"; I'm not sure it's even protected now.

Re:This just in: More companies with Lame names

[Rocketship Underpant]

I always assumed Lycoris was supposed to be pronounced "licorice", which at least means something.

Power Flower?

[Enrique1218]

What is with the flower stuff. Mac users are suppose to be the gay ones. Right?

Re:Power Flower?

[Anonymous Coward]

Seriously! Every gay guy I know(1) either has a Mac or wants one. The boys who have them pretty much masterbate over them all day. Mind you, they're not whacking it to hot gay porn on the screen. They are smacking off to their ever so stylish Macintosh.

-1 And believe me I know a *lot* of gay guys!

Who's next?

[halleluja]

Google.

The Obvious

[glrotate]

Manlyc

yes but then again ...

[essreenim]

they did deliver the announement of such major imaginery O.S.' as GNU Herd...

Mandrivolis!

[Anonymous Coward]

This is positively Mandrivolis news!

Lycoris: something of value

[Yankel]

Okay, so Lycoris isn't ranked high on DistroWatch, and it may not have a huge following (but enough of one to mod people down ;)

However, something's brewing. Mandriva wouldn't have made the acquisition if nothing interesting was going on.

Whaever Lycoris has, it's obvious that Mandriva wants to throw more resources into it and integrate it into its own offerings. It'll be interesting to see what happens six months from now.

Why?

[Anonymous Coward]

Lycoris is garbage

They NEVER where Bankrupt or in Bankrupty

[Moulinneuf]

"about 2 years ago they were in bankruptcy,"

No , not at all , They where in Judicial protection , someone whas playing with there stock and some of there former deal made by incompetent Manager ( Poole , Le Marois ) where being owed and they where unable to repay them at that time also they where getting sued for the use of the name Mandrake.

Judicial protection is 2 step above bankrupty protection.

"but what I've heard, their desktop was even better"

No not at all ...

"I hope they decide to do business under the Lycoris trade name. "

Why would they switch name to a loosing company name when they have one evrybody knows by now ...

Re:They NEVER where Bankrupt or in Bankrupty

[Bingo Foo]

Hmm. I thought they spoke English in Canada.

Re:They NEVER where Bankrupt or in Bankrupty

[Moulinneuf]

That is english , Moron , you never read my French either ;-)

Re:They NEVER where Bankrupt or in Bankrupty

[Allnighterking]

Not in Quebec!

nope.

[Anonymous Coward]

When was the last time you saw man in a sentence. Now when was the last time you saw mand? Dont expect people to look for the root word at the end of a compilation. In fact the way you read it, there are no root words. Especially considering that _Man_ was in the original name, and driva was switched from drake (male duck), Mandriva is really a gay name.

Mandrake was a little on the mysterious side, they changed the name to something lamer, equally gay, and that just cannot be justified. A name change should be avoided to maintain professional image, and they did a name change without any reason, and with a poor replacement.

The new name...

[Anonymous Coward]

Mandriva + Lycoris = Mandriva

i hope

[tourettes]

I hope one of the 'assets' they're buying out was the game of solitare that you could play during the install of Lycoris. I'm sure there are other distributions out there that i haven't tried that have something like this, but i thought it was so great that I didn't have to sit there staring at packages installing, that I could have a few games of solitare while the installation whipped through. Nice idea, all distros should have it :)

Re:i hope

[Pop69]

Can't remember which distro it was but I'm sure there was one where you could play Pacman while it installed.

Re:i hope

[Anonymous Coward]

god knows, thats what i need for me gentoo installs *yawn*

Linux Market

[bfree]

• RedHat
• Debian (including CDD and Derivatives)
• Nose (that's No_vell Su_se)
• Mandriva

I can see RedHat talking the traditional Server roles (database, web, application), Nose taking the Desktop + Workstation servers, Madriva taking the standalone machines and Debian et al being the true competition for all of them.

Note that I am not suggesting that everything else will dissappear, but that commercial entities will remain localised, be debian based, or be swallowed up (who will take TurboLinux or will it take one of the above). Non-commercial distributions will remain a plenty, but they will be hard pushed to find anything more then a small niche to work in, either hobbyists or specialists.

The bigger question is how big a market can they carve out between them, as long as people are running (at least predominently) free code, I'm not too pushed who gives it to them. Bad practice/business models/methods will fall naturally.

If you feel I've slighted your favourite distro here, I'm sorry, maybe it'll swallow one of the above, but I honestly think we will see the main major linux players collapse to 3 or 4 at most, though 6 of them could be very compatible versions of debian with (for practical purposes) trivial differences. If you must substitute in another distro for debian above go ahead, I just don't see it myself.

I also think this is all a good thing. By having a main few players it is far easier to squash out stupid recuring bugs and compatibility issues, but as it's free software (and I don't see debian going away) where needed any diversity can accomadate itself (the main requirement being self sufficiency either by code/docs/testing or cash in the right places). All I hope is that the consolidations remain friendly so everyone can focus on doing good work and not who they are working for today.

Screw them

[Just-some-person]

They put proprietary software in their commercial version. I'm staying with Fedora.

Re:Screw them

[ChaoticLimbs]

Yeah, because Linux isn't about making a superior product with excellent hardware support, it's about making a social statement and adhering it to it completely. It's about revolution, man, not software. Screw those capitalist pigs! If someone writes something completely on their own and isn't willing to share it for free with everyone, there's something WRONG with them. Filthy dogs who want to get PAID for the thing they do AT THEIR JOB. DEBIAN 4EVAR!!!11 LOLZ0rz!

Mandrivorix

[njfuzzy]

...but I'm wondering: What the hell are they going to call the company now?

Canadian Commas

[Anonymous Coward]

But , you , really , need to work , on your punctuation,,,, :-)

Re:Canadian Commas

[Moulinneuf]

No , because , I have given up on trying to be something wich I am not : a good writer , in "any" language.

Took many class , took personnal course , I have many dictionnary and spell checker. Its just not working for me at all.

Re:Canadian Commas

[Anonymous Coward]

May I remind you that you are posting messages in a forum for which the method of communication is the written English language?

It's the drivers, stupid

[Anonymous Coward]

1. The packaging system is user-unfriendly.

2. The locations of programs are user-unfriendly.

3. The folder layout of Linux systems is user-unfriendly.

All of these things can be abstracted away, and have been in various distros. For instance, no desktop user needs to be confronted with the root filesystem, it can all be smoothed over like on Mac OS X. Sure, we can pick nits, and there is room for improvement, but none of these things are the real issue.

4. The lack of a standard base of installed libraries is application (and thus user) unfriendly.

This is much closer to the mark, but not quite for the reason you explain. To paraphrase, "It's the drivers, stupid."

On the application level, what you describe is a problem, but not a huge problem because so much that's important on a Linux system is open source and thus can be made available for your system anyhow (and will be, if the distro is not of negligle size). An Ubuntu home user, for example, doesn't have much problem finding software for their system. An RHEL or Suse user in a corporate environment doesn't have much problem finding software for their system. And on the horizon are solutions like Autopackage, which I think will take us the rest of the way.

The driver level is a different story. Linux has no stable driver interface and the developers intend to keep it that way, so every minor update of every minor distro on the planet requires specially built drivers. That's not much of a problem if the drivers are open source, see above. But many are not, and never will be, for reasons we can argue until the end of time.

Thus even when we can convince a Nvidia or an ATI or a Broadcom to release Linux binary drivers, they're only of limited value, break quickly, and only work if you're on one or two "blessed" distros. And we're right back in the same mess we were to begin with.

Thus we end up with half-assed Linux boxes where the wifi doesn't work, the 3D graphics don't work, sound doesn't work, digital cameras don't work, and on and on and on.

Before the geeks in their basements get their hackles up, I'm well aware that the diligent techie can work around many of these issues, either through hackery (ndiswrapper and so on) or extremely careful selection of hardware. But the simple fact is that Mom and Dad's existing Dell (or the Dell at the office) can't be easily turned into a fully functional Linux box. For PowerPC, take the above problems and multiply by a thousand.

Since the Linux developers won't (or can't, depending upon your interpretation of the GPL) budge on this issue, and the hardware manufacturers won't budge either (go debate the reasons in another thread, Now Playing elsewhere on Slashdot), and the odds of all the distros agreeing on a single binary kernel framework is somewhere around zero... there isn't a lot of hope. Drivers will remain consumer desktop Linux's achiles heel for the forseeable future.

Oh sure, there are myriad other problems. There are still some ease of use wrinkles to iron out. Lack of simple stuff like MP3 support, without resorting to illegal hacks (in the U.S. anyway), is also a huge problem. And there's the lack of network effects, which hurts in so many, many ways. But all of these are fundamentally solvable, whereas the driver problem is a true conundrum. Huge changes in the marketplace are going to be necessary to get these drivers opened up.

How to move forward? Well, Novell and Red Hat seem to have the same idea. Push desktop Linux where it does make sense, where the hardware isn't very fancy and thus well supported, in controlled environments like thin clients or vanilla corporate desktops. Community distros, many based on Debian like Ubuntu, Skolelinux, and LinEx, are reaching out to third-world, educational, and governmental desktop users, where the benefits of a free system greatly outweight the drawbacks. Asianux is another good sign on the horizon - a billion Chinese running Linux can't be wrong. Hopefully, with time, the network effects will accumulate, forcing hardware companies to design for the possibility of Linux in the first place, leading to more open drivers...

The future may be bright. But we have a LONG way to go.

The question....

[khellendros1984]

....that everyone is asking now: For how many months?

Yeah, we're working on it

[HishamMuhammad]

Mod at will, but I think it's on-topic to make a shameless plug here for the distro project I'm a part of, GoboLinux, since the entire point of the distribution is to make the radical changes to Linux that we consider necessary for it to overcome the problems you listed.

1. The packaging system is user-unfriendly.

Yes, and that is because in regular distributions, you have a "list of packages and dependencies" and then the actual files scattered through the file system, and those are held together by a database of some sort. The fact that in the actual filesystem you can move single files around, overwrite stuff regardless of the package list, etc. leads to loss of syncrhonization and corruption of the packaging control system.

2. The locations of programs are user-unfriendly.

True, and that is because of traditional Unix conventions created to deal with stuff such as /usr on NFS, etc. These days we have more advanced methods to deal with this, such as UnionFS, but those legacy paths are still there, complicating the overall structure of the system.

3. The folder layout of Linux systems is user-unfriendly.

That is the heart of the matter. Changing the directory layout is how we addressed problems 1 and 2 in GoboLinux. We organize all data each program under /Programs/[name]/[version] (not like Windows where parts are under windows/system, in the registry, etc.). With this total modularization, we don't need to maintain a database of "what belongs to whom", and it also gives the user a better view of what's in his/her system, and how are things organized.

4. The lack of a standard base of installed libraries is application (and thus user) unfriendly.

This is indeed a problem. In GoboLinux, we apopted a small standard "base" set (inspired by Linux From Scratch) which we then build on. This helps, but standardized "frameworks" of libraries would be a good thing -- note that desktop environments like KDE and GNOME do this to some extent.

So, if you want to take a look at an actual implementation of these ideas, give GoboLinux a go. :) It's a live CD (which can also install to the HD).

Re:Yeah, we're working on it

[AKAImBatman]

Hey, it's Hisham! Glad to have you in on the discussion!

Mod at will

Which is to say, mod parent up for being an expert with an on-topic opinon. ;-)

I've looked at some of the work you guys have been doing, and I think you're on the right track. I have a few more thoughts that are going to be in my next blog (which I'm not going to replicate here, because that's a LOT of typing), but you guys are at least getting close from a source perspective.

For those who don't know what GoboLinux does, they break up programs into /Programs/$NAME_OF_PROGRAM structure. After that, symlinks are used in various places to maintain system wide compatibility. It's very interesting work, and is explained in more detail in the FAQ.

what about their new name

[Anonymous Coward]

If

MANDRAKE + CONECTIVA = MANDRIVA

then obviously

MANDRIVA + LYCORIS = SLIMY OR CANARD VI

(does not sound very easy to use).

Nah. Mandrivoris.

[JCCyC]

You read it here first.

Re:Nah. Mandrivoris.

[black6host]

Easy to remember, ryhmes with a female body part. (Just don't ask Jerry...) :)

The new name

[Quila]

Mandrivoris?

Re:The new name

[noldrin]

My guess was Mandoris

Those who want an O/S that works just like Windows

[KwKSilver]

should stick to windows.

OT: Your sig

[Just Some Guy]

[-(friend^2)]^(1/2)

iFriend? Is that a Mac thing?

How about Libranet?

[walterbyrd]

Another pretty distro, that nobody uses. Because nobody wants to pay all that $$, when you can download an equally good distro for free.

Packaging systems

[Anonymous Coward]

It's actually pretty good at what it is - a means to package a diverse system that can be tailored to the user. Things like Smart (a Conectiva/Mandriva project even) and Autopackage help a lot.

A Mandriva developer has comments on Smart and RPM in his blog. Smart is maturing and approaching production quality, and RPM, despite a mature product, has a lot of problems to be fixed.

It's not a problem

[poptones]

And I'm telling you, after using linux more than two years now and a few differnt distros. I cannot speak for all of them but I do know - from experience - if you are running windows and you try to install a windows app it has LESS chance of success the first time than if you are running ubuntu and try to install an app supported by them.

Should microsoft have to support every app? No, it's a different model and they CANNOT support every app. But ubuntu or mandriva exist for this very purpose, to provide a desktop platform AND a compelling list of appplications for that desktop. If you need to install software that exists outside that scope you have several choices: learn to DIY (impossible with most windows software), do without, or pay someone else a modest sum to do it for you. If you have the same needs in windows you have the choice of paying one of the DEVELOPERS whatever they demand to help you or you can do without.

The best contemporary distributions are able to install a vast number of apps and do it without incident. In the specific example the other fellow was arguing about - vlc - if one is using ubuntu one need follow the simple directions to enable the extra repositories, then go to a command window and type

apt-get install vlc

If that's too scary then do a "search" in synaptic for vlc, click it to select it, and click apply. Where do you see the problem in this?

Re:It's not a problem

[Blakey Rat]

Did you even read my post? Apparently not, because you immediately started talking about Windows again.

Look, when Macintosh users sit around and talk about things that are troublesome in OS X, do you think there's a guy there that says, "well, it doesn't matter if foo steals focus because a lot of Windows applications also steal focus!?" The other people would just say, "what the hell does that matter?"

I'd like to think that the Linux community is capable of standing alone, but posts like yours appear constantly, comparing Linux to Windows... who cares? Judge Linux on its own merits.

that would be relatively interesting news if..

[Anonymous Coward]

I'd had ever heard of either of them in the first place. What's with the vague of obscure distros being pushed out when the underlying issues holding linux back keep being ignored? (cross-distro compat, hardware support from vendors, etc)

Re:that would be relatively interesting news if..

[chawly]

How's your sex life ? Or haven't you hear of tht either. Leave Linux alone and try sex - this will heighten your awareness. Return after. Do not smile too widely.

Re:Name

[Anonymous Coward]

I'd rather go with Mandrivoris for a name.

Which distro is next in this line of acquisitions by ex-Mandrake? Make your bet.

MOD PARENT DOWN

[timbo234]

There's no easy way of installing software like apt-get install

Except for 'urpmi foo' and the GUI equivalent in the Mandrake Control Centre

Or having segfaults all the time while using Mandrake 10.1

What segfaults? The kernel? kde? some app you downloaded off the net? It works fine for the majority of people.

KDE 3.2 when 3.3 is out just because the guys have screwed something up

Nobody screwed KDE up - 3.3 was released only just before 10.1 was released so there wasn't time to integrate it into the distro (at that time Mandriva was following 6 monthly release cycles). There was no attempt to fork KDE - you pulled that out of your arse.

And is Lycoris Debian-based or does it use RPM?

It sounds like you used it for a grand total of about 5 minutes and then gave up.

Duh

[poptones]

I'm telling you your thesis is a non starter. It is a flawed assumption based on antiquated or non mainstream linux distributions; it is no more; it is pushing up daisies.

Re:Duh

[Blakey Rat]

No, my ASSUMPTION is that every time somebody points of a problem with Linux, a Linux fan comes out of the woodwork and declares "well, Windows has the same problem!" (as if that were at all relevant.) You've proved that assumption correct nicely.

Since you've now read it twice and STILL don't get it, I suppose there's no point in trying to explain it to you a third time.

I love reading these posts...

[Anonymous Coward]

The Linux zealots are a riot. I have no love for Windows, and would love to be able to run only Linux, but it's impossible. I play games on my machines, and because of that I'm forced to use Windows.

Lycoris was trying to be a cheap alternative to Windows for the average user by providing them with specific programs to accomplish the basic tasks that the average user needs. All the while, they did this with a desktop that tried to make it easier for Windows users to identify with. I used it, and was very happy with it.

The problem is, nobody will be able to create a desktop version of Linux that will be widely accepted until it is as easy for average users as Windows. It must also be standardized, so that 3rd party closed source companies can easily port their applications over and make them available to Linux users as well as Windows users. Until the "WELL KNOWN" applications are there, Linux will remain a niche market OS for geeks.

Until I can choose to buy my copy of Half Life 2, or Age of Empires for either Windows or Linux, then I will always have to have a copy of Windows, so why would I bother to have a copy of Linux?

One other thing...It's much, much, much easier for me to explain over the phone to a friend how to fix something on their Windows machine than it would be to fix something in Linux. THAT is why Linux has the Geek stigma attached to it.

Re:I love reading these posts...

[KingBahamut]

http://www.transgaming.org/ for the Linux geek that still wants to game in a M$ Windows dominated world.

Competing with Windows HOW-TO

[zIRtrON]

After reading todays articles on /. I realised something. Win2K is still used by a large number of businesses and MS is discontinuing support. This is a "large" number of businesses that use Win2K on the desktop that may soon be looking for an upgrade path.

Instead of every linux advocate or anti-monopolistic advocate focussing on linux at the new user, or new PC vendor level - maybe it's time to start consulting with a product that can replace Win2k.

The click n feel and location of applications is fading somewhat because a lot of our work can be done within a browser window. Ordering, Reporting, Emailing what-have-you.

You fill in the blanks -

Now with Apple riding on intel chips in the future, it opens up the market considerably. It's open standards time possibly to really kick in. Giving every consumer, organisational or individual real choice.

The mandriva company is moving - it's trying something - people knocking their name from within the community they have helped build is just something that should not happen. There is a plan that is being formulated in some room in their offices that is saying - in 12 months time we want to have a product that looks like this, works like this, integrates with this et cetera. Whether it be 3 6 or 12 months time they have a plan - possibly to co-incide with their biggest competitors upgrade drive.

In the mean time, I'm working to improve my credentials to be a leader in the next change in IT in my city.

Good luck

Nice troll

[Anonymous Coward]

You even got modded informative, funny enough. Great job, moderators.

Which Lycoris?

[grolschie]

Was is the sweet stuff, or that salty crap that the dutch eat? ;-)

Mod parent down

[Anonymous Coward]

The parent poster (poptones) is an obnoxious troll who needs to be modded down on all the posts in this thread.