Slashdot Mirror


Run Linux as a Windows Screensaver

zornorph writes "A software engineer at IBM has come up with a way to 'construct and package a Linux® LiveCD so that it will install using the standard Microsoft® Windows® install process and will operate as a standard Windows screensaver.'"

259 comments

  1. Why not stand-alone? by xorbe · · Score: 5, Interesting

    The article doesn't make it clear why it should run as a screensaver... is the ISO interactive? How does one escape the screensaver? Why not just run it stand-alone?

    Also, this was surprising: "OS/2 is finally being withdrawn on December 23, 2005. According to the IBM Web site on OS/2 Warp migration (see Resources), there is no replacement product from IBM. IBM suggests that OS/2 customers consider Linux." They should at least recommend a specific product, else the remaining OS/2 userbase will entirely fragment. Recommendations are not irresponsible, only the customer blindly accepting it would be.

    Following the instructions in the article is not for the faint of heart!

    1. Re:Why not stand-alone? by MoxCamel · · Score: 5, Funny
      If you have to ask why...you really don't belong here. :)

      Mox

    2. Re:Why not stand-alone? by Rosco+P.+Coltrane · · Score: 5, Funny

      The article doesn't make it clear why it should run as a screensaver... is the ISO interactive? How does one escape the screensaver? Why not just run it stand-alone?

      No no no, you don't understand, while it runs as a screensaver, it's building Gentoo. Only after it's done can you run it standalone...

      --
      "A door is what a dog is perpetually on the wrong side of" - Ogden Nash
    3. Re:Why not stand-alone? by Stan+Vassilev · · Score: 3, Funny

      "The article doesn't make it clear why it should run as a screensaver... is the ISO interactive? How does one escape the screensaver? Why not just run it stand-alone?"

      It's made for educational purpose, once it starts it captures the mouse and keyboard so that you can't exit to Windows, and you're forced to use Linux until you nail it.

      A caveat was quickly discovered however: if you stop so the Linux screensaver turns on, you're back to Windows. Go figure.

    4. Re:Why not stand-alone? by aichpvee · · Score: 5, Funny

      Why? So when someone says, "nice screen saver, but does it run Linux?", he'll be able to say yes.

      --
      The Farewell Tour II
    5. Re:Why not stand-alone? by rjstanford · · Score: 4, Funny

      They should at least recommend a specific product, else the remaining OS/2 userbase will entirely fragment.

      What, both of them?

      --
      You're special forces then? That's great! I just love your olympics!
    6. Re:Why not stand-alone? by kesuki · · Score: 1

      They should at least recommend a specific product, else the remaining OS/2 userbase will entirely fragment.

      What, both of them?


      What there was two? I thought they were worried about the creating a case of MPD where by the last user of os/2 warp fragmented into different personalities, each of whome had a linux distro of choice.

    7. Re:Why not stand-alone? by Brandybuck · · Score: 1

      Small world then, because I happen to know two of them.

      --
      Don't blame me, I didn't vote for either of them!
    8. Re:Why not stand-alone? by YrWrstNtmr · · Score: 5, Funny
      Only after it's done can you run it standalone...

      What, I have to wait until next week?

    9. Re:Why not stand-alone? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Indeed. If one doesn't want to install it or even use a LiveCD (needs reboot), then there is still QEMU or the free VMWare player (or VMWare workstation or the MS alternative - but both cost money).

      Linux is great, but as a screensaver? ...

    10. Re:Why not stand-alone? by Anti_Climax · · Score: 1

      If you want to run it standalone, just change the executable name from whatever.scr to whatever.exe. Hell, throw it in the startup folder :-)

      --
      Even people that believe in pre-destiny look both ways before crossing the street.
    11. Re:Why not stand-alone? by afidel · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Uh, two years ago I did a MASSIVE rollout of OS/2 under Virtual PC. The client was replacing dual workstation and KVM's with single, more powerfull machines running OS/2 under VPC. This was for tens of thousands of seats nationwide with single sites consisting of several thousand workstations. And then there all the ATM's which run OS/2 which will now have to be converted to much crappier, more failure prone windows models. Of I don't know why IBM doesn't steer people to eComStation. It's the product of the company that bought the rights and code to OS/2, so if you have a custom app and need it to run on more modern hardware they are the people to talk to.

      --
      There are 4 boxes to use in the defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, ammo. Use in that order. Starting now.
    12. Re:Why not stand-alone? by kstillson · · Score: 2, Funny

      do. or do not. there is no "why"

    13. Re:Why not stand-alone? by Daxster · · Score: 1

      How does one escape the screensaver?

      Just like any other screensaver. Move the mouse or type a key.

      --
      Death by snoo-snoo!
    14. Re:Why not stand-alone? by TubeSteak · · Score: 4, Funny

      Because it sounds like he may be a little new here:

      "but does it run linux" was the question asked of the first new Windows release since Linus coded Linux.

      Finally, we have an answer.

      --
      [Fuck Beta]
      o0t!
    15. Re:Why not stand-alone? by idonthack · · Score: 0, Troll

      The question "why" is always satisfied by "Because it's [day of week]!"
      So, in this case:
      Because it's Wednesday! Duh!
      ---
      What subliminal message?
      Generated by SlashdotRndSig via GreaseMonkey

      --
      Why is it that when you believe something it's an opinion, but when I believe something it's a manifesto?
    16. Re:Why not stand-alone? by egburr · · Score: 2, Funny
      How does one escape the screensaver?

      I haven't read the article; this is just my preference...

      Figure out the root password.
      Figure out how to login.
      Issue a shutdown command.

      After completing the shutdown, you'll get your windows desktop back.

      --

      Edward Burr
      Having a smoking section in a restaurant is like having a peeing section in a swimming pool.
    17. Re:Why not stand-alone? by hellrot · · Score: 1
      What, both of them?

      Ever used an ATM? If so, you've likely used OS/2.

    18. Re:Why not stand-alone? by rapidweather · · Score: 2, Interesting

      The Damn Small Linux folks have a version that runs inside Windows. I have not tried it. There's a link to it on their main page. DSL linux is a remaster of Knoppix linux. I note that some of the versions of the IBM screensaver linux are also based on Knoppix, if not all. Might be able to use any knoppix remaster or linux based on knoppix. IBM's documentation looks like it would work, if one wanted to go to the trouble. The DSL version puts a functional linux in a window on your Windows desktop. One time I did find a screenshot of that, but can't locate it now.
      Kind of crazy, really, to put a little linux in a window on a Windows XP desktop, I would rather just dual boot. I have a couple of boxes that do that, using loadlin and a batch file from Windows 98 F8 choice 5 bootup to access a /KNOPPIX folder on the hard drive. I remastered DSL for those, so it looks very nice, and does what I want it to. That setup does not run knoppix within Windows, once you exit knoppix, that's it.

    19. Re:Why not stand-alone? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And Jack left town...

      Thanks! I'll be here all week!

    20. Re:Why not stand-alone? by c_forq · · Score: 5, Funny

      What, I have to wait until next week?

      I know this is slashdot, but you don't have to rub in how much faster your state-of-the-art processor is then mine. I'll have to wait until next YEAR!

      --
      Computers allow humans to make mistakes at the fastest speeds known, with the possible exception of tequila and handguns
    21. Re:Why not stand-alone? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Let me guess, they forgot to tell you that the reason they were putting OS/2 on VPC was part of the transition plan *away* from OS/2, That's OK, you just do, you don't need to know why.

    22. Re:Why not stand-alone? by 1u3hr · · Score: 1
      And then there all the ATM's which run OS/2 which will now have to be converted to much crappier, more failure prone windows models. Of I don't know why IBM doesn't steer people to eComStation.

      I don't understand why they will be "forced to" convert to Windows, when, as you say, eComStation is available and apparently actively under development.

    23. Re:Why not stand-alone? by afidel · · Score: 3, Informative

      A lot of banks internal politics won't let them run a solution that isn't supported by a "major vendor". Besides which Diebold no longer loads new ATM's with OS/2 so they would have to develop their own or work with a smaller player who would.

      --
      There are 4 boxes to use in the defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, ammo. Use in that order. Starting now.
    24. Re:Why not stand-alone? by mrbooze · · Score: 1

      There's no question that OS/2 still had a sizable presence in some environments and businesses.

      But that doesn't mean there is an OS/2 "Community", nor does it mean that even if there was, the terrible fear of "fragmenting" said community is anything anyone should care about.

      Everyone I know has silverware. Does that mean there is a "Silverware Community"?

    25. Re:Why not stand-alone? by laffer1 · · Score: 1

      I think most OS/2 users starting migrating when it became difficult to find hardware that would actually work with OS/2. I actually own warp 3 & 4. The boxes are collecting dust in my closet because I have no hardware to run them on. If I still had my first computer (packard bell p1 100mhz), i'd probably have an install up. By the time IBM had any agp support, I was already using NT4, then linux, solaris, and now freebsd. I've moved on and its probably time others did as well. From a graphical standpoint, I think mac os is the closest fit for OS/2 users. I bought an imac 5 years ago and it was the most logical transition from OS/2. That was OS9 though.

      I just wish OS/2 had been open sourced. It would have been interesting to use some of that code in a *nix desktop environment.

    26. Re:Why not stand-alone? by cHiphead · · Score: 4, Interesting

      This article seems a bit late and the screensaver angle makes it useless. I've been running colinux as a service on my windows 2000 box for almost a year. I can apt-get anything from a debian/compatible repository...

      where's the news?

      Cheers.

      --

      This is my sig. There are many like it, but this one is mine.
    27. Re:Why not stand-alone? by numbski · · Score: 1, Funny

      Not to pick nits...

      okay, yes to pick nits.

      So next week?

      --

      Karma: Chameleon (mostly due to the fact that you come and go).

    28. Re:Why not stand-alone? by dryeo · · Score: 3, Interesting

      OS/2 supports lots of modern Hardware. Its true that your v3 and v4 won't install out of the box. V4.5+ will install on most hardware and with a fairly new kernel even the fastest P4s and 64 bit AMds (in 32 bit mode). Pretty well all display drivers are supported (by scitech), even under winos2, though only 2D. IBM paid for ALSA to be ported so pretty well all sound cards supported under Linux work under OS/2. USB support is pretty good as well.
      Same with Printers, pretty well if they work with Linux they'll probably work on OS/2.
      Basically if hardware works on Linux it'll run under OS/2.

      --
      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inverted_totalitarianism
    29. Re:Why not stand-alone? by sonofdelphi · · Score: 1

      Because when run stand-alone, it is a face-saver for Windows, and hence cannot be a screen-saver.

    30. Re:Why not stand-alone? by jinxidoru · · Score: 1

      ...else the remaining OS/2 userbase will entirely fragment.

      I guess you're right, if the two or three OS/2 users all go in different directions, they will have entirely fragmented.

    31. Re:Why not stand-alone? by I+Like+Pudding · · Score: 1
      The article doesn't make it clear why it should run as a screensaver... is the ISO interactive? How does one escape the screensaver? Why not just run it stand-alone?

      Dude, if you have to ask...
    32. Re:Why not stand-alone? by Trejkaz · · Score: 4, Funny

      I think the phrasing in this scenario is usually "I happen to know both of them."

      --
      Karma: It's all a bunch of tree-huggin' hippy crap!
    33. Re:Why not stand-alone? by Ed+Avis · · Score: 1

      From TFA, it appears that he's just patched QEMU to run as a screensaver. It doesn't have much to do with Linux at all since you could equally well run DOS, FreeBSD or whatever under QEMU.

      --
      -- Ed Avis ed@membled.com
    34. Re:Why not stand-alone? by talornin · · Score: 1

      Man, your life must be wery boring! Want some cheese with that whine?

      --
      When in danger, whewn in doubt! Run in circles, scream and shout!
    35. Re:Why not stand-alone? by Ironballs · · Score: 0

      You insensitive clod.

      In Soviet Brazil we don't have these fancy ultra-fast Pentium or whatever-ium processors.

      I'll have to wait next decade!!!

    36. Re:Why not stand-alone? by morgan_greywolf · · Score: 2, Insightful

      A lot of banks internal politics won't let them run a solution that isn't supported by a "major vendor". Besides which Diebold no longer loads new ATM's with OS/2 so they would have to develop their own or work with a smaller player who would.

      I've seen ATM machines running Linux. In fact, Banrisul
      in Brazil replaced all of their MS-DOS-based ATMs with Linux some time ago. What defines a 'major vendor'? Is Red Hat? Is Novell/SuSE? What defines 'support'?

      The thing is I often find the knee-jerk reaction of "We can't run something that isn't supported by a 'major vendor'" to more or less translate to "We can't run something that isn't supported by a vendor who's not giving us kickbacks."

    37. Re:Why not stand-alone? by rjstanford · · Score: 1

      And don't forget all of the older AS/400 folk. I actually do know that OS/2 is still a significant presence... just couldn't resist the joke. As most people figured it out to be.

      --
      You're special forces then? That's great! I just love your olympics!
    38. Re:Why not stand-alone? by VJ42 · · Score: 1

      Here in the UK the only time I discovered what OS an ATM was using is when it crashed on me. It was using NT 4. I got a BSOD, and the machine swallowed my card. IIRC The Bank was Natwest. I run a Windows Box at home (dual boot) and at work, and they hardly ever crash but it's just my luck that I can make a cash machine do it.

      --
      If I have nothing to hide, you have no reason to search me
    39. Re:Why not stand-alone? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      hi, with all due respect, I believe we must encourage fresh ideas. When people are so involved in something they forget to think fresh and out of box. I am available at gopal1035@gmail.com (B.Sc.(information Technology)), take care all

    40. Re:Why not stand-alone? by maccam94 · · Score: 1

      But what is the point of running it in a window? It's like taking a bath in the best tub ever, which is surrounded by shit...

  2. Proof of concept? by cytoman · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Is this just a "proof of concept" and not really something useful? I mean, if it shows Linux running in screen-saver mode, any disturbance of the keyboard/mouse will bring back windows...am I missing something?

    Still, pretty cool!!!

    1. Re:Proof of concept? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      You've never used any of the after-dark screen savers have you? They are fully interactive.

    2. Re:Proof of concept? by ikkonoishi · · Score: 1

      Screensavers determine when they shut off. If the screensaver doesn't give the close command when it takes input then you can't get out of it.

  3. Awesome by c0dedude · · Score: 5, Funny

    This is cool, as long as you don't need to use your keyboard or mouse.

    --
    Since when has this country used intellectual elite as a pejorative term?
    1. Re:Awesome by CastrTroy · · Score: 4, Interesting

      That's OK, just use the joystick to control Linux. For some reason windows doesn't think the joystick is primary input, so if you're using it for an extended period, then the screen saver turns on. This feature is great during games. Always seems to pop up at the most inopportune moments.

      --

      Anthropic principle: We see the universe the way it is because if it were different we would not be here to see it.
    2. Re:Awesome by Halfbaked+Plan · · Score: 1

      I have numerous highly useful machines whose only connection to the outside world is the power cord and the ethernet cable.

      --
      resigned
    3. Re:Awesome by ESqVIP · · Score: 1

      And I guess running a Linux install as a screensaver on them would be really helpful?

    4. Re:Awesome by imikem · · Score: 0

      This restriction would not make most Windows machines less useful than they already were.

      --
      Perscriptio in manibus tabellariorum est.
    5. Re:Awesome by ucahg · · Score: 1

      It beats trying to get the keyboard and mouse to work ;)

    6. Re:Awesome by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sounds like a plan for a very good time-based ssh connection, eh? Suzie from accounting is out to lunch and her PC is on...so you ssh over and use her machine as a proxy to somewhere else.

      This could be the next p2p app!

    7. Re:Awesome by mwvdlee · · Score: 1

      It's trivial to let a program disable the screensaver whilst running.
      Perhaps you should buy a game from a decent company which knows how to code.

      --
      Slashdot social media options: AIM, ICQ, Yahoo, Jabber and Mobile Text. Why no MySpace?
    8. Re:Awesome by Halfbaked+Plan · · Score: 1

      In my BSD-using opinion, almost as useful as any other form of Linux, but now I am posting flamebait.

      --
      resigned
    9. Re:Awesome by Chabo · · Score: 1

      And it's also trivial to disable the screensaver manually before playing a game.

      --
      Convert FLACs to a portable format with FlacSquisher
  4. The Point? by imemyself · · Score: 1, Insightful

    OK, other than the "cool factor", WTF is the point of this? Its nice to know what IBM's people are spending their time on...

    --
    Every time you post an article on Slashdot, I kill a server. Think of the servers!
    1. Re:The Point? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Something tells me that you must be new here...

    2. Re:The Point? by MikeFM · · Score: 1

      Dude! It's Linux so it can run anywhere and that's the point right?! It runs on my supercomputer cluster and is the OS of choice for my Power Pleasure programable vibrator. Who needs more reason than that.

      --
      At what price learning? At what cost wisdom? The price is a man's peace of mind, and the cost is his life.
    3. Re:The Point? by martin-boundary · · Score: 2, Funny

      Think! The _point_ is that if Linux is running instead of a screensaver, then you can finally run XScreenSaver on Linux on Windows!

  5. woah! by johann8384 · · Score: 0, Redundant

    That is awesome. What would you use it for?

    1. Re:woah! by IdleTime · · Score: 2, Funny
      That is awesome. What would you use it for?
      Screensaver?
      --
      If you mod me down, I *will* introduce you to my sister!
  6. I wanna be the first to say it by suso · · Score: 2, Funny

    I run Windows as a Linux screen saver all the time. Or at least the major parts. ;-)

    And with the new modularized X, if it crashes it won't bring down the fonts.

  7. Or you could not by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

    Or you could just install and run Linux the normal way... I know, not as interesting, but less BSODs has got to count for something, right?

    The word for the (first?) post is: oppose

  8. Eh? by sH4RD · · Score: 1, Funny

    Why the hell would anyone want to run Linux as a screen saver? To admire X11R7 (jesus! X devs actually do something!)

    --
    WASTE - The Secure P2P
    1. Re:Eh? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      C'mon, give this guy a break...I'm pretty sure we're all big nerds who know ALL about spending time on things that don't have a practical use.

    2. Re:Eh? by EraserMouseMan · · Score: 1

      The funny thing is that if you can't use your mouse or keyboard how would this Linux screensaver even be preventing burn-in?

      I know, I know . . . that's not the point. But really, what an odd way to brag about the "progress" of IBM research.

  9. And this is useful... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ... how?

  10. The mouse by quickbasicguru · · Score: 1

    Screensavers on windows are just executables.

    You could use the mouse without it quitting...

  11. So... by FusionDragon2099 · · Score: 3, Funny

    To boot Knoppix, I'm going to have to wait 5 minutes?

    1. Re:So... by User+956 · · Score: 1

      To boot Knoppix, I'm going to have to wait 5 minutes?

      Hey, that's faster than usual. I usually have time to go make a sandwich.

      --
      The theory of relativity doesn't work right in Arkansas.
    2. Re:So... by value_added · · Score: 1

      To boot Knoppix, I'm going to have to wait 5 minutes?

      Yeah but now you can multi-boot using rundll32 interface while running Windows.

      Or something like that.

  12. funny feeling.. by kerpal2005 · · Score: 3, Funny

    Why do I get a feeling Microsoft's spyware program will detect this as malware?

    1. Re:funny feeling.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      by the term 'Microsoft's spyware program" you surely mean windows right?? (you shoulda said Anti-spyware, ya silly goose)

  13. IBM confirms it - OS2 is dead by tomhudson · · Score: 2, Insightful

    FTFA :

    OS/2 is finally being withdrawn on December 23, 2005. According to the IBM Web site on OS/2 Warp migration (see Resources), there is no replacement product from IBM. IBM suggests that OS/2 customers consider Linux.

    ... and the replacement runs under Windows. :-(

    oh, the irony.

    1. Re:IBM confirms it - OS2 is dead by Stan+Vassilev · · Score: 1

      "OS/2 is finally being withdrawn on December 23, 2005."

      They wouldn't admit it until the OS/2 users didn't reach 6 figure negative number.

    2. Re:IBM confirms it - OS2 is dead by Duhavid · · Score: 1

      I'm waiting until Netcraft confirms it.

      --
      emt 377 emt 4
    3. Re:IBM confirms it - OS2 is dead by BigWarpGuy · · Score: 1

      OS/2 has been transformed into eComStation.
      eComStation is based on the OS/2 kernel licenced to Serenity Systems.
      http://www.ecomstation.com/

  14. oh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    this is pretty much all linux is good for

    1. Re:oh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      this is pretty much all Windows is good for (running Linux as a screen saver that is).

    2. Re:oh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      Bill? Is that you?

  15. What a pain® by Rosco+P.+Coltrane · · Score: 5, Funny

    Am I the only one® to find non-legal documents® polluted by legalese bullshit® extremely annoying®?

    --
    "A door is what a dog is perpetually on the wrong side of" - Ogden Nash
    1. Re:What a pain® by Heembo · · Score: 1

      Oh comon now, IBM has a virtual city of Lawyers, you gotts to give those boys something to do!


      All Right Reserved Heembo Inc. 2005

      --
      Horns are really just a broken halo.
    2. Re:What a pain® by boolean007 · · Score: 1

      Feeling snipey, yeah? There are more (R)'s in your single sentence than in the whole of the article.

    3. Re:What a pain® by Urusai · · Score: 2, Insightful

      A trademark holder might pepper their missives with (R) and TM to assert their trademark. In my non-lawyerly opinion, you have no obligation to preserve someone else's trademark; you just can't use it on your own products/services. I can mention Coca Cola and Mickey Mouse all I want without such qualification. Disney, however, might refer to "Mickey Mouse (TM)" to let you know they claim a trademark on the name and to prevent you from claiming ignorance of the claim in court.

      A similar foolishness runs through the media with the term "allegedly". Yes, they don't want to make a false accusation. But when you have a headline such as "Cops Arrest Man for Allegedly Smoking Crack", it's stupid. Allegedly smoking crack is not a crime and would not be a cause for arrest; smoking crack would be.

      Pardon me, there's a knock on the door, brb...

    4. Re:What a pain® by ari_j · · Score: 2, Informative

      Actually, while I am not a lawyer and have no particular expertise in trademark law, I suspect that it may be helpful to use (R) and TM to avoid being sued. For instance, if I talk at length about Coca-Cola and never point out that it's trademarked, someone may be stupid enough to think I am using Coca-Cola as my own term. If enough stupid someones thought that, Coca-Cola Inc. would probably sue me.

      But in general, I don't think excessive use of trademark symbols helps anyone. Use it once per term per document, at most, and put in a footnote about all trademarks being the property of their respective owners. More than that gets on my nerves.

    5. Re:What a pain® by dryeo · · Score: 1

      A similar foolishness runs through the media with the term "allegedly". Yes, they don't want to make a false accusation. But when you have a headline such as "Cops Arrest Man for Allegedly Smoking Crack", it's stupid. Allegedly smoking crack is not a crime and would not be a cause for arrest; smoking crack would be.

      Perhaps its not actually crack. What if someone liked smoking plastic, especially plastic that looked like crack? You have to prove that it actually crack they are smoking.
      I know myself I've had all my spices confiscated by the RCMP because they thought I was a pot smoker and I had these baggies full of things like bulk oregano.
      No charges were ever laid but I did make the local paper as alleged to have been caught with pot.

      --
      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inverted_totalitarianism
    6. Re:What a pain® by remmelt · · Score: 1

      Yeah, sorry 'bout that:

      Alleged Cops Allegedly Arrest Alleged Man for Allegedly Smoking Alleged Crack (Allegedly)(Don't sue us!)(Look! A squirrel!)

    7. Re:What a pain® by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      an ALLEGED squirrel!

    8. Re:What a pain® by xdroop · · Score: 1
      A similar foolishness runs through the media with the term "allegedly". Yes, they don't want to make a false accusation. But when you have a headline such as "Cops Arrest Man for Allegedly Smoking Crack", it's stupid. Allegedly smoking crack is not a crime and would not be a cause for arrest; smoking crack would be.
      Actually this is a result of the media totally mangling the concept of a "suspect", leading to such witty news reports as blah blah blah robbery the suspects got away with an undisclosed amount of cash*. This is false: the perpetrators got away with an undisclosed amount of cash (the perpetrators perpetrated the crime, so to speak). Once the police catch someone, they are innocent until proven guilty in the court of public opinion^W^Wlaw, but the police suspect this person is the perpetrator.

      So this is a long way around of explaining that they arrested a man who they suspect of smoking crack; they allege that the man they arrested smoked crack.

      Grammer has never been the long suit of headline writers (or even copy writers).

      (* = what does it say about me that I wrote cash as cache the first try each of three times it appears in this comment?)

      --
      you should read everything on the internet as if it had "but I'm probably talking out of my ass" appended to it.
  16. clustering maybe? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    perhaps dynamic clustering is a useful purpose of this method to run the linux kernel.

  17. Maybe there is a point... by fmaxwell · · Score: 5, Interesting

    A distributed computing project (ala SETI) which relied on Linux could run this way.

    1. Re:Maybe there is a point... by metlin · · Score: 1


      But how long before someone writes a virus that does this?

      Of course, that would definitely be ugly for the OSS community...

    2. Re:Maybe there is a point... by _|()|\| · · Score: 3, Informative
      A distributed computing project (ala SETI) which relied on Linux could run this way.

      If this were Cooperative Linux that might be an avenue worth exploring. However, the article describes running Linux under QEMU, which the author admits is "slooooooooowwww."

    3. Re:Maybe there is a point... by Rattencremesuppe · · Score: 1
      A distributed computing project (ala SETI) which relied on Linux could run this way.

      I think that a solution with cygwin or colinux would be more elegant in this case.

    4. Re:Maybe there is a point... by Halfbaked+Plan · · Score: 1

      cygwin is just a layer of Win32 .dll files and hardly elegant.

      Somebody should really be working on the 'key to the treasury' which would be a free open-source POSIX subsystem that runs direct on the Windows NT kernel. An Interix clone, so to speak. Softway Systems, the producer of Interix, put the question out to the Interix userbase a short while before the company was sold to Microsoft, asking for support in the idea of open sourcing Interix. The silence was sorta deafening.

      --
      resigned
    5. Re:Maybe there is a point... by Cuthalion · · Score: 1

      You'd like this subsystem to be something other than .dll files?

      --
      Trees can't go dancing
      So do them a big favor
      Pretend dancing stinks!
    6. Re:Maybe there is a point... by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

      perl scripts?

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    7. Re:Maybe there is a point... by Mr.+Underbridge · · Score: 1
      A distributed computing project (ala SETI) which relied on Linux could run this way.

      Or something like "Folding@Home" that isn't a complete waste of time.

    8. Re:Maybe there is a point... by Halfbaked+Plan · · Score: 1

      An elegant solution is a real POSIX subsystem that talks directly to the NT kernel, not a wonky set of DLLs that translate the POSIX calls to Win32 and rides on top of the Win32 subsystem.

      They should have written cygwin to run on top of the character-mode OS/2 1.0 subsystem built into NT. At least that would have been interesting.

      --
      resigned
  18. RTFA Please! by ThatGeek · · Score: 5, Informative

    The submitter referred to this software as a "screen saver", but if he had bothered to read the story at all he would have realized it should in fact be classified as a "computer saver".

    Still, it's a very interesting story!

    --
    What are you eating? isItVeg?.
  19. Correct me if I'm wrong by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    But aren't screensavers just regular programs with a different extension? That is, if I put a program into my windows folder and rename it as a .scr doesn't windows just consider it a screensaver? Also, the program itself would have to implement the waking up on mouse move or keyboard press... I'm pulling this information from back in my days of windows 98 screensaver creation using visualbasic 5, so I may be completely wrong.

    And if I'm right, wouldn't that mean this can be run as a regular program?

    1. Re:Correct me if I'm wrong by Sheetrock · · Score: 1
      It's been a long time since I made a screensaver. I kind of miss it -- it'd access a page of terms users were searching on using a popular engine at the time, then scroll those terms across the screen marquee-style, so about 80% of the time I would get to see a remarkably mistyped query for porn or warez.

      I modified a Visual C++ 5.0 screensaver example to do it, and I seem to recall some extra plumbing having to do with getting the thing to preview properly in the screensaver selector.

      All of which really doesn't answer your question, but thank you for reminding me of an old project to learn Windows 95 programming. I know worms/viruses will transfer via .SCR which would suggest the equivalency is close enough, and a hexdump shows a .SCR looks like an .EXE, but I've never actually tried renaming and running stuff to find out.

      --

      Try not. Do or do not, there is no try.
      -- Dr. Spock, stardate 2822-3.




    2. Re:Correct me if I'm wrong by gmf · · Score: 1

      An .scr *is* really just an .exe file. You can take any .exe, rename it to .scr, and use it as a screensaver. A "real" screensaver should recognise certain command line parameters for running in preview or configuration mode, but apart from that it's not different from any other program.

  20. So what happens when... by CaroKann · · Score: 5, Funny

    You run Windows and the screen saver kicks in...
    And it runs Linux with Wine, and the screen saver kicks in...
    And it runs Linux with Wine, and the screen saver kicks in...
    Ad Infinitum...

    1. Re:So what happens when... by esromneb · · Score: 1

      Recursive call...

    2. Re:So what happens when... by JFMulder · · Score: 5, Funny

      This reminds me of a funny thing with Virtual PC. Trying to install Virtual PC on a Windows virtual machine running under Virtual PC popped up "You can't run Virtual PC under Virtual PC. You just had to try, didn't you?"

    3. Re:So what happens when... by X-rated+Ouroboros · · Score: 1

      Well, I know what I'm doing this weekend!

      --
      Simple Machines in Higher Dimensions
    4. Re:So what happens when... by spiderbitendeath · · Score: 1

      How about using Virtual PC to run Windows, then run VMWare under that, and then Virtual PC under that?

      --
      Sometimes when I'm working on projects things disappear, I suspect gremlins.
    5. Re:So what happens when... by rts008 · · Score: 1

      LOL- had to go change pants from expressing my humor on this subject as excessive "micturation spontaneous"!

      --
      Down With Slashdot BETA!!! I've been around the corner and seen the oliphant; you can only abuse me from your perspecti
    6. Re:So what happens when... by cagle_.25 · · Score: 1
      Umm...the stack overflows?

      Just guessing.

      --
      Human being (n.): A genetically human, genetically distinct, functioning organism.
    7. Re:So what happens when... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      yea, it's not like you were going to get laid or anything anyway

    8. Re:So what happens when... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not to rain on your dry pants, but it's "micturition"...

    9. Re:So what happens when... by Pseudonym · · Score: 1

      And courtesy of the Matrixesque Conspiracy Department, this thought: You might be doing that already, and be unaware of it!

      --
      sub f{($f)=@_;print"$f(q{$f});";}f(q{sub f{($f)=@_;print"$f(q{$f});";}f});
  21. Couldn't you find a lamer article? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "So why should you read this article? Why, indeed, should I write it? "
    said the author - AND I AGREE. I think there's a mouse fart article out there; can we read that instead?

  22. yet another worthless story by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Someone must have absolutely nothing better to do with his time..

  23. GNAA behind the times by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    You've just unveiled your 2005 product line, days away from 2006. It's no secret now: the GNAA is dying.

    1. Re:GNAA behind the times by uberjoe · · Score: 0, Redundant
      the GNAA is dying

      I won't believe it until netcraft confirms it.

      --

      The days of the digital watch are numbered.

  24. Screen Saver Fun by LordofEntropy · · Score: 2, Informative

    You can pretty much make any exe a screen saver. I remember a coworker doing this once with logon.exe on Win 2k. Funny thing is, that the screen saver ran as admin, this was a pretty big security hole, and quite amusing.

    --
    Entropy just isn't what it used to be.
    1. Re:Screen Saver Fun by carleton · · Score: 3, Informative

      Actually, there's a bootable floppy (running Linux) that will let you edit the registry. The dox for it recommend doing so (specifically, running cmd.exe as the logonscr(eensaver) and then bringing up the password gui tools) to reset the password on a box running Win 2000 with Active Directory. (the tool can just blank out the password for non AD-based systems, but AD is trickier)

  25. other distros by esromneb · · Score: 1

    Can we run other distros like this? Ie gentoo?

    1. Re:other distros by gazpa · · Score: 0

      # emerge sync
      connecting to windowsupdate.microsoft.com for rsync...
      .
      .
      .
      #emerge -uD world
      These are the packages that I would merge, in order:

      Calculating dependencies ...done!

      [ebuild UD] semi-sys/windows-xp-r2 -hardened +iexplorer -w3c +mediaplayer +nsa +headache -BSoD 33,726 kB

      Total size of downloads: 533,726 kB

  26. Screen saver? by dogbrt · · Score: 1

    If it runs as a screensaver, why call it a LiveCD?

  27. What I understood from the article is... by Stan+Vassilev · · Score: 1

    they use it to scare people away from tinkering with your PC while away.

  28. uh what? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

    the article says its running as a screensaver so it'll be faster than just having an executable...

    having made several screen savers for windows several years ago, i know that a screen saver is simply* an EXE renamed to a SCR file and put in the windows\system directory.

    wtf is this article talking about?

    (*it is also passed different command line arguments so you know if its being run, previewed, or the settings button is being pressed, and some other stuff)

    1. Re:uh what? by tomythius · · Score: 1

      I think the authors means that generally a screensaver will be active when the computer is idle, so more resources will be available.

      --
      Tom says so, QED.
    2. Re:uh what? by Vo0k · · Score: 1

      Not -just- simply that. Putting windows into screensaver mode means way more than just displaying funny stuff instead of normal desktop, while not interacting with the user. It's a clean-up time. Less used things get swapped out of main memory, disk buffers undergo some tidying up (sync, free up older unused buffers etc.), idle processes get their priorities lowered so that active processes get more CPU time, generally the computer gets less desktop-like and more server-like. Some hardware may be put in power-save mode too. That's why on slow boxes exiting the screensaver mode may take up to a minute... and that's why the screensaver exe has LOTS of resources at its disposal.

      --
      Anagram("United States of America") == "Dine out, taste a Mac, fries"
  29. A screensaver.. or not? by TheUncleD · · Score: 1
    Obviously Linux as a screensaver seems to make little sense in the way that it would act as a usable operating system while defaulting as a screensaver. It could ideally using windows hibernation type of techniques, save a snapshot of windows settings, and then allow some kind of virtual representation of windows in screensaver mode. However, the whole idea of a screensaver is to be reserving some power use or to be a different screen than the normal workflow while the user is away.

    As a user who would try this out, it sounds fishy in terms of any practical use. You type something, the screensaver vanishes. Not much use there. A great LiveCD however to experiment with linux in my opinion is Ubuntu, which lets you boot the operating system entirely from one of their livecd's. Ubuntu which is now being worked on by many debian developers is not a screensaver, but its certainly a lifesaver when it comes to often needed quick-fixes in the linux world. Praise Linux :)

    1. Re:A screensaver.. or not? by Slack3r78 · · Score: 4, Informative
      As a user who would try this out, it sounds fishy in terms of any practical use. You type something, the screensaver vanishes.

      Not really. Windows screensavers are just executables with the file extension changed to .SCR. The program itself dictates what causes it to quit. Now, most screesavers do exit when there's any kind of keyboard or mouse activity, but it's nothing built into the screensaver framework itself.
    2. Re:A screensaver.. or not? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      strangley enough, this is a big security flaw in windows, you just change the screen saver to cmd.exe, and poof, you get a comand line over the login screen(have to wait 15 minutes though. I used this to recover the domain admin password in windows just last week. this would be even cooler. Locked out of windows? just run linux on top of it!

    3. Re:A screensaver.. or not? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Considering you have to have admin rights to begin with to accomplish that task, how exactly is that a security flaw? That's like calling the fact that root can replace Xscreensaver with a copy of bash a security flaw.

    4. Re:A screensaver.. or not? by swillden · · Score: 1

      strangley enough, this is a big security flaw in windows, you just change the screen saver to cmd.exe, and poof, you get a comand line over the login screen

      Can you elaborate on how this is useful to breach security? Doesn't the screen saver run under the user account, meaning that your cmd.exe session has no more privileges than if you had simply run cmd.exe from the "Run" menu item?

      --
      Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
    5. Re:A screensaver.. or not? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It runs as admin for the login screen. Of course you need some way of changing cmd.exe to the name of the default screen saver (can't remember what that is) which generally necessitates booting from a boot disk or another install of Windows if you don't already have admin access. So this particular security hole is only really useful if you have physical access to the machine.

    6. Re:A screensaver.. or not? by The+Notorious+ASP · · Score: 1

      I can elaborate...

      "and poof, you get a comand line over the login screen" (emphasis mine)

      Boot the system into Linux/PE, rename cmd.exe to logon.scr, load up the registry and modify the screen saver timeout to 60 seconds (so you don't have to wait 15 minutes), reboot the system into Windows. Wait 60 seconds and you get a command prompt.

      This is substantially more usefully under Windows 2000 as the screen saver when no one is logged in runs as the powerful Local System account - 2003 runs as Local Service which really doesn't get you a whole lot.

      Of course you've got to have physical access to the machine (or a reasonable simulation thereof...) to pull this off, so if this burns you, you probably have bigger problems on your hands...

    7. Re:A screensaver.. or not? by adavies42 · · Score: 1

      Reminds me of the ultimate evolution of pointless screensavers: After Dark's gameshow screensaver for Mac OS 9. It was fully keyboard-interactive, only a specific keystroke would exit it.

      --
      Media that can be recorded and distributed can be recorded and distributed.
      -kfg
    8. Re:A screensaver.. or not? by sw155kn1f3 · · Score: 1

      Very interesting tip, thanks. I thought it was fixed in nt4. Seems like it's not. I'll try this when I'll be locked out of my workstation (probably never).

      --
      - Arwen, I'm your father, Agent Smith.
      - Well, you're just Smith, but my father is Aerosmith!
  30. i bet MS is happy by amazon10x · · Score: 3, Funny

    Finally. A reason for the screensaver function in Windows.

    1. Re:i bet MS is happy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      actually, no :) LCD monitors dont require screensavers - only CRT ones which are rapidly becoming obsolete

  31. Penguinistas notwithstanding by catmistake · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    Why the heck would you run Linux as a screensaver? It's non-standardized, breaks itself, and any time you change anything you have to recompile the damn kernel. Now... if you could run NetBSD as a screensaver... or even OS X... that would be something...

  32. Linux on Windows by freek808 · · Score: 0, Troll

    Linux runs just fine on Windows. I use it all the time.

    It's called Cygwin

    Good job IBM! Reinventing the wheel!

    1. Re:Linux on Windows by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Or, more accurately, coLinux.

  33. Idle Hands? by Bit_Muncher · · Score: 1

    The devil makes use of idle hands?

    1. Re:Idle Hands? by saskboy · · Score: 1

      "The devil makes use of idle hands?"

      That's why Jesus Screen Savers Save!

      Use those Idle Cycles to run Linux!

      --
      Saskboy's blog is good. 9 out of 10 dentists agree.
  34. Based on THIS I'd say it was only a matter of time by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Based on This[Slashdot Preferred Link], I'd say it was only a matter of time. Windows users beware!

  35. Why? by AgentAce · · Score: 2, Informative

    Damn Small Linux already runs on top of Windows.

    Of course running Linux on Windows is similar to driving a BMW around inside of a Triumph.

    1. Re:Why? by radiotyler · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Unless you're a guy like me, that's trying to hone some very, very, very rusty *nix skills (4 years of Army Windows.. *puke*) and all you have available is a USB Drive, a Windows box, and 8 more months in the desert.

      I think it's a great idea. I'm chomping at the bit for this download to finish.
      -t

      --
      hi mom!
  36. What happens when you try to get out? by colinbrash · · Score: 2, Funny

    When you try to get out of the screen saver, does it give you a black screen with "LI" up in the left corner?

    1. Re:What happens when you try to get out? by Halfbaked+Plan · · Score: 1

      harumph! That's not a BUG. That's a FEATURE of Linux.

      --
      resigned
  37. Hu...? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The words "What the f...??" spring to mind.

  38. Isn't this just the same thing... by Ruff_ilb · · Score: 3, Insightful

    As saying that Linux and windows can run at the same time on the same hardware, with quick switching between the two? Depending on how easy that is to do, this either makes the story a lot more or a lot less interesting.

    --
    http://www.TheGamerNation.com/Forums
    1. Re:Isn't this just the same thing... by tyler_larson · · Score: 3, Interesting

      They're using Qemu.

      --
      "With sufficient thrust, pigs fly just fine. However, this is not necessarily a good idea...."
      RFC 1925
    2. Re:Isn't this just the same thing... by rts008 · · Score: 1

      ""With sufficient thrust, pigs fly just fine. However, this is not necessarily a good idea...." LOL- ROFLMAO! But it would create jobs cleaning up after them!

      --
      Down With Slashdot BETA!!! I've been around the corner and seen the oliphant; you can only abuse me from your perspecti
  39. What a dope! by Trestop · · Score: 1

    He is running a linux livecd under QEmu for the screen saver (and hardcoding the iso image file name in the binary).
    Running coLinux would be tons neater.

  40. Choice quote from TFA... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting
    Most computer users are familiar with a Microsoft Windows environment and with the variety of screensavers available to prevent unauthorized access to the data on the computer when unattended.

    I imagine running Linux instead of Windows would help solve 99% of all "unauthorized access to the data" problems people have in an office environment.
    1. Re:Choice quote from TFA... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's extremely easy to gain unauthorized access to Linux systems in an office environment, especially if the machine doesn't have a password protected boot loader. At one of my old jobs we subjected one of the new Linux admins to a bit of hazing by rooting his workstation while he was away at lunch and setting up an alias so that whenever he ran ls (as root) it would open his cdrom drive, run the ls command, then close the cdrom drive again.

      Turned out the guy wasn't a very good admin and "left the company" a couple months later, when my buddy was tearing the machine down he discovered that running ls as root resulted in the cdrom opening and then shutting again...

      BTW, an encrypted root partition will provide you with pretty good protection against attackers with physical access to your machine. Providing that they don't install a hardware keylogger or anything, that is :)

  41. Strange to see by oztiks · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Whenever you see a screenshot of MacOS its always with a shot of Safari, ITunes or Corel Draw. Whenever you see a screenshot of Windows its always the Control Panel, Windows Media Player, MS Office, or IE.

    Whenever you see a screenshot of Linux its always with shots of people using Fractial Apps, drawing PCB Diagrams, or something to do with the planets orbit.

    All they need to do now is to be able to the same with MacOS and then you'll be able to download mp3's and draw pictures with one os, watch porn and write word documents with the other, and lastly be able to discover the cure to cancer the last os and the great thing is you'll be able to do this all off the same computer.

    1. Re:Strange to see by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Most Linux screenshots I see consist of little more than whatever window manager or desktop environment the person uses coupled with an IRC client, and some sort of naked female as a background image.

  42. finally! by theodicey · · Score: 5, Funny
    Now i can get my Windows friends to run Linux by emailing them!

    Subject: Hi!

    Body: How are you ?
    When I saw this screen saver, I immediately thought about you
    I am in a harry, I promise you will love it!

    Attachment: Linux.SCR

    1. Re:finally! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      LOL! I am Linux screen saver, not a virus.

    2. Re:finally! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      More like:

      Attachment: Linux.naked.jpg.scr

    3. Re:finally! by spacefight · · Score: 1

      Don't forget to get out of Harry before going home today :)

    4. Re:finally! by pD-brane · · Score: 1

      I don't think so. I am expecting an email from a from one of my Windows friends:

      Subject: Hi!

      Body: how R U?
      Zome Linux nerd sent me this thingy, I immediately thought about you
      you being a Linux nerd and all..
      I is in a harry, I promise you will love it!
      (sic)

      Attachment: Linux.SCR

      Do'h!

  43. Damn... I guess Linux really is infiltrating by ylikone · · Score: 1

    I leave my computer alone for 5 minutes and it's switched to Linux all by itself!


    /just kidding, my computer always runs Linux

    --
    Meh.
  44. Yeah, but by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Does it run wine?

    1. Re:Yeah, but by ylikone · · Score: 1

      The real question then becomes... will wine (running on the windows Linux screensaver) be able to run the Windows Linux screensaver?

      --
      Meh.
  45. I'd rather run winows... by theheff · · Score: 4, Funny

    as a linux game. It's pretty fun... if you don't get a virus in 14 minutes you win!

    1. Re:I'd rather run winows... by Bradee-oh! · · Score: 5, Funny

      It's pretty fun... if you don't get a virus in 14 minutes you win!
       
      Uggh... I can't stand another game with an unreasonably high difficulty level =/

      --
      "This is Zombo Com, and welcome to you who have come to Zombo Com" - www.zombo.com
    2. Re:I'd rather run winows... by ShaLouZa · · Score: 3, Funny

      I almost made it once. But I screwed up : I connected my box to the net at the 12th minute. Silly me.

    3. Re:I'd rather run winows... by shadowbearer · · Score: 1

      Yeah. Oh, and watch out for those hidden entries at the higher levels. There Be Zombies :)

      SB

      --
      It's old. The more humans I meet, the more I like my cats. At least they are honest.
  46. Is this an inside IBM OS/2 tech joke? by smchris · · Score: 1

    I used OS/2 for 6 years at home and it was good. However, one of the several weird things about marketing the product is that IBM sold OS/2 Warp 3 and OS/2 Warp 3 _for_ [emphasis mine] Windows. The intent was to sell one version cheaper for people who already had Windows 3.1 and didn't need the capabilities of WinOS2.

    However, I always thought labeling it as _FOR_ Windows was moronic. What was that supposed to imply to the purchaser? That it was a Windows add-on?

    Maybe this linux screensaver is a final OS/2 team joke to confuse the hell out of selected users. I'm not sure I don't approve.

    1. Re:Is this an inside IBM OS/2 tech joke? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, the version _FOR_ Windows didn't have the Microsoft pieces bundled, because you already had them as part of your current Windows. And IBM didn't have to pay Micro$haft to re-distribute them.

      Cheers.

    2. Re:Is this an inside IBM OS/2 tech joke? by smchris · · Score: 1

      No, the version _FOR_ Windows didn't have the Microsoft pieces bundled, because you already had them as part of your current Windows. And IBM didn't have to pay Micro$haft to re-distribute them.

      Isn't that what I implied?

      The intent was to sell one version cheaper for people who already had Windows 3.1 and didn't need the capabilities of WinOS2.

      Sigh. You don't get it either?

      If I said this Volkswagen is FOR Toyota, what the hell does that mean? A Volkswagen is a car and a Toyota is a car. Windows 3.1 was an OS and OS/2 was an OS/2. In what earthly sense was OS/2 ever "FOR" Windows?

      Oh, well. OS/2 is almost gone. Time to move on.

    3. Re:Is this an inside IBM OS/2 tech joke? by NullProg · · Score: 1

      However, I always thought labeling it as _FOR_ Windows was moronic. What was that supposed to imply to the purchaser? That it was a Windows add-on?

      Thats ok, I have an original box here that says "Microsoft O/S 2". Try and grok that one :)

      Enjoy,

      --
      It's just the normal noises in here.
    4. Re:Is this an inside IBM OS/2 tech joke? by the_greywolf · · Score: 1

      just going on memory here, so feel free to correct me.

      microsoft was, in fact, the principal developer (or a co-developer?) of OS/2 for IBM, and IBM sold the original versions under Microsoft's name. then Microsoft split off and went their own direction and developed Windows 3 based on their work on OS/2.

      something like that. i do know that as late as Windows 2000, there are OS/2 compatibility libraries hiding in the system folder. i also remember hearing about some spat between IBM and MS over ownership of OS/2 source. maybe i'm just dreaming. i am pretty tired. (and far too lazy to go read the wikipedia entry.)

      --
      grey wolf
      LET FORTRAN DIE!
    5. Re:Is this an inside IBM OS/2 tech joke? by BigWarpGuy · · Score: 1

      eComStation http://www.ecomstation.com/ Have you checked the latest version of OS/2 called eComStation?

  47. This is pointless by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Redundant

    Because when you go to use the system it will turn off!

  48. what do you call this distro? by doubtless · · Score: 1

    the You can see but you can't touch?

    --
    geek page at KY speaks
    1. Re:what do you call this distro? by Gryle · · Score: 5, Funny

      "the [thing} you can see but you can't touch?"

      Girls?

      --
      Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not entirely sure about the universe - Einstein
    2. Re:what do you call this distro? by thatoneguy_jm · · Score: 1
      "the [thing} you can see but you can't touch?"

      Girls? Or, more specifically, boobies?

  49. Infected With Linux?? by protolith · · Score: 2, Funny

    Good Lord this machine has been infected with Linux... Doh, Wait!!! I Think I want That.

  50. One good reason... by rkaa · · Score: 4, Insightful

    to use this, would be to in effect run Xscreensaver on Windows! Using XP, I really miss those. And they will never be ported.

    1. Re:One good reason... by seweso · · Score: 0

      My (now ex) girlfriend loved the random screensavers she got with (ubuntu)-linux. She switched back to Windows Xp because of the webcam support in msn-messenger...

    2. Re:One good reason... by Sax+Maniac · · Score: 1

      Jamie will never port them. But, someone else could. Especially the OpenGL ones, which would easier to do than the pure X ones.

      --
      I can explanate how to administrate your network. You must configurate and segmentate it, so it can computate.
    3. Re:One good reason... by rkaa · · Score: 1

      Well there's that fine line between theory and practice, and in this case it looks more like a concrete wall. Do you seriously think it would be smart to hold my breath for this one?

    4. Re:One good reason... by Sax+Maniac · · Score: 1

      There's porting the entire dang thing, and porting a single display hack you like.

      I think the latter it's possible. I took standalone OpenGL graphic demo that I wrote and ported into the xscreensaver framework. It took all of a few hours. For a portable program that uses just GL, I suspect the reverse would be true.

      You don't really want to port the entire thing, because a good part of what Jamie's code is trying to deal with is already done on Windows - namely, launching the screensaver itself. So if you ported to Windows, you wouldn't port that part. His framework is already very similar to Windows in that each saver is a dedicated executable, instead of a monolithic program like xlock or xlockmore.

      What I don't know is how the Windows screensaver framework and conventions, and getting a development setup going there. It's been long years since I've done Windows development and it's a fast-moving target.

      --
      I can explanate how to administrate your network. You must configurate and segmentate it, so it can computate.
    5. Re:One good reason... by rkaa · · Score: 1

      I'm not sure if you're trying to call me an idiot. Of course it is possible to port it. Everybody knows that. But that wasn't what I asked you about.

    6. Re:One good reason... by juhaz · · Score: 1

      Well there's that fine line between theory and practice, and in this case it looks more like a concrete wall. Do you seriously think it would be smart to hold my breath for this one?

      Someone already ported Really Slick Screensavers from Windows to XScreensaver, so not only it's possible in theory, it's simple enough that someone has done it in practice.

      Other way around probably isn't any harder, so the question becomes are there any windows opengl coders who want it enough?

  51. With roles reversed... by Sathias · · Score: 5, Funny

    Does this mean I can run 3D Pipes as an OS?

    --
    Blessed are the 1337, for they shall pwn the earth.
    1. Re:With roles reversed... by Council · · Score: 1

      Does this mean I can run 3D Pipes as an OS?

      Yes. However, we have examined your pipes, and find that you are using stolen SCO gaskets and elbow joints.

      --
      xkcd.com - a webcomic of mathematics, love, and language.
    2. Re:With roles reversed... by ENIGMAwastaken · · Score: 1

      Fuck pipes! I want to play that maze screensaver! Every single time that screensaver would come up I'd pretend like I was playing it. It rocked. I won every time.

    3. Re:With roles reversed... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Unlike 1D pipes (cat a/* | grep -e 'blah' | wc -l), 3D pipes are fully Turing complete and can emulate any OS in existence.

  52. As a Windows user by Ginza · · Score: 0

    This actually piques my interest as I don't have to re-partition my HD or make some drastic change. It's an easy shell to get experienced with linux and maybe even switch over.

    --
    Difference between a brave man and a smart man: a brave man will die for his country. A smart man kills for his.
    1. Re:As a Windows user by ylikone · · Score: 1

      Um, never heard of Knoppix, or the million other live linux distros out there I assume?

      --
      Meh.
    2. Re:As a Windows user by chronicon · · Score: 3, Insightful
      Um, never heard of Knoppix, or the million other live linux distros out there I assume?

      ...or running Knoppix in Windows via QEMU? Or quick Damn Small Linux in similar fashion?

      What makes this newsworthy today? The bizarre "run it as a screensaver" factor? What's the point?

  53. You know... by Captain_Thunder · · Score: 1

    I've seen screen-savers that are essentially small games. You can use your mouse and keyboard to interact with a screen-saver. I'm guessing you would use Esc to exit.

    --
    My journal: Clicky. Read it because it
    1. Re:You know... by ChrisA90278 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      No, I figure you'd use something like "shutdown -h now" or "init 0" to exit. The creen saver stops when the process terminates. The big news here is simply that someone got Linux to run as a Windows userland process. OK not 100% new but then they thought to call it a "screen saver". It's cool to be the first to think of something.

  54. Into the looking glass... by suitepotato · · Score: 3, Funny

    Now you can let the screensave run and go into another OS and then the screensaver on that runs and you go into another OS and then the screensaver on that runs and you go into another OS and then the screensaver on that runs and you go into another OS and then the screensaver on that runs and you go into another OS and then the screensaver on that runs and you go into another OS and then the screensaver on that runs and you go into another OS and then the screensaver on that runs and you go into another OS... ARRRRRRRGGGGHHHHHH!!!!!!!! MAKE IT STOP!!!!!!!!

    --
    If my grammar and spelling are off, I am [distracted/tired/careless] (take your pick)
  55. This caught my attention by johansalk · · Score: 2, Insightful

    This Linux screensaver is from Nathalie Carrie and Arnaud Verhille, science teachers on Reunion Island, a French colony in the Indian Ocean. Verhille asks "Does anyone know where I can get a free Java," because he is concerned about encumbering his pupils with Sun®'s license conditions." Does it really matter? I'm of the opinion that schoolchildren on a remote Indian Ocean island are unlikely to do anything that would cause Sun to chase after them.

    1. Re:This caught my attention by xlv · · Score: 1
      Does it really matter? I'm of the opinion that schoolchildren on a remote Indian Ocean island are unlikely to do anything that would cause Sun to chase after them.


      Apart from the fact that this would be breaking the license terms, something people usually involved in Open Source do not want to do, no matter who the IP owner is, Reunion Island is part of France and thus French laws apply there. If somebody in the Paris headquarters of Sun France had a bad day or wanted to vacation in an exotic place^W^W^W^W^Wpay a visit to the people violating their license, they could be in for a lot of trouble...

    2. Re:This caught my attention by vmcto · · Score: 2, Funny

      I would think the Sun would be particularly strong on an island...

  56. this just goes to show... by Petronius · · Score: 2, Funny

    how robust Windows is.

    --
    there's no place like ~
  57. In other news by SmallFurryCreature · · Score: 2, Funny
    Steve Ballmer hurdled a chair through his office shouting, "Fucking Samuel J. Palmisano is a fucking pussy. I'm going to fucking bury that guy, I have done it before, and I will do it again. I'm going to fucking kill IBM."

    To wich Bill Gates replied, "and this time we fucking make sure IBM stays dead."

    Oh god, the world is upside down. IBM the new and happening company, MS and Intel as "the man". Apple is still a bunch of new age hippies right?

    --

    MMO Quests are like orgasms:

    You may solo them, I prefer them in a group.

  58. The US will hate it, simply because ... by chris_sawtell · · Score: 1
    ... it's been produced under the auspices of the UN.
    The-Rest-of-the-World will love it for that very reason.

    I wonder how long it will be before the anti-virus outfits give it a signature?

    Once that happens it will have 'made it', and everybody will want it.

    :-)/2

    Congratulations and thanks to IBM.

  59. What does it do exatcly??? by elgatozorbas · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Am I the only one who doesn't understand xhat this thing does exactly? Does it
    A) install Linux during the screensaver?
    B) run Linux during the screensaver? What happens to windows? Why would you want to wait for the screensaver?
    C)show a linux slideshow. What's the use of that?

    1. Re:What does it do exatcly??? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      r
      t
      f
      a.

    2. Re:What does it do exatcly??? by ch_rob · · Score: 1

      Now, just run a Linux screensaver that runs Windows and watch the sparks fly!

  60. What a neat screensaver! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I hope they port it to Linux!

  61. Good idea, but I like coLinux better by n2rjt · · Score: 3, Interesting

    According to the article, this runs Linux in emulation mode, which is slow. CoLinux runs Linux as a Windows application, which is faster. CoLinux, however, lacks a graphics interface. I use it with X, but that doesn't work out of the box with existing live CDs.

  62. Windows as X11 screensaver by penguin-collective · · Score: 1

    It's only fair. After all, Windows has been running as an X11 screensaver for years (just invoke the BSOD module of xscreensaver).

  63. add mosix by codepunk · · Score: 1

    Add mosix and you have a company wide screen saver cluster...

    --


    Got Code?
  64. Now, to reverse it... by winphreak · · Score: 2, Funny

    I'll have linux use the BSOD screen saver. Mocks windows perfectly.

    --
    "I'm a well-wisher, in that I don't wish you any specific harm."
  65. And in other news... by iced_773 · · Score: 1


    Microsoft announces that Vista will not support screensavers.

  66. Hey, run condor by bingo_tailspin · · Score: 1

    This would be great for running Condor flocks in a University computer lab. Distributed computing, only when not being used.

  67. Um... we actually by jimmypw · · Score: 0

    Excuse me for being pedantic but the exit code i.e. disturbance of mouse / keyboard, has to be programmed in to the screensaver, it is not controlled by Windows.

    Try it take your standard .scr file and change the extenson to .exe. It will run and as soon as u move the mouse it will exit and vise versa rename an exe file and rename it to scr. It will run as a screensaver and wont exit when u move the mouse.

    I hope there aren't any API gurus out there to prove me wrong.

  68. lemme guess... by juanescalante · · Score: 1

    Soviet Russia, right? Is that where you're from?

  69. Finally by LanceUppercut · · Score: 0, Troll

    Finally, Linux occupies a place it deserves. A screensaver...

  70. Perfect for xscreensaver! by mystik · · Score: 1

    Well, Now we don't have to worry about jwz porting xscreensaver to windows!!!

    xscreensaver

    win-xmatrix, here I come!

    /didn't rtfa
    //don't run windows
    ///oops, wrong site.

    --
    Why aren't you encrypting your e-mail?
  71. Imagine... by isny · · Score: 0, Redundant

    I'm halfway serious when I say "Imagine a beowulf cluster of these."

  72. Already exists! by DavonZ · · Score: 4, Informative

    OK. When andLinux (http://wiki.gp2x.org/wiki/AndLinux) was released to the public over a week ago, Slashdot flagged it as uninteresting and ignored the news. andLinux is a Debian based Linux distribution that runs in Windows. It uses CoLinux, Xming and several other technologies to work.

    So, is it that LordDavon (yes, me!) is just a john-q-public open source developer and doesn't matter... but if Big Blue does something similar they matter!? Is it that Dynamism is supporting andLinux and not IBM? I really am a bit pissed on this one! I really believed that Slashdot would want to promote a project made for the public, by the public. I guess I need to try and make money off of Linux for them to care.

    Honestly, I just don't know. What I do know is that I don't need a screensaver to run Linux in Windows, I was first and Slashdot and IBM can kiss my ass!

    1. Re:Already exists! by Vo0k · · Score: 1, Funny

      There are some more things considered when it comes to accepting an article than just "the news being important". Like the style of writing, grammar, correctness, the submitter not being a troll and not sounding like an arrogant bastard. If the article was written in similar tone as this post, no wonder it was rejected. Be more humble.

      --
      Anagram("United States of America") == "Dine out, taste a Mac, fries"
  73. Your sig by Schraegstrichpunkt · · Score: 1
    Human being (n.): A genetically human, genetically distinct, functioning organism.

    So... Identical twins aren't human beings?

    1. Re:Your sig by cagle_.25 · · Score: 1
      Since indentical twins are two organisms beyond the 8-cell division stage, I think the potential for confusion is low, nicht wahr?

      Genetic distinction does not equate to genetic uniqueness. For two objects to be "distinct" means that they can be separated from one another. So for example, I have millions of bacteria within my body. They are not promoted to human status simply because they reside within me; instead, because they are genetically distinct, they can be marked as separate organisms.

      It's not great language, I admit, because of the confusion between "distinct" and "unique." I'm open to suggestions for change...

      --
      Human being (n.): A genetically human, genetically distinct, functioning organism.
    2. Re:Your sig by Vo0k · · Score: 1

      remove "genetically" from "genetically distinct". Twins are two distinct (separate) organisms, but taken only genetically (so - in the meaning of "gene pool") they aren't distinct. Say, a theoretical, on more than one level, situation, if a girl is screwed by your twin brother and you in a threesome orgy, there is absolutely no way to tell who's the father.

      in physical space, distinct != unique. In case of information space, data (like genes) is distinct only if unique, otherwise it's just an instance of the same data. Unless you promote your sperm cells to human beings.

      --
      Anagram("United States of America") == "Dine out, taste a Mac, fries"
    3. Re:Your sig by Schraegstrichpunkt · · Score: 1
      if a girl is screwed by your twin brother and you in a threesome orgy, there is absolutely no way to tell who's the father.

      Hmm... I wonder what kind of radioisotopes a person could get into their sperm, and how long they would remain in the offspring...

    4. Re:Your sig by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Pretty hard to do I bet. First, they must be weak enough not to kill the sperm. That is, the one single sperm that gets to fertilize the egg must contain detectable amount of the isotope and not be killed by it. Detectable after getting distributed all over the billions of cells the child body will be built of. And still distinguishable from isotope contained in the child's body after the rest of the sperm cells get resorbed by immunological system of the mother and distributed all over her organism with blood, then injected back into the embryo with her blood.

  74. Hardcore System Stacking by BadassJesus · · Score: 1

    I would only be satisfied when i could be able to
    run Linux on Windows (like a screensaver.. thats ok)
    then run Amiga500 emulator within the Linux
    then run ZX Spectrum emulator within the Amiga500 emulator
    then run my Atari Pong game emulator within the ZX Spectrum emulator
    then finally spend some good time playing the only game
    I have ever beed addicted to.

  75. Running IBM 370 VM on an IBM 370 VM by billstewart · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Back when I was in college, and we had to walk uphill both ways in the snow to get to the punch-card computer center, my freshman roommate was a ham radio operator, and was friends with another ham, Phil Karn, KA9Q, who you might remember from TCP/IP on DOS and other projects. Phil had a job one year as a computer operator. The computer was a mainframe that lived out near the airport, and there were a bunch of punch-card/printer computer centers around campus that needed operators to feed them. The mainframe was an IBM 370 with VM and a variety of guest operating systems on top of it, including CMS and several batch systems. Phil guessed one day that the password for the backup administrator account (a 4-character uppercase password) might be BKUP, so he was able to access a copy of VM and run it on top of the main VM. The client OS on top of that ran v...e..rrrr..yyyy s...l...ooo...wwww...llll...y, and remember that that's a definition of "slowly" that considers punchcard access to a ~1 MIPS mainframe to be "not slow" :-)

    --

    Bill Stewart
    New Fast-Compression-only CPR http://preview.tinyurl.com/dy575ks
  76. You know you're on Slashdot, when... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Someone suggests using Linux as a Windows screensaver, and nobody asks "Why?".

    1. Re:You know you're on Slashdot, when... by Vo0k · · Score: 1

      'cause asking questions that can't be answered is pointless.

      --
      Anagram("United States of America") == "Dine out, taste a Mac, fries"
  77. Funny by PenGun · · Score: 0

    Really one of the best threads in weeks.

        PenGun
      Do What Now ??? ... Standards and Practices !

  78. So this is what they spend their time on... by Pete+Brubaker · · Score: 1

    ... instead of making decent tools/compilers/linkers for the PS3.

    --
    What's a sig? Pete Brubaker
  79. a sin... by ovit · · Score: 1

    Running Linux as a screen saver under windows? That has to be a sin of some kind!

    1. Re:a sin... by hellfirea18 · · Score: 1

      I'm glad I'm not the only one who sees this as being very wrong in so many ways.

  80. It's no use by Nybble's+Byte · · Score: 0

    Linux cannot save Windows from itself.

  81. Beat em to it by MasterPi · · Score: 1

    Linux has had windows as a screensaver for years. Its called the BSOD screensaver.

    --
    ( I
  82. But can I run Linux as an iTunes Visualizer? by theurge14 · · Score: 1

    Now Playing: Billy Joel - The Longest Time

    emerge --update --deep --newuse world

  83. In typical IBM fashion... by sm8000 · · Score: 1

    Will it be patented? (Sorry, can't be bothered to read all the replies)

  84. Mods on crack by alc6379 · · Score: 1
    I hate to break this to ya, but cygwin isn't linux...

    Who the hell modded this Flamebait? Cygwin isn't Linux. I can run bash on a Solaris machine, along with a bunch of other GNU tools. Does that mean my Solaris machine just became a Linux box?

    --
    I don't moderate anymore. Karma penalty for 90% fair mods? Can I mod that unfair?
  85. Paradox by Tronks · · Score: 0

    Windows is going to be productive only when it is idle.

  86. Distcc? by icefaerie · · Score: 1

    Internet-wide distcc in a screensaver?

  87. But what is the use? by d33p1x · · Score: 1

    So I start the screensaver, see the login screen, and I type 'd' ...
    w00t! Where did my Linux go? I am back to Windows!

  88. MOD PARENT INFORMATIVE, NOT! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The parent referred to this software as a "computer saver", but if he had bothered to read the story at all he would have realized the title of the article says "screen saver".

    Still, it's a very funny comment!

  89. Linux becomes a Windows product by FeralTitan · · Score: 1

    Linux becomes a Windows product! If I think of it that way, this might be a good thing. An oppurtunity to run any Operating System(Linux/Windows/Mac) from anyother OS so you can have the best of all worlds. Windows could be a screen saver on Linux too.
    It could prove to be a starting point for making OSs truly independent, not by letting various OSs talk to each other, but instead to run within and in concert with each other.

    For those of us who use both Operating Systems and don't look condescendingly on either this would be a great way to switch - maybe without rebooting - Maybe with a hot key and not a screen saver though.

    Alas, I don't think flamers and trolls would ever allow such a thing - not that they matter. :)

    ----
    Sacrifice the things you like doing for the things you Love doing

  90. Hey Honey, this screensaver is Awesome! by serutan · · Score: 1

    Think of it -- a Windows screensaver that does email, word processing, spreadsheets, web browsing... Windows becomes just something you boot to get to the screensaver. Then eventually they figure out that they can install just the screensaver by itself and it will run faster, for free.

  91. Does the new linux have a screensaver? by oldCoder · · Score: 1

    And can I run my pictures of Jessica Simpson on the Linux screensaver that's running in my Windows screensaver?

    --

    I18N == Intergalacticization
  92. Shock! by DollyTheSheep · · Score: 2, Insightful

    A screensaver, that may make your more productive than the whole rest of your OS!

  93. Work affected by chrisnewbie · · Score: 0

    So if it works as a screensaver that means that all user will only be able to work with it if they do nothing for about hum.. let's say 10 minutes...then they'll have about less that half a second to click in the window to work in linux,,,,then wait another ten minute to get back in.

    that's a waist of time ;)

  94. Great Hack! by Hosiah · · Score: 1

    I'm anxious to check this out! Does anybody know where I can find MS_Windows.tar.gz?

  95. I want my ten minutes back by emm-tee · · Score: 2, Funny

    Please can I have back the ten minutes I just wasted trying to work out what the hell this article is about.

  96. Shoot the Grammar Nazis by tepples · · Score: 1

    Fuck pipes! I want to play that maze screensaver!

    It's been made available for DOS in the form of Shoot the Grammar Nazis.