Google Unveils The Google Pack

7hunderstruck writes "Google yesterday announced the release of Google Pack, a 'free collection of essential software'. Along with Google's own programs, such as Google Toolbar and Google Earth, Google Pack contains Firefox, Adobe Reader, a six month subscription to Norton Antivirus, and Trillian as well as other apps. Any respectable /. user should have most of this suite installed already (excluding a few things), but it will be nice to make it all widely available to the general public." Commentary on ZDNet.

Comments

nortan anti-virus

[bobby1234]

forget it you could get me to install it if it was free forever.... avg for me... http://free.grisoft.com/

Re:nortan anti-virus

[Achromatic1978]

It has definitely changed, but that being said, if you're able to, go with Symantec AV Corp Edition... much lower footprint, and less effort and energy spent in useless eye candy and overhead.

Re:nortan anti-virus

[GaryPatterson]

I would not use Norton's Anit-Virus even if it was free for life, came on a golden CD and updates were hand-delivered by trained flying monkeys.

A one-year subscription came with my motherboard, and I duly installed it after everything else (including a few games). Performance across the board plummeted, apps took ages to open, or sometimes didn't, every file seemed to take ages to read in or write back to disk - in short, everything started to suck badly.

This is on a brand new Athlon-64 3200, with 1GB RAM and 2x160GB drives. It was like greased lightning until NAV was installed.

I removed NAV and after a little looking around, installed Avast (arrr, me hearties!) and it's been great. No complaints at all, and importantly - no perceived performance difference between running Avast and not running any virus checker.

Google Pack is only available for WindowsXP

[oilisgood]

Oh well.

Re:Google Pack is only available for WindowsXP

[Tony Hoyle]

I think only certain builds of Windows XP too.

I'm running XP here and it won't let me download it.

Re:Google Pack is only available for WindowsXP

[Professor_UNIX]

What is this "Windows XP"?
Is that some other software that Google provides? Is it some "free software" that I haven't heard about?

It is a proprietary operating system developed by Microsoft of Redmond, Washington. It is usually freely included with new PCs.

Re:Google Pack is only available for WindowsXP

[drcagn]

I think you're correct. I'm running Windows XP x64 Professional Coroporate and it tells me I need Windows XP.

Re:Google Pack is only available for WindowsXP

[Elektroschock]

This is why the original writer is wrong. All respectable users of Slashdot shall fuddle around with Wine to get the tools run.

What surprises me is that OpenOffice.org is not included in the Google Pack despite of the partnership announcement.

Re:Google Pack is only available for WindowsXP

[loginx]

Yes. This has been around only for a week or so I think...
http://gentoo-wiki.com/HOWTO_Install_GoogleEarth_w ith_wine

The article is a little gentoo-specific but I'm sure that shouln't be an issue for other distros.

"Any respectable /. reader"?

[daveschroeder]

Any respectable /. user should have most of this suite installed already

From http://pack.google.com/:

System Requirements
- Windows XP

I think there is a disconnect somewhere... ;-)

Re:"Any respectable /. reader"?

[jlowery]

Any respectable /. user should have most of this suite installed already.

Are there any respectable /. readers?

Re:"Any respectable /. reader"?

[Moby Cock]

Actually the requirement is:

Windows XP with Administrator privileges

Which I understand is pretty easy to get over the internet.

Re:"Any respectable /. reader"?

[blkros]

I think you've hit the nail on the head, so to speak. Google seems to take without really giving much (except talk). Yeah they have funded some stuff, but really, in relation to their income, it's not even a drop in the bucket. They use open source software, and yet, everything they put out is proprietary. That's not giving back, and it's not doing good (although I guess it's not"evil" either, just kinda shady.).

Re:"Any respectable /. reader"?

[Anonymous Coward]

Yeah, they could at least provide some free services in return for all the money I give them.

Re:"Any respectable /. reader"?

[26199]

I would say that they're giving back something at least as important as code. Open source is a wonderful idea but of limited importance unless the software actually gets used. Google is adding its heavyweight brandname and reputation to the side of open source.

Really, they're doing something only a big corporation with a good public image can do. Code would be great, but it doesn't take a megacorporation to write code.

Re:"Any respectable /. reader"?

[mysticgoat]

Google seems to take without really giving much (except talk). Yeah they have funded some stuff, but really, in relation to their income, it's not even a drop in the bucket.

Let's give them some time. Great wealth has a kind of inertia-- there is a lot of organization behind the scenes that has to be done before newly acquired wealth can be put in motion.

But I think we can see where Google is going now-- from TFA:

"We realize software distribution will have to become one of our core competencies," quote from Marissa Mayer, Google Product Manager.

That sounds like a major commitment in an area that the FOSS communities haven't yet addressed very well.

Re:"Any respectable /. reader"?

[Anonymous Coward]

Google employs many open source giants. Google also uses a lot of open source software. Could it be that they are simply bank rolling people that work on open source and THAT is their contribution?

Similar to Red Hat who employs many of the GCC and kernel developers. Perhaps Google contributes simply by employing others and letting them do their thing on Google's dime?

Crazy, but many companies that contribute don't do it in the grandiose "Here's our enterprise application, you can have it!" fasion. Most simply have developers that use open source and allow them to contribute their code back to the project.

Re:"Any respectable /. reader"?

[NetRAVEN5000]

" Except for using some OSS what are they doing for it, if all the products they put out are proprietary? How does their reputation (which isn't all that "great" in my opinion) help OSS if they are doing this?"

A lot of their products are available for free, even if they're not open-source. And they're also funding certain open-source projects, which is more than we can say for most other companies. According to Netcraft, Yahoo! and Altavista both run FreeBSD, and AskJeeves uses quite a few Linux servers - but I have yet to hear about any of these funding open-source projects. Why don't we start complaining more about them and less about Google - at least Google had "Summer of Code" to help out open-source projects and is providing funding for some open-source projects.

Re:"Any respectable /. reader"?

[AndreyF]

What are you talking about? Who cares if their "Google pack" is open source? I bet they threw it together in a weekend - it's not that impressive. The contributions Google gives to the OSS community aren't little - check out Google code before you talk. The places where it matters - like an open XMPP-based talk infrastructure, Google is the only company to step up. Try building something useful on top of the MSN chat network, and see how fast MS sues you out of the water.

Branded?

[Tango42]

Are the non-google products identical to the versions issued normally, or are they branded? It says firefox comes with the google toolbar (does it add anything to ff? I can already search google easilly and block popups...), is that the only modification?

I'm not sure why google are doing this, unless they're getting paid (in money or some other way) by the producers of the software...

Re:Branded?

[linuxci]

The Google toolbar for firefox only adds a few items that I consider useful, however as this toolbar integrates seamlessly with Firefox toolbar customisation then you can just move the items you need into other areas of the screen and hide the toolbar itself.

e.g. the Google search box on the toolbar incorporates Google suggest, so I've customised the toolbar and removed the Firefox built in search box and replaced it with the Google one.

I also like to see the pagerank of sites that I help develop so I've dragged the pagerank icon to the left of the throbber on the menubar (Linux and Windows) or to the left of the personal toolbar (on Mac) so I can see it at all times. Then I hide the rest of the toolbar.

To customise toolbars simply right click on any area of the toolbars that don't have any other context menu (e.g. reload, stop, home buttons) or select View > Toolbars > Customize.

Google are also offering $1 per download to members of their adsense program who put a link to download Firefox with the Google toolbar on their sites. For Google it is good to encourage use of Firefox as Firefox will not default to MSN search like IE does - and remember what Ballmer wants to do to Google!

Re:Branded?

[wazo2k]

I'm not sure why google are doing this, unless they're getting paid (in money or some other way) by the producers of the software...

according to the google blog they are not getting paid:

We worked with a number of technology companies to identify products that are the best of their type to create this suite. (We didn't pay them, and they aren't paying us.)

Re:Branded?

[Tango42]

If they intend to get favours in return, that's still payment. I'll believe they aren't getting any money, but I doubt they're getting nothing.

Re:Branded?

[hkmwbz]

"There was the initial excitement about its speed and the nice screen and then it came time to actually get it running. Which meant embarking on some real work - downloading a browser, a couple of multimedia players, a PDF reader, a toolbar, and maybe something for voice and instant messaging."

I don't know about everyone else, but my copy of Windows XP came with a browser, a multimedia player, and an instant messaging program. And believe it or not, but I'd pick Windows Media Player over the evil spyware infested Real Player any day.

I'd download Opera separately for my browsing needs anyway, though.

"We worked with a number of technology companies to identify products that are the best of their type to create this suite."

As an Opera user, I'd have to disagree with their choice of browser. Heck, it's even smaller and faster, yet more powerful and user friendly than Firefox out of the box. But of course, the Google toolbar doesn't support Opera...

Oh yeah, and their choice of antivirus software and multimedia player sucks too. They chose the worst there, not the best. I think that someone is not telling us the full story... Are we supposed to believe that Google did this out of the kindness of their hearts? If that was the case, the pack would have looked a bit different if you ask me.

Re:"Free"

[metaomni]

The free piece of cheese I get at the supermarket from the nice little lady expires in about 12-14 hours... doesn't make it any less free.

XP only

[Turn-X Alphonse]

Wheres the mention that it's XP only in the article text? I personally feel this is rather an important fact in not wasting people's time on stuff they can't use.

Not Gaim?

[SWroclawski]

Google hired the main Gaim developer, and they don't ship it as part of the Google Pack?

Despite the article- I don't see Trillian listed in on the article page. If they ship Trillian and not Gaim, that'd be even more strange.

Re:Not Gaim?

[AC-x]

Trillian is included. It's not there by default but they do give you the option here

Re:Not Gaim?

[mgs_X75]

"Google hired the main Gaim developer, and they don't ship it as part of the Google Pack?"

well, thats because google doesnt care too much about open source but is just smarter than most other traditional it companies and they see the tremendous - yet largely unstructured and very loosely connected - economic powers of the open source community. once those os communities work more focussed, structured and interlinked be assured others will also try to become "friends" with them.

google a true friend of open source? dont think so. 400 times 4500$ for the summer of code is some money and it has some benefits for the open source development in general. but, first, compare this prize money to the millions that they paid this ms guy. second and more important, google gets to know 400 bright people and can approach/hire them when they are students - not necessary to pay millions to hire them from a competitor at a later stage. this certainly is worth the 400 times 4500.

google is good for open source? in the long run...dont think so. they take lead developers (read: directly weaken the os community) from ff and gaim and hire them to work for google. what makes open source a success? its the bright people/developers behind it. take that and open source is left with some volunteers and good intentions, but not much more.

can one blame them? no. its a company as any other company and has the same goals. google is just smarter and with an excellent marketing and pr department.

should one be thankful for google? im defenitely thankful for their search technology but im certainly not thankful for their business model/strategy. hooking up with open source is the smartest thing they can do in terms of costs and benefits. plus, in taking lead developers they seriously weaken the further open source development in exchange for pocketmoney. something, i think, a true open source member should hardly be thankful for.

Re:Not Gaim?

[SWroclawski]

I'm all about being skeptical but:
google a true friend of open source? dont think so. 400 times 4500$ for the summer of code is some money and it has some benefits for the open source development in general. but, first, compare this prize money to the millions that they paid this ms guy. second and more important, google gets to know 400 bright people and can approach/hire them when they are students - not necessary to pay millions to hire them from a competitor at a later stage. this certainly is worth the 400 times 4500.

I don't see the analogy here. They're hiring students to work on Free Software projects for the summer... The students can do what they want afterward. Many large companies have internships for students, but few of them involve Free Software.

they take lead developers (read: directly weaken the os community) from ff and gaim and hire them to work for google.

That's what many companies do, hiring smart developers. While it's not good- I don't see how Google is any worse than any other company for this practice. Google has been relatively skimpy on the Free Software front, but code.google.com does have some useful programs.

Re:Not Gaim?

[zr-rifle]

Most importantly, why Trillian and not GTalk?

Re:Not Gaim?

[chiok]

Both Trillian and Google Talk are there as optional programs.

Norton?

[Jesus IS the Devil]

Why did Google choose to include Norton? I've found Norton AV to be the most worthless antivirus software I've ever used. It has consistently let me down in terms of protecting my computer. I've even tested it against a known virus. A rival AV was able to catch it. Norton wasn't.

A couple of times I was hit by a trojan by simply going to a web page. Next thing you know, my system gets infected, and Norton shuts down completely and won't start back up again. That's what you call protection? No thanks.

Re:Norton?

[donovangn]

I run into this same issue on so many of my clients' computers. I end up removing Norton as it was either expired or somehow broken. At least half the time the damn thing doesn't uninstall. This is such a pervasive issue that Norton had to write a removal (SymNRT) to clean up where their uninstaller failed. Eventually they should move that tool to this page.

Re:Norton?

[Spoing]

A couple of times I was hit by a trojan by simply going to a web page. Next thing you know, my system gets infected, and Norton shuts down completely and won't start back up again. That's what you call protection? No thanks.

While Symantec's Norton AV is one of the most notorious AV programs out there, if you're relying on an AV to protect you ... as the latest exploit shows ... you are already in trouble.

AV products "protect" you as much as using garbage bags on top of your shoes when walking across broken glass.

Re:Norton?

[Frankie70]

Why did Google choose to include Norton?

Norton probably paid Google shitload of money to be included in the
pack.

Avast

[NaNO2x]

I myself would sugest Avast, I've never had an issue with it. Though I haven't used AVG for years it could have changed, back then it wasn't looking to good.

Odd statement

[toupsie]

but it will be nice to make it all widely available to the general public.

That's an odd statement. Weren't all these software packages widely available to the general public before? I like Google and all but come on. I really don't see what the big deal is. You can download all these programs from Google? Whupty-fword. And it doesn't work with my Mac OS X box which makes sense because I don't need Ad-Aware and Norton Antivirus for safe surfing. Plus PDF viewing is built into the OS through Preview.

Am I missing something here?

Re:Odd statement

[philipdl71]

Am I missing something here?

You're right, but you have to think of the average end user and Google's needs as well. Google Pack is a good idea for a couple of reasons:

1. Geeky people can tell their clueless computer friends to install one thing to get them started. Google Pack invites them to run and try all of the software by presenting them a list of what was just installed.
2. Google Pack will keep their software up to date by downloading upgrades (I hope that it mentions this before doing anything).
3. It allows Google a way to bundle their really cool applications together in a meaningful way. That is to say, often many people know about Google Earth but have not heard of Picasa or Google Desktop.

Re:Odd statement

[Tal0n]

Mod P up and mod GP down.

Yes, you are missing something. You/We are not the norm. We are the exception to the norm. If our way was sufficient, there wouldn't be a need for stuff like this. How many of you have done support for friends, families, bullies? :-) How many of those people don't install some of these programs, cause it's too much trouble? How many of them have no idea what ad-ware/spyware means? How many have called you asking about how to do simple, menial (to us anyway) tasks, that could be solved with some of this software? I don't know about you, but for me, it's a large proportion of the support I give.

What the original statement was trying to say is that most/many geeks using Windows (Shut up, yes there are some of us using it. No you're not all that funny), already have most of these installed. For me it was about 70%. Are there better alternatives out there? Probably, but that's not the point. The included software is a collection of fairly good, mainstream, respected choices for in each of their fields. I can tell my family/friends to click this link and install ONE program and then, not have to worry. It will take care of installing all of those pieces. BTW, all of those installs are INVISIBLE. There are NO dialogs to click, no choices neccessary, which is great for the large majority who will just click through the dialogs anyway. It also detects if you already have it installed and doesn't bother you about those. Oh and it keeps them up to date. Automatic installs of windows patches weren't created for us geeks, it was created for the millions of users who don't know what a windows patch is and why it's needed.

Google isn't the one that needs to get a clue, we are. As a software engineer, I have a lot of respect for large companies who make software that just bloody works (for the common user).

Bravo google. And thank you.

Let's see...

[CharonX]

Google Earth is more of a "fun" program. Nice to toy around once in a while, but nothing I have always installed.
Picasa is nifty. A free image editor is always nice.
Google Pack Screensaver Don't really care about that one. I usually blank my screen.
Google Desktop I don't use since I have "order in my chaos"(tm) and don't really like to things hooked into everything.
Google Toolbar for Internet Explorer will be a godsend for all IE unsers, but I don't need it since I do Firefox.

Mozilla Firefox with Google Toolbar guess this will make Firefox's markedshare do another jump.
Norton Antivirus 2005 Special Edition - personally I use AntiVirus Personal Editon, its free and quite good, but if I think about all the PCs without any up-to-date protection out there its a real godsend.
Ad-Aware SE Personal 4236 programs found? If you have used IE, not used a virusscanner and/or have a "shiny, let's click it" PC user this thing will cleanse your system. Otherwise once every 3 months is sufficient.
Adobe Reader 7 A no-brainer, one of the most portable formats around (let's see how Open Document spreads), .doc eat your heart out.

Re:Let's see...

[damiam]

They have different goals. Picasa is an organization program (similar to iPhoto); it doesn't aim to be Photoshop.

There's a reason this is XP only

[linuxci]

There's a reason this is XP only and that is because it's designed for people to help out their less computer literate relatives who have just purchased a computer and give them a way to download most of the important 'essentials' and keep them up to date farily easily.

People who use Linux are not their target, Linux distributions come with all the apps you could need and very few newbies would likely have the option to buy a Linux system.

For them it's almost always WinXP forced down their throats unless they notice these Mac things in the store they bought their iPod - and there's no need for this pack on the mac either - the Mac already comes with a modern web browser, a decent desktop search (since Tiger), the iLife apps for photos, etc.

There's two things wrong with the Google offering and that's all I could see - one is the choice of anti-virus (only free for a limited time and not the most trustworthy name around) and the central updater duplicates the roles that the Firefox and Adobe updaters perform. They should have disabled the individual updates if they were going for a central solution.

What a letdown.

[blkros]

This is supposed to be a "great" announcement? That's it? A bundle of software that's available anywhere? And none free/libre? and Norton isn't free since you have to pay for updates after 6 months (just like any other OEM installation). Why not choose AVG, which has free updates, on it's personal version, forever?

Bet their stock pricer just went down. ...and all of it only works on XP? No wonder Bill Gates dismissed them out of hand at CES.

Re:What a letdown.

[bwy]

Yeah, I can't believe this even made the news. For me, a new product or service is newsworthy. Some marketing/advertising/other scheme means nothing. I can't think of a single time that I've cared when someone cross selling something or coming out with a new advertisment or rebundling stuff that already exists.

Google shouldn't have a free ticket here. Their stock is high and they've done some good stuff, but that doesn't mean the whole world cares when they take a shit and something like Google Pack drops into the toilet.

Free virus checkers

[AC-x]

Going a bit of topic here but what's peoples opinions of AntiVir? Seems fine myself but everyone else seems to use AVG

Re:Free virus checkers

[Nagus]

I've switched a PC in my family from Antivir to AVG, and am now recommending AVG to anyone that asks.

The first reason is that Antivir has a relatively complicated update method for novice users. When it updates the antivirus database (ie. on startup), it sometimes likes to pop up a window with ads for the commercial version or with user surveys. This scares novice users who don't know what to click, and who then promptly call me for support. However that problem gets much worse when an update of Antivir itself is made - because then it just downloads a Setup.exe and starts it. This leaves the confused user (who has never seen an installer before) in front of a (maximized) InstallShield wizard, wondering how to "get back on the Internets". And quite frankly, even I find that installer a bit confusing.

AVG is much better in this regard: on startup, it checks for updates (to either program or antivirus database). If it finds any, it shows a progress bar while downloading and installing them. Then it shows an "Update Complete" dialog, which will vanish automatically after 30 seconds (unless you click it away before that timeout). Not a single click is required, ever.

The second reason I prefer AVG is that AVG's updates are much faster than Antivir's. Either Antivir has really slow servers, or AVG's updates are drastically smaller. I've had Antivir's update downloader timeout on me, but never AVG's.

To conclude: AVG is hasslefree, which is an essential property if you have to support friend's or family member's PCs.

Why "XP Only"?

[Chelloveck]

System Requirements
- Windows XP

I think there is a disconnect somewhere... ;-)

This is a bad trend. All of the software (with the possible exception of Norton AV, which I've never used) runs just fine on Win2k. Why the XP restriction? This is twice in one week I've run up against an arbitrary won't-install-on-2000 roadblock. (The first was trying to install Age of Empires III, which actually runs just fine on 2000 if you can manage to trick the installer.) It looks like the days of Win2k are numbered, not because it can't run the software but simply because the software refuses to install. I really hate artificial limitations.

Re:Why "XP Only"?

[Echnin]

Wow, it's 2006 now... Heh, that's kinda funny. You're probably aware, but XP did actually come out nearly 5 years ago. Funny how time passes, huh?

Re:Why "XP Only"?

[lukewarmfusion]

"Mainstream Support" was end-of-lifed on 6/30/2005. Now it's one thing to make software that only works with a newer version of an OS, but it's another to put artificial blocks on compatibility.

As a web developer, I don't support older browsers. I do, however, let them load up my sites in whatever they like. As long as users realize that they may not be seeing the same thing or interacting in the same way, they're free to use Netscape 4 or whatever they like.

So if the Age of Empires developers decided that Win2K was a drastic minority with no mainstream support from MS, I can understand them not testing and support their product on 2000. But if the product works fine and users want to try it (unsupported) then they should let 'em do it.

I made the mistake - once - of forcing visitors to my site to use a specific browser. I did a browser detection and showed them a message requiring that they upgrade their browser in order to use the site. The problem with this is that the site worked fine in a lot of browsers that I was too lazy or ignorant to test or support. Eventually I learned the term "gracefully degrade."

Re:Why "XP Only"?

[westlake]

Why the XP restriction?

XP has 73% of the market. Up about 1% a month. W2K 15%. Down about 1% a month.

Mac and Linux 3%. Up 1% since 2003. Linux remaining pretty much where it was in July 20004.OS Platform Stats This is how the world looks to a developer. I'll leave it to your imagination to consider W2K's place in the home market.

Re:Why "XP Only"?

[slavemowgli]

Welcome to the world of closed-source software, vendor interests and monopolies...

forgetting something?

[know1]

"Any respectable /. user should have most of this suite installed already (excluding a few things)"
well i installed nothing from it as i'm on of the "respectable /. user(s)" running linux on my main box. Seriously google, port some of this amazing software to the operating system that gave so much to you on the back end while you were starting up - all for free

Re:forgetting something?

[Junta]

Sounds all nice and good, but when you stop to think about it, they weren't helped so much by the desktop aspects of linux, but server side aspects. In that line of reasoning, how much testing, bug reports, and fixes have they provided back to the kernel and relevant untilities to them? I honestly have no idea, but the areas in which Google would be 'paying back' their benefit of linux is in places very mundane and boring to the linux desktop market, and therefore for a great deal of users so low profile as to appear ungrateful despite efforts they may be making to really bolster the enterprise-capable aspects of Linux.

My bet is that they have made significant QA and development contributions back, simply because any large scale user of any technology contributes QA back, and if an open technology and they have technical skills available, they will be impatient enough to make progress in fixing it themselves.

All this aside, if nothing else consider the marketing leverage Google provides by advocates being able to point at google as a successful extremely large deployment of Linux. Not so significant nowadays since Linux is taken seriously, but when Google first started deploying with Linux, a great deal of the market still considered it unproven, and moves like Google's served to help convince skeptical would-be users that there is value and maturity in the Linux platform.

Re:"Free"

[narooze]

Well, it's not far from the product you get when paying: If you pay for NAV the update subscription still expires, only after 12 months instead.

Why Norton?!

[Aminion]

Why the heck did Google select the resource hog Norton? Norton is by far the most annoying and disfunctional AV on the market. I would have prefered NOD 32 or Kaspersky. They do their job very well and are resource efficient.

ClamWin

[Anonymous Coward]

For their XP userbase, they should have included ClamWin instead.

But, ClamWin is unlikely to pay Google for distribution like Symantec.
Ditto with Spybot vis-a-vis LavaSoft.
Et PDFCreator v. Adobe.

Re:ClamWin

[bamf]

PDFCreator isn't really a suitable replacement for Acrobat Reader is it? But why let that spoil your argument.

In addition ClamWin doesn't actually have an on-access virus scanner which makes it somewhat suboptimal.

Re:ClamWin

[Drakonite]

Et PDFCreator v. Adobe.

They said Adobe Reader, which last I checked was completely free and does a better job rendering than any open source PDF program does. Don't get me wrong, it has enough issues I typically use xpdf or other programs, but I still keep a copy of Acrobat Reader around because certain things just don't render correctly in anything else.

...and I don't know what you are smoking with ClamWin.. I'd recommend AVG over ClamWin any day, since ClamWin doesn't seem capable of automatically scanning files before letting the user run them (which lets face it, is the only way 99% of people will have a chance of knowing there is a virus before running it a dozen times over)

Re:ClamWin

[bamf]

Who says Adobe are paying Google to distribute it?

It's freely available software anyway, I suspect you can even find copies of it bundled with your breakfast cereal.

Re:ClamWin

[jawz101]

AV-ClamWin, Watchdog (works in conjunctions w/ ClamWin, Foxit PDFreader. But in the scheme of things this is really just a reaction to Microsoft's http://ideas.live.com/ Take a look. The OneCare app is an inbound/outbound firewall to replace the built in xp inbound firewall/virus scanner, etc. The http://start.com/ - the testing site and http://live.com/ - their production site even started using Gadgets http://microsoftgadgets.com/, just as Yahoo bought Konfabulator http://widgets.yahoo.com/ & has widgets now. Google just made some more API's available and brought out Google modules http://www.google.com/ig/directory Microsoft is working on a new messenger program, a primitive mapping program (that they've had for a long time), the whole live site is basic white even. Every one is getting the minimalist sites and all-in-one package deals. If you check the big browsers they are all competing for a desktop/browser setup. Personnally, I don't like when my browsers take their crap onto my desktop and make apps out of them. Anything that indexes my desktop seems like a security risk and a definite performance hog. If I wanted gadgets/widgets/modules... well I don't. And I really don't need a toolbar. I'm not surprised this was Google's next step but I try not to download the stuff I don't need. I'm a Windows OS fan but *nix ported apps are the best in my mind.

Re:ClamWin

[jonnythan]

From the Google Blog:

"We worked with a number of technology companies to identify products that are the best of their type to create this suite. (We didn't pay them, and they aren't paying us.)"

Google Philosophy

[ignavusincognitus]

2. It's best to do one thing really, really well.

This is a quote from the official "Google Philosophy" page. Oh well.

2. It's best to do one thing really, really well.

Google does search. With one of the world's largest research groups focused exclusively on solving search problems, we know what we do well, and how we could do it better. Through continued iteration on difficult problems, we've been able to solve complex issues and provide continuous improvements to a service already considered the best on the web at making finding information a fast and seamless experience for millions of users. Our dedication to improving search has also allowed us to apply what we've learned to new products, including Gmail, Google Desktop, and Google Maps. As we continue to build new products* while making search better, our hope is to bring the power of search to previously unexplored areas, and to help users access and use even more of the ever-expanding information in their lives.

since when does Google Earth run on linux ?

[Ernest]

Any respectable /. user should have most of this suite installed already
Who is that guy writing about ?
Any respectable /. user I know would run only Open Source Software
and would have nothing to do with anything needing a virus checker.

Re:since when does Google Earth run on linux ?

[Ekarderif]

Only FLOSS? Okay, mini-RMS...

Any respectable /. user would use software because it's better, not because it's FLOSS. Those two happen to coincide on many things (Firefox, Linux, BSD, TeX, Ogg), but it also fails in many departments (OOo, XWS). Just because you tack on a political agenda doesn't make people support you. In fact, it tends to do the exact opposite.

Respectable

[MS_is_the_best]

Any respectable /. user should have most of this suite installed already (excluding a few things)

dpkg-query -S norton
dpkg: *norton* not found.

Guess I am not respectable ;-).

Re:Amazed they have included Adobe Reader

[Zebra1024]

Adobe reader V7 is fine if you can wait the 20 minutes for it to start up. I also switched to Foxit reader which starts instantly and work fine for most of the PDF documents I read. There are some PDFs the Foxit does not format correctly and I have to go back to the Acrobat. Foxit saves me a ton of time especially when you click on a PDF link by accident.

Re:Avast... arrrrr

[thelost]

I also use avast and have had it filter out many a virus; I chuck it an orange now and then to prevent scurvy and it seems happy. arrrrrr

Good Work Google

[l33tlamer]

From http://pack.google.com/, this seems to be true AFAIK for many PC users:

- Essential: Enjoy safe, useful software for your computer
- Simple: Download and install everything in just a few clicks
- Customizable: Choose only the software you want
- Up to date: Get updates and new software via Google Updater

For the average user, who generally uses Windows, this is pretty sweet. No fuss, easy to use pack of "tools" that are easy to use and keep up-do-date. Sure, one can argue about having non-open source software in the pack, choice of Anti-virus software and so on. But, to the average PC user, all he or she cares about is having easy to use, maintainable software.

Instructions for Annoyed Downloads

[Gamzarme]

Below is a proceedure that will change you life...

1. Click link in article.
2. Below the huge button that says DOWNLOAD GOOGLE PACK there is another link that takes you to a page
3. Use this page to customize your download and use the following: (if you don't already have them..)
4. 
   
   • Google Earth
   • Picasa
   • Google Pack Screensaver
   • Google Desktop
   • Google Toolbar
   • Google Talk
   • Firefox
   • Ad-Aware
   • Adobe Reader
   • and Trillian (and get rid of those other three IM clients!!)
   
   
5. Click the Download Button!!

Foxit

[El_Muerte_TDS]

You can keep your Adobe (Acrobat) Reader. Way to heavy.
I've been using Foxit Reader for a while now and it just works and it is fast.

Besides... the name is just great with one of the other tools in the Google pack: Firefox and Foxit ;)
Now we just needs a Foxbar, Deskfox, Fox-aware, Foxasa, Anti-fox (hmm, that doesn't sound good), Planetfox, Foxsaver.

Re:Foxit

[IamTheRealMike]

Hell yes, I'll take the opportunity to pimp Foxit reader too. Great, great software.

The nice thing about Foxit (apart from the instant rendering and startup) is that they went out of their way to make it look identical to the regular Adobe Reader. There is even a little advert bar that amusingly can be switched off in the view menu.

The company behind it make a PDF rendering component for Windows, which I guess is how they make money. The basic version of Foxit is free (but not libre).

Re:"Free"

[drsquare]

So you're saying you have to pay for the six month trial? That's the only way it couldn't be counted as free, and the only way your post would make any sense whatsoever.

Anyone can play this game.

[ettlz]

OK, let's see... if I were running XP, I'd install ettlz's Essentials:

Network

• Mozilla Firefox
• Mozilla Thunderbird
• SSH.com's SSH client
• Gaim

Doing Work

• OpenOffice.org
• The GIMP
• Inkscape

Utilities

• 7-zip
• jEdit

Multimedia

• Winamp
• CDex
• aoTuV Vorbis encoder
• Audacity

Security

• ClamAV ClamWin
• Spybot Search & Destroy
• Lavasoft AdAware
• Stern note about limited privilege accounts

Re:Anyone can play this game.

[wfberg]

You missed some!

Network

putty for SSH (even commandline SCP which rules), wget for sucking down the web, opera if you don't like firefox, and some form of bittorrent client, like bitcomet.

Utilities

gvim, unxutils or in a pinch some downloads from the gnuwin32 tools, tools from SysInternals.

Multimedia

Don't forget Mediaplayer classic (MPC) which by happy coincedence is included in the k-lite mega codec pack (from codecpack.nl).

Security

grisoft AV, tools from SysInternals.

Re:Anyone can play this game.

[hkmwbz]

Regarding BitTorrent, Opera is supposed to support that in the next version. Or you could get the smaller, faster uTorrent, which is far better than BitComet in my opinion

Hmmmmm...

[Mister Mudge]

I notice there's no Mozilla Thunderbird in the Pack.

Google wouldn't want to cut in on their own GMail market, ehh?

code.google.com

[diegocgteleline.es]

http://code.google.com/

Re:code.google.com

[idonthack]

...the value they get from OSS is far more than anything they contribute.

And how do you expect it to be any different? You can't survive as a buisness if your policy is to give away more than you recieve.

It seems to me that you've forgotten what OSS is about. It is free, and written to be useful to everyone, not as a means to make other people write code for you. Google is taking advantage of this the way it's expected to.

Think of how normal people use OSS. I myself have a full operating system with an awesome desktop environment, and I use software that's the best of the best. But have I written a full window manager with a widget system, a web browser, an instant messaging client, a first-person shooter, and countless other apps to contribute back? No, I've made a small bugfix to the Greasemonkey script I use for my signatures and a small hack to better integrate a plugin in a content management system. Once I wrote a breakout clone in Java that nobody wanted. That's about it, and it's okay, because that little bit still adds to the whole. I think Google's contributions are more than equivilant.

---
What subliminal message?
Generated by SlashdotRndSig via GreaseMonkey

Re:code.google.com

[TheRaven64]

it seems like the value they get from OSS is far more than anything they contribute

That's the entire point of OSS. Everyone contributes a small amount, and benefits from everyone else's contribution. The only way it could be the other way around would be if you were the sole / primary contributor to every single piece of OSS you use - and no one is in this situation.

google giving?

[notanotheridiot]

what about google summer of code?

Speaking as a Computer Science student with many friends who took part in Summer of Code, I think that they really did give something to Open Source - although admittedly it was, financially, absolute peanuts to google.

Actually, i think this is a huge step forward - google as a company is hugely trusted: if google promotes firefox like this, then it can only be a good thing. Maybe this will be the final push needed to make firefox the de-facto mainstream browser!

huh?

[epicstruggle]

should have most of this suite installed already (excluding a few things) Thanks for defining most for us.

Picasa = iPhoto

[MBCook]

Picasa IS NOT AN IMAGE EDITOR.

I have seen this before, and I have NO IDEA where people get that from. Picasa is a photo collection program. It lets you make small edits (crops, reduce red-eye, color balance, etc) but it is not an image editor. It is designed to help your organize your photos and find them easily.

It is the best program I have seen for that purpose on Windows. It really is great. And free too (back when it cost money, Wolf Camera would give it out on photo-cds you got back with your pictures; then Google bought it an made it free for everyone).

The only program I like more for that purpose is iPhoto, but that isn't available for Windows (obviously).

Re:Try running a W2K3 game machine

[Anonymous Coward]

Your a tool.

Pure stupidity. Everyone knows that MS recycles its code endlessly and that with XP they in fact made a deliberate merging of the NT and 9X code bases. Or put another way. There is no real difference between the current windows desktop OS'es. The current wmf shitfest showed that clearly.

This line just goes to show that you have no idea of the history of Windows 9x and NT.

FYI: Windows NT 3.5.1 used a GUI that was somwewhat similar to Windows 3.1. Windows NT 4.0 used a GUI that was VERY similar to Windows 95. Windows 2000 (NT 5.0) continued to use the same GUI. Now, the differences between Windows NT Professional and Server for both v4 and 2000 were minimal. It was a handful of registry changes. Windows 2000 was also the first version that had decent game support and, I felt, a replacement for Win98SE. Windows XP does NOT reuse code from the Win9x line. What happened was a suggested/forced recommendation to game companies to use the Direct X for everything.

Fisher Price aspects of XP

BTW, you can turn off the candy-ass aspects pretty darn easy if you know how to use prefrences. Think something along the lines of 'Classic'.

Re:"Free"

[melvin xavier]

Well....the funny thing is, if you set back your calendar in 6 months when Norton gives you a friendly reminder it's about to expire, you can extend the life of its 'trial period' indefinately. I've tried this before with success. If it doesn't bug you to have the calendar off, it can be a handy tool to not have to pay for stuff.

Re:They're considering Mac, not caring about *nix

[TellarHK]

Why -should- they care about *nix? After looking at this crowd and the rather snarky reaction from most of the higher-rated posters, they'd wind up spending a year of manpower creating 20 different packages for 40 different *nix distributions, of the 3 applications in the pack that most *nix people don't get already. And then, they'd get bitched at ad-infinitum by the same snarky bastards here, because the package formats wouldn't include ".formatIcameupwithwhilereallystonedandcompilingGe ntoo".

There are several reasons why it makes sense for Google not to bow to the Open Source movement and users, first and foremost being that people who use *nix don't need this level of ease. Second of which, being that they've tried to appeal to this crowd by offering the least evil solution in most markets they enter into. But thirdly, it's because Open Source zealots are a bunch of backstabbing pricks that don't recognize a good thing when it's handed to them or their loved ones that -don't- run free-as-in-speech everything.

Fortunately, Google -is- working on Mac support where it's relevant. They should get credit for that much, rather than attacked and derided for not supporting an Operating System that can't get its shit together even to agree on a standard way of installing software.

I run Debian on headless servers, but after trying to install various flavors of *nix on my P2-366 Toughbook, determined that none of the distributions will handle such a low-spec system as well as even -XP- does. Quit whining about Google and fix that crap.

One more Anti-Norton post

[Sebastopol]

Yes, this is redundant, but I just want to help make the chorus louder:

NORTON SUCKS.

January of last year I set up a test platform and installed all of the AV programs recommended by the microsoft link page (you know, the page it sends you to when you install XP without AV software)?

Panda, McAfee, Norton, F-Secure, and two others. They all sucked except F-Secure. It just sits there and quietly does its job -- No bullshit menus or intrusions or dialogs that won't go away. (Hell, Panda even put an icon on my xp LOGIN screen that wouldn't go away after de-install).

I think this is one of those cases when redundancy is essential.

Re:Try running a W2K3 game machine

[c_forq]

It offered no real improvement at the time

Better RAM management was worth it alone. Every windows 9x machine I had would eventually eat all it RAM and force a reboot if it wasn't rebooted regularly. Windows XP I've been able to leave on for weeks and it mangages RAM much better. (Pro version, not Home).

Re:Try running a W2K3 game machine

[Erik Hollensbe]

All this seems to be missing is your current machine specs and a little l33t5p34k.

Lie much?

[AndreyF]

everything they put out is proprietary

really