Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

An Early Look at Freespire Linux

Posted by ryuzaki0 on from the lime-in-the-coconut dept.

An anonymous reader writes "DesktopLinux.com takes an early look at Freespire Linux in a recent article. Linspire will be releasing their first version of Freespire, the first community Linux distribution to include many third-party proprietary codecs, drivers, and software. From the article: 'While I still have my doubts about the long-term wisdom of using proprietary software and drivers with Linux, I must say that if you feel you need to use such programs, Freespire makes it much easier than any other Linux distribution. And, when is all said and done, that's really what Freespire is all about -- making Linux as easy as possible for users.'"

9 of 171 comments (clear)

  1. It's about time... by Geldon · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Linspire has had some pretty good ideas when it comes to making Linux easy for the Windows user. But since it has not been free, I have been reluctent to recommend it to friends. I would like to see how this turns out...

  2. Odd name by Winckle · · Score: 3, Insightful

    For a linux distro that contains software which is not "free"

    1. Re:Odd name by QuantumFTL · · Score: 3, Insightful

      It is the perhaps unfortunate nature of the english language that two, entirely separate concepts are both given the same name - free. The target audience of this distribution does not care about source code or software politics. They want a tool that they can use to get work done, and they want it on the cheap. For them, the name Freespire is good, as the point of the distribution is that it does not cost money. Whether or not it is Stallman approved means less to them than if it is "kid tested and mother approved."

  3. More Bubbly by neonprimetime · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Is it just me, or do Linux Desktops seem to be following the Windows trend? They seem to be getting more bubbly. Take me back to the days of BlackBox

    1. Re:More Bubbly by BecomingLumberg · · Score: 5, Insightful
      I agree Linux is going that way, but familiarity and 'good' looks are the only way to start converting the non-geeks. And there are plenty of nuts and bolts distros.

      Eye candy is very appealing to the mainstream user, and will help A LOT to increase Linux's usage and familiarity.

      --
      If a nation expects to be ignorant and free, in a state of civilization, it expects what never was and never will be.-TJ
    2. Re:More Bubbly by B11 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I don't know about you, but it's nice to have a system that isn't ugly. Of course, the first thing I did when I installed ubuntu was change the theme and get rid of the brown. Seriously, who thought that was a good idea? Of course now, it's sort of their claim to fame, and they can't change it now, but I wonder how many "regular" users are put off by unbuntu altogether, right off the bat?

      --
      insert inflammatory anti-microsoft comment here
  4. Re:nice quip by aixou · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Nice quip, served you well.

    You appear to be misinformed however. Freespire will be released in two distinct versions:

    One containing entirely free software, and one containing proprietary codecs (paid for and licensed by Linspire).
    The user gets to choose which he uses.

    Hence the "Free" -- freedom of choice to opt into one of two free (as in beer) choices: a completely free (as in speech and beer) version, and a free (just as in beer) version.
    Seems pretty free to me.

    Any questions?

  5. Re: just one little thing by aixou · · Score: 3, Insightful

    One eensy weensy little detail distinguishes Freespire from EasyUbuntu:

    legality.

    Freespire uses fully licensed codecs (paid for by Linspire), whereas EasyUbuntu takes the gray area route of not using fully legal stuff.

    Since Linspire is footing the bill for the codecs, I think we can all see which choice is both more practical for the user and more ethical.

  6. Re:Kickstart by Almahtar · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Much of the concern over the use of proprietary material is that it'll eventually be relied-upon with no alternative. If that happens and then the owner of the proprietary software has a change of heart or goes belly up, there are problems. For example: if everyone uses ATI's fglrx drivers, there's no need for the open source ones. If ATI goes out of business, everyone's using this huge black box to power their ATI cards. Bug fixes would have to be in the form of unofficial binary hacks, and new feature implementation is next to impossible. By not using any non-free (as in speech) components, such a calamity can be avoided.