Now in English: VALO-CD Open Source Software Collection

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Now in English: VALO-CD Open Source Software Collection

Posted by timothy on Friday March 2, 2012 @10:07PM from the so-put-down-that-translator-gun dept.

spuguli writes "VALO-CD is an open source software collection similar to The Open CD. Version 8 is now available in English. The open source collection has been available in Finnish for several years, but now it has been translated into English and is available internationally as well. The collection contains pretty much everything a typical end user would need: LibreOffice, Inkscape, Firefox, Audacity and many other programs. The main goal is to increase knowledge about open source software. The programs are for Windows since most Linux distributions already contain most of the programs, and Linux users obviously are already aware of open source. The CD is developed collaboratively in a wiki. It is freely available as a torrent download."

41 comments

Min score:

Reason:

Sort:

Do we need another one? by stoneforger · 2012-03-02 22:23 · Score: 0

That would be news if there distrowatch wasn't around. Maybe.
1. Re:Do we need another one? by sourcerror · 2012-03-02 22:26 · Score: 3, Informative
  
  These aren't Linux distros. They're collections of Windows versions of opensource applications.
2. Re:Do we need another one? by Pax681 · 2012-03-02 22:33 · Score: 1
  
  it's all fair and well not reading TFA but you never even read TFS FFS :P
  if you had you would not have just came out the gate a tad early
3. Re:Do we need another one? by stoneforger · 2012-03-02 23:39 · Score: 0
  
  True, but let me rectify: What kind of open source software other than perhaps LibreOffice or gimp would most people be unacquainted with already? If it's academic,research,engineering,or development software they've pretty much looked into it. Most users just need an office suite, a browser, and a media player. That means stuff like LibreOffice, Firefox, VLC. If someone doesn't like the software he's using already, or he's having license or price issues, he can just use Google. That's stuff that was meaningful in the 90s. And if the person in question hasn't heard of open source, why or how will he get to download this thing? It's one thing spreading the word, and quite another posting about something like this on a site like Slashdot. I mean, why is it news-worthy, in Slashdot of all places?
4. Re:Do we need another one? by cupantae · 2012-03-03 02:43 · Score: 2
  
  What kind of open source software other than perhaps LibreOffice or gimp would most people be unacquainted with already?
  All of it. I would say that about half of computer users barely know what programmes they're using. They just recognise the icons they need to double-click to do what they want (e.g. "need to open the internet" => double-click the blue "e")
  
  It's one thing spreading the word, and quite another posting about something like this on a site like Slashdot.
  A fair point. I imagine the point in this is that people will be able to get the less computer-savvy to install such programmes, without getting them to just download and install it. A lot of people would still associate quality software with installation from a disc. A lot of people fear every installer downloaded from the internet, with good reason. Seriously, most people are not capable of deciding what software to use and setting up their system as such. But the software these people use greatly affects us all.
  However, I personally have long since stopped trying to influence other people's habits. Make one suggestion and you become responsible for all the consequences.
  
  --
  --
True, it's not a distro, but... by IANAAC · 2012-03-02 22:30 · Score: 2

It brings up the question:
How is this better than what's already out there with Open CD, for example?
Maybe "better" isn't the correct word. What does this offer that another open source compilation doesn't already offer? More up-to-date programs?
1. Re:True, it's not a distro, but... by smi.james.th · 2012-03-02 22:46 · Score: 4, Informative
  
  Well for one thing, the Open CD was discontinued in 2007. A more up-to-date collection of free software would be useful for advocates distributing to their friends.
  
  --
  One thing I know, and that is that I am ignorant...
2. Re:True, it's not a distro, but... by Anonymous Coward · 2012-03-02 23:03 · Score: 1
  
  For one, it have manuals. I don't know if they are useful but they are there on the disc.
  And isn't Open CD dead as a dodo anyway? VALO-cd is obviously more up-to-date and going to get new releases in the future.
This reminds me by mvar · 2012-03-02 22:33 · Score: 1

of the nightowl collection cdroms with bbs stuff. Waaaaay more awesome than "firefox" and "libreoffice". Meh!
The Open CD is no longer maintained by Anonymous Coward · 2012-03-02 22:44 · Score: 0

The Open CD project is no longer maintained, and has been succeeded by the The Open Disk effort. Highly recommended.
1. Re:The Open CD is no longer maintained by fph+il+quozientatore · 2012-03-02 23:08 · Score: 3, Informative
  
  The latest version includes Firefox 6.0.1. 'Nuff said...
  
  --
  My first program:
  Hell Segmentation fault
2. Re:The Open CD is no longer maintained by Anonymous Coward · 2012-03-03 00:29 · Score: 0
  
  and what about the OpenDisc, the official fork/continuation of the project?
3. Re:The Open CD is no longer maintained by fph+il+quozientatore · 2012-03-03 01:31 · Score: 1
  
  and what about the OpenDisc, the official fork/continuation of the project?
  Yes, it's exactly what I was writing about. The OpenDisc includes Firefox 6.0.1. Sorry, probably I should've added a quote for context, but I did not imagine my post would end up with more upvotes than the parent.
  
  --
  My first program:
  Hell Segmentation fault
4. Re:The Open CD is no longer maintained by Anonymous Coward · 2012-03-03 01:37 · Score: 0
  
  so those of us that refuses to touch anything after 3.6.x should stay away?
5. Re:The Open CD is no longer maintained by cupantae · 2012-03-03 02:45 · Score: 3, Funny
  
  But, given the current Firefox release schedule, that's probably only a few days old.
  
  --
  --
6. Re:The Open CD is no longer maintained by Darinbob · 2012-03-03 11:30 · Score: 1
  
  6.01 is pretty new. And if they wanted a stable release they should have stuck with version 3.6.
7. Re:The Open CD is no longer maintained by Tyrannosaur · 2012-03-03 15:19 · Score: 1
  
  I was gonna say, doesn't that make it current as of about last week?
An OSX alternative in the App store would be cool by Anonymous Coward · 2012-03-02 23:24 · Score: 0

I notice that there are not many open source programs in the Apple App store. For many people, esp. those less technical inclined, this is however a practical way to obtain software. It would be cool to see these programs (when they have an OSX variant) in the App store as free downloads, they would almost certainly be noted and come in the "most downloaded" list - encouraging more downloads.
For the purists, the "about" box of the programs could have a link to a website that has the source code for this who care about that.
I realize that it requires some work, but it would be nice from a user point of view.
As an aside, about the description of the programs on the CD: I think that "alternative for" is wishful thinking. Yes, these are nice programs, but I won't be exchanging Photoshop for Gimp. Gimp is not an alternative, but it is very good competing well with affordable image editing programs.
What Windows users really need... by bmo · 2012-03-02 23:34 · Score: 4, Interesting

... is a repository system of free software.
A CDROM image does not really cut it. Sure, a handful of packages give a taste of what's available, but there's a lot out there that cannot be fit on a CD. And there is no way to keep up with updates except manually.
One of the greatest advantages of many Linux distros is that they have repositories of software that are kept up to date, with just about everything you could ask for in F/OSS.
Windows users are stuck crawling the likes of Tucows and Download.com and the venerable Simtel archive is not even a shadow of its former self (really, have you seen it lately?). Windows users just don't even know how nice it is to open up a software management window and get free/open source software without hassle. Signed packages in a vetted searchable mirrored database really is the way to go.
--
BMO
1. Re:What Windows users really need... by stoneforger · 2012-03-02 23:44 · Score: 0
  
  ..is switch to Linux wherever possible (without Wine). Sorry, GNU/Linux.
2. Re:What Windows users really need... by jones_supa · 2012-03-02 23:48 · Score: 1
  
  Something like this could indeed be created by the community. Maybe something like Ubuntu Software Center. It would also take care of updates of the software (if desired) in the same manner as Windows Update.
3. Re:What Windows users really need... by paugq · 2012-03-03 00:31 · Score: 1
  
  I said that one year ago:
  A wish a day 7: make emerge a generic package manager for Windows
  A wish a day 6: AppStore-like installer for KDE on Windows
  Intel AppUp includes open source software but it's not *only* open source.
  It's sad how open source and Linux distributions failed to capitalize on this appstore-frenzy.
4. Re:What Windows users really need... by buchner.johannes · 2012-03-03 00:48 · Score: 1
  
  There are package managers for Windows, taking the idea from linux package managers. They all suck ... probably because it is difficult to create complex software for Windows that also looks good and is easy to use, then make it easy to install.
  Another trouble is that windows software doesn't come in compressed archives that you can copy somewhere -- MSI is more complicated. And don't get me started on uninstalling.
  
  --
  NB: The message above might reflect my opinion right now, but not necessarily tomorrow or next year.
5. Re:What Windows users really need... by QuasiSteve · 2012-03-03 00:52 · Score: 3, Informative
  
  Microsoft are planning this, more or less.. mostly less, of course, because they're Microsoft.
  That said, one site that I've seen suggested before is:
  http://ninite.com/
  It's not just open source software, and it's not even 100% free-as-in-mythical-free-beer (trial version of MS Office, for example), but it does have a great many open source applications listed and makes installing them and keeping them updated pretty simple.
  It's not a complete set, but it is probably 'enough' for the casual user - and the concept could easily grow to accommodate more applications without losing sight of the fact that having 100 applications that all do the same thing is more confusing than helpful.
6. Re:What Windows users really need... by jones_supa · 2012-03-03 02:34 · Score: 1
  
  And just for completeness, the Filehippo Update Checker also deserves a mention.
7. Re:What Windows users really need... by Anonymous Coward · 2012-03-03 03:20 · Score: 0
  
  who uses tucows and download.com for finding open source? use source forge! are you a decade old post?
8. Re:What Windows users really need... by Anonymous Coward · 2012-03-03 17:34 · Score: 0
  
  Try Allmyapps which is basically a Windows app store. It keeps all your apps up to date and it takes about 5 minutes to get everything installed on a new computer.
9. Re:What Windows users really need... by Anonymous Coward · 2012-03-11 10:36 · Score: 0
  
  http://www.cygwin.com/
  ???
Re:An OSX alternative in the App store would be co by Hognoxious · 2012-03-03 00:14 · Score: 1

Open source programs, whether through malice or incompetence, might display rectangular dialogs with incorrectly rounded corners.
I'm sure we all agree that would be a catastrophe. Apple are 100% correct in applying the principle of "better safe rather than sorry."

--
Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
Re:An OSX alternative in the App store would be co by Anonymous Coward · 2012-03-03 05:05 · Score: 0

Your post is written with tongue firmly planted in cheek, but unfortunately Open Source software is often pretty ugly.
Trinidad & Tobago Computer Society CD / DVD by jdeisenberg · 2012-03-03 06:58 · Score: 2

The Trinidad and Tobago Computer Society Open Source Software for Windows CD (and DVD) seems to have a larger selection than the VALO offering.
Portable Apps by Anonymous Coward · 2012-03-03 07:44 · Score: 0

I don't bother with Windows FLOSS installs anymore. I use portable apps on a USB memory stick; to "install" on a PC I simply copy the whole apps folder to C:
http://portableapps.com/
Fileforum / Re:What Windows users really need... by Anonymous Coward · 2012-03-03 08:18 · Score: 0

This site has good freeware in addition to software under different licenses:
http://fileforum.betanews.com/
"repository system of free software"
Agreed, with all of the money Microsoft squirts towards R&D, with how much money is under their belt, you'd think they would offer a repo with signed freeware software for their customers.
Re:An OSX alternative in the App store would be co by tepples · 2012-03-03 08:28 · Score: 1

You have a good point. So who's willing to donate money to free software projects, with the funds earmarked to bring the software up to the aesthetic guidelines of the platforms on which it is intended to run?
.msi vs. .deb by tepples · 2012-03-03 08:31 · Score: 1

Another trouble is that windows software doesn't come in compressed archives that you can copy somewhere -- MSI is more complicated.
I was under the impression that .deb and .rpm were also more complicated than a tarball. How is MSI more complicated than .deb?
1. Re:.msi vs. .deb by buchner.johannes · 2012-03-03 09:14 · Score: 1
  
  I think in MSI the installation procedure is in the executable, while rpm/deb are tarballs, but you can (optionally) configure a hook to have a script called when copying is done.
  In other words, on windows, the MSI package is in control, while on linux, the package manager is in control.
  
  --
  NB: The message above might reflect my opinion right now, but not necessarily tomorrow or next year.
Re:Fileforum / Re:What Windows users really need.. by bmo · 2012-03-03 09:24 · Score: 1

>you'd think they would offer a repo with signed freeware software for their customers.
They don't even have to provide the actual server space. All they have to do is provide the infrastructure in the OS and it will happen. You'll see mirrors of free Windows software pop up on servers everywhere. It's how the community works.
--
BMO
Re:An OSX alternative in the App store would be co by Darinbob · 2012-03-03 11:37 · Score: 1

Open source software is written to get a job done. Actually most proprietary software is the same way. I see quite a lot of proprietary programs that are pretty ugly while getting the job done and making a lot of money at it.
Re:An OSX alternative in the App store would be co by Anonymous Coward · 2012-03-03 12:42 · Score: 0

I think the job differs though.
The job of Free / Open Source software is to accomplish a task.
The goal of proprietary software is to get bought.
Not that I have anything against making money, just wanted to note the difference.
Does this ISO even work? by cvtan · 2012-03-03 14:27 · Score: 1

I've tried downloading it twice. The CD I burned was not useable and using MagicISO to mount it also failed. ???

--
Sorry, but gray text on gray background is making my eyes bleed.
how are you going to convince by Anonymous Coward · 2012-03-05 06:27 · Score: 0

a windoze user to download anything that doesn't flash the micro$soft emblem? they have good reason to suspect a virus is included at no charge.