Slashdot Mirror
Caldera OpenLinux 2.2 review at Salon
Robert Rwebangira writes "There is a nice review of Caldera OpenLinux 2.2 over at Salon - read the original review.
Bottom line: The easiest Linux to install so far, but there are signs of increasing fragmentation in the Linux distributions. "
I agree I was pretty annoyed when I found out that
rxvt wasn't installed. On the question about not having a graphical install. Use LISA, it is just a text based install program, kinda like redhat's install. I am actually really happy about that because I couldn't get that stupid lizard to recognize my cd-rom, and it would never let me add a module in even when I added the option on the boot for it. I guess its time to get a newer cd-rom drive.
Actually, I picked up caldera because it was cheap. Plus the one I wanted doesn't have the new version out YET. I also thought it would be a challange to see how I could change everything to my liking.
My biggest complaint about OpenLinux is the really crappy documentation. I want to have more tech info and less of those stupid step by step pictures.
Overall it isn't bad. I think it would be good for newbies, kde makes an easy transition from windoze. I actually started with slackware, then redhat, now openlinux, next stop slackware 4.0.
Yeah, I had a 3 hour battle getting my RIVA 128 and "wheel" mouse to work. LIZARD found and configured the card, but I had this mysterious shrinking color palette in X -- after about 2 hours, Netscape was down to about 16 (ugly) colors. This is probably easy to fix if you know where to start, but I didn't, so I ran XF86Config and reconfigured X, and it seems to be working fine.
I also found that neither COL 2.2 or RH 6.0 seem to work with my OEM Intelli-whatever mouse (one of those MS things with the wheel). In both cases the mouse pointer gets stuck in the upper-right corner of the screen, and all kinds of fun stuff happens if you try and move it (I started programs that I've never even seen before). Generic PS/2 seems to work fine, but, alas, with no wheel.
COL's graphical boot messages are cool, but if something unexpected happens, error messages spew across the screen, and 'telinit 3' left me staring at a blank screen with no shell.
Other than the fact that it doesn't work a lot of the time, I was quite impressed over all. If they keep on this thing, the next release could be a winner, and you can't beat the price ($30 at CompUSA, plus a $10 rebate)
TedC
I ran into the same problems with another Distro already installed. It will generally install OK if it is the only Linux Distro on the machine, but if you throw anything else into the mix (besides Win95/98) it will hose after Installation. Besides that it has to be the SLOWEST Linux Distro out there. I know KDE will bog an older machine down a bit, but this distro bogs the machine from boot to shutdown.
Ya, I've noticed problems with the inteli* mice, but never had it start things - it's probly dependant on the window manager being used, because it sends weird clicks...
If you mouse goes of in the top corner, roll the wheel up, and you should get control of it back.
a.
Huh?
If Circuit City is selling Dell and Compaq Linux boxes, Linux will already be installed.
Sounds like it's time for someone to write a Distribution Independent File Locator (DIFL, hm, there must be a better acronym) library for GNOME and KDE. You want to edit XF86Config? Use a DIFL call to find it... I guess each distribution could have a template (RedHat puts it here, Slackware puts it here, OpenLinux puts it here) and so forth.
The various distributors have a vested interest, I'm sure, in providing and maintaining those templates.
Is that obtuse enough for everyone? Sure beats making dozens of soft links.
(chromatic has forgotten his password at work)
Has anyone tried compiling the kernel sources that come on the Caldera 2.2 cd? (They're not installed by default). I tried, and some of the modules (particularly scsi.o) wouldn't compile. So I downloaded 2.2.7 from the net, and it compiled fine, but the graphical boot messages frame-buffer thingie was all screwed up with the new kernel (I enabled frame-buffer support on the kenerl).
Other than that, it seems pretty good, but their init process confuses me -- I'm used to RedHat's.
Come on, COL 2.2 is a step -towards- being more user friendly, remember its a linux just like any other, so any problems you had, you would have had with any of the other distros and probabally moreso. Having started with linux, had you been given 'more control' in the startup sequence you would have probabally botched it up worse then started complaining that it wasnt easy enough.
Also common sense prevailes, if partition magic crashed halfway through surely too goodness you must realise that it didn't work and try again.
When I started using slackware I think I must have reinstalled it a dozen times in my first week, but yet its still my fav distro.
Its the price some people have to pay for 'User Friendlyness' phah
The review asserts that the diversification of GUI environments is a problem for application developers. This is a real issue that ought be addressed. The two main benefits of these environments over standalone apps/guis (straight X, toolkit of choice, whatever) is 1) look & feel and 2) component backbone.
First off, look & feel consistency is overrated. The best GUIs in the world (in my opinion) are games and industrial process control. Both of these are usually application specific look & feels optimized for the task at had. Standardization of look & feel simply aids in the early learning curve and often is an incumberance afterwards. Therefore, being able to use the best toolkit for the joba is preferrable (and is also more in the OS & Linux spirit). Therefore, look & feel consistency is NOT an argument in favor of Gnome, KDE, or whatever.
OK, now component technology. For applications, GUIs in particular), components are an effective way to leverage and connect different applications. Staying CORBA compliant should (in theory, often not in practice) make applications operational in all environments. However, I do have significant reservations about the whole component philosophy and model, but for this small posting I won't go into that.
In conclusion, I do not think it is wise to make applications dependent on GNOME, KDE. I also do not think it is necessary. If an app wants components, stay CORBA compliant. If an app want to look Qt or gtk then fine, but it is preferrable for binary providers to have static versions built in addition to the dynamic ones. In this case the proliferation of GUI/desktop environments should not be a problem.
Static GUI libraries compiled into applications suck. Look at the static Motif NS and StarOffice. No on wants to download an entire toolkit for one app.
I thought the graphical install was an important step in the right direction but OL 2.2:
1) broke my lilo
2) didn't find my video card (and then broke kde when I fixed the X server)
3) and I think that COAS is an alpha version of something that could be worthwhile.
Also, LISA appears to be broken (looks fine but won't let you actually install or remove...)
I'm using OL 2.2, and I'm having no luck installing a custom-built kernel. The caldera init scripts have me utterly baffled... Is there a page out there anywhere or a howto or a pointer on how to actually compile and install a new kernel, and perhaps get rid of the graphical boot messages?
There already is a poweful, fast, stable OS thats easier than Windows, mac, or anything else to set up and use (as well as to develop for BTW), its called BeOS. Its not quite ready for prime time yet, but it is ahead of where Linux was at a similar point in its development.
Linux is a great OS, but it, and some of its supporters, are not user friendly. BeOS for the desktop, Linux for the server!
The "community" seems to be holding up very well. When I check the newsgroups, quite a few of the questions seem to be intelligently answered ... atleast the faqs.
There is a LISA based install on the CD, but you have to know where it is. I've done so many Caldera installs, I've been warned I'll go blind if I don't stop doing that.
.xserverrc.
I was looking for fvwm, not there.
This distro is really messed up. Very little of it was configured right. Wait til you start explaining how to edit
You're right, people will go for the price, have it blow up in their face, and conclude that you get what you pay for.
It isn't going to take long for the rabble to figure out why MS can charge a C note or two, and get it.
No, there is no need to be especially polite to this journalist. One
should be polite to anybody most of the time, but the man is paid
for being a technical journalist. If he doesn't earn respect with a
competent review, he deserves none.
What concerns me is your role in this as the "random software
engineer". I'd think Mr. Leonard would have run the review by
you prior to publication. And, it is your job to clear up some in-
accuracies to avoid making Mr. Leonard look bad.
Do you really think Windows has anything like a foolproof
interface considering the problems with its easily corrpuped
registry or application compatibility with DLL hell, etc? Do you
really think that the Windows level of overall stability and ease
of user considering the need for reiinstalls is somethign to
aim for? In what way is any of that foolproof?
No, I get the feeling that the origin of the FUD is you, Angst
Badger, and that you should know better.
It was a terrible review, and I think you are a shill. Clearly you have
some kind of axe to grind and have not done a very good job
of helping Mr. Leonard write a competent review, and sooner
or later he will realize that he's been played for a fool and seek
better random advice from some other software engineer.
how about we make it modular enough so that it doesn't matter what GUI you choose to run, if you are even using a GUI at all. That way everyone can be happy and won't be forced into using GNOME or KDE or just plain X. I personally don't really like X, but its something I _need_ for playing Quake III and such :) And I'm sure a lot of people wouldn't mind running Netsape and stuff...
-ethan
This would be a cool project... Also, because of the diverse amount of Unix Lovers we've got at Slashdot, we could incorporate elements of the many Linux Distro's as well as the BSD's. I think there are a lot of good idea's that FreeBSD has that I've never seen on Redhat or Slackware such as the preinstalled directory structure of makefiles of ports that downloads the source and finds dependancies, all accessing files via ftp... I'm sure we could expand on that in the Slashdot Distro, as well as many other things.
email me if you feel like discussing thing/flaming me: ethan@enteract.com
-ethan
A mess for me too - check my tale of woe on comp.os.linux.setup/misc titled "Caldera OpenLinux 2.2 Boot fails during modprobe of scsi_hostadapter".
:-{
Still waiting for further response from Caldera "support"
Rory O'Connor - r o o c o n n a t i b m d o t n e t (put 'em
together for my email address)
Um, yeah, most unices are incompatible. How many applications nowadays compile only under linux? I know it's always disappointing for me to download a program and try to compile in on my solaris box to find the source code littered with #include and assuming /dev/cdrom. If I have to make any changes to the source then it's not compatible. Most stuff that shows up on freshmeat isn't compatible.
/etc/fsck. Or only expect 8-bit color depth. There are a thousand assumptions a binary application might make that aren't necessarily valid on any given machine.
Besides, why should I have to compile something just to use it? What if I don't have the right compiler? Source compatibility is the last refuge of unix apologists.
If you can't use a command as simple as mount, you just plain don't need linux.
I can think of plenty of situations where I would use linux but not need mount. In any case, the author didn't say that he couldn't use "mount", only that it was cumbersome. Which it is.
As for binary applications.. erm.. like most other applications, ya, *gasp* type the command and it *gasp* works.
Unless they are dynamically linked against a library you don't have installed. Or are expecting to find
I'm sure your holier-than-thou righteousness makes you feel better but that's about all it's good for.
you can install if you already have ext2 partitions... you just need to select the *advanced* option when it asks you about your disks and then edit the displayed partitions to what they should represent
I have working, miracles of miracles, an actooooal copy of Caldera 2.2, of Comdex heritage.
/dev/cuaX, instead of /dev/ttySX. At least it works. Sometimes. And no, we are not downloading a zillion bytes of KDE 1.1.1.1.1.1 to work around your mistake.
It's a morass of mistakes.
kppp is broken, there's a bugfix/recompile on the users' lists, but no newbie can do it, and besides, there's no source code with the Comdex distro. Cool. Anyway, use the deprecated
The install fails to lay down the boot sector, not on the hard disk or a floppy. It took me 2 minutes with a rescue, but it's a mighty steep learning curve for the newbie.
It's missing a libcrypt.so something or other, so it can't run the newest version of Applix. But hey, that's why the free market will sell us RH.
Star Office needs a media key, nowhere to be found on that neat plastic CD case. Neither Caldera nor Stardiv say it's their responsibility. OK, so tough, if you can't see your way through to it, I won't try it or buy it. You have our email address, you scanned it at Comdex. Maybe Suse can help us, we have one of those CDs, too.
All in all, Caldera has failed in the attention-to-detail department. Pity, 1.1 had so few boo-boos. Better luck next time.
Ugh, why do accidental backs now delete this text box?
:)). Or when you call a tech support line because a card stopped working, "Have you installed any other software since the card's drivers? Yes. Well, we can't guarantee performance then. Reinstall Windows and see if it works." (Happened to me once, the moral of the story, never install anything.)
Ok, here's a little more of the quote from Salon:
The various Linux distributions continue to morph into distinctly different identities. Does this mean that the Linux market is fulfilling the predictions of open-source skeptics by beginning to fragment into incompatibility, just as Unix did efore it?
Obviously, since there is multiple distributions, and they all aren't identical (by definition), nothing is compatible, right? And until we have just one distribution, we can never achieve the utopia that is Windows. That is the only reason Linux exists, right?
Now, to put a distribution in its perspective, one must understand the target audience for it. In OpenLinux 2.2's case, the hard core hacker isn't their target. So there isn't things like rxvt, many console editors, etc. They chose the KDE route and most likely the newer people that try OL will stick with GUI programs for a long time. For optimum performance, you probably don't want to muck with RPMs from other distros, but stick with whatever Caldera puts on their FTP site.
But, after the play around in COAS and what-not for a bit they may want to learn more about the underlying things. Just realize that without proper studying up on what you're doing, you can cause things to get messed up. In a worse case scenario, you'll have to reinstall, though I'd urge you to first research why what you did wreaked havoc. You can usually find a simpler solution (restore a default config file and re-edit or whatever).
This is where the beauty of Linux comes in. If you want to dig deep into just about anything, you can. There is no one company saying, "No! You cannot know what all the keys in the registry do (or any undocumented "feature")! Now go back home and use IE!" (not to point any one company out
Let's face it. The vast majority of the media doesn't care. It's about entertainment, not news. They want hits, viewers, listeners, etc. So they have to do what they can to win people to their medium. I basically gave up on them when a local TV station's teaser for the news was something like, "10 ways your kids will kill themselves with household items. Tune in tonite for part one of our weeklong special." Shocker headlines is what advances a career, not journalism. Their job isn't to hunt down the story, look into allegations, discover the truth, etc. That's all just folklore of days long ago. Now it's just repeating what a "source" told them and ending there.
So here we are. This fringe group, coding in dark basements with piles of Fritos, that doesn't behave like Windows, programs aren't identical to Windows, etc. Until we pack up our bags and work to make Windows perfect (like one of them put it), we will never be well represented in the mass media. And they'll keep churning out this drivel that gets 100,000 hits in it's first day on the 'net and think nothing is wrong...
Every time I hear about the fragmentation of Linux, I start wondering just how hard it would be to partially fix that. I mean, we have the LSB right? But what are we gaining from it? I think the big things than need standardization NOW are file locations and package formats. With Linux seeming to gain popularity, it'd be nice if when you're told to edit "/foo/bar" it's actually there, instead of finding it at "/bar/foo/bar" or something. I realize this is being worked on but what is being DONE?
Packaging is another problem. For those who don't understand or don't want to use source, we have packages, right? But there are tgz, slp, deb and rpm, which is 3 too many. There needs to be a package format drafted (and it's the LINUX package format, NOT the distribution package format) that addresses the shortcomings of current packagers as well as integrating their good features.
Of course, with file locations being the same and all, we'll have no problems with packages from one distribution working with another. Commercial distributors need to think about the good of Linux rather than the good of themselves at this point, even if it does mean boxed programs say "Runs on Linux Standard 1.0" instead of "Runs on Distribution X". We'll all benefit.
I've installed both COL 2.2 and RH 6.0, and it seems to me that they're converging, not fragmenting. COL has LIZARD and RH has GNOME, but other than that they are very similar; both use the 2.2.5 kernel, glibc 2.1, XFree86 3.3.3.1, KDE 1.1, etc. RH has maintained their tradition of shipping a pre-patched kernel, but some things will never change, I guess.
TedC
I think you probably did. I have both COL 2.2 and RH 6.0, and the only significant difference is that RH includes GNOME (which is very nice, BTW).
TedC
oops...damn white spaces didnt come thru...
:P
/system
|-./bin
'-./etc
/users
|-./root
|---./apps (GUI apps)
|---./admin (GUI admin tools)
'-./guest
mayhaps that helps
"There is no spoon" - Neo, The Matrix
so we decide to roll out a distro...will it be KDE or Gnome (if any GUI)? :P THERES a quick way to kill a distro, with 176 thousand flames over what to use and what not to use
"There is no spoon" - Neo, The Matrix
Umm, check your /etc/blah file.
It's not there.
What distro are you on?
Um, BigSlacker7.
Err...
It's going to end up like different flavors of UNIX, all over again. If we at least maintain a standard filesystem (STD?) then we're in some better shape. The kernel is the kernel is the kernel. The apps aren't so relevent - you can put them anywhere - and should be standardized somewhat as well.
Foolproof interface? What are you on? Windows has never provided a 'foolproof interface'. That is why many of us are LINUX USERS to begin with.
/etc/rc*. The same goes for the rest of the configuration files. You can hose Windows just as easily through regedit. The idea that a cluebie could trash their system by futzing with things they have no understanding of is not something limited to Unix.
Windows still aint no Macintosh. Get over it already.
The novice user has no motivation to get anywhere near
The idea that it is, is infact FUD.
A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
You misunderstand. The issue is not whether or not the newbie should be futzing with their configuration but rather whether or not they should be or want to be futzing with /etc/foo.
My rant is not at all a matter of "M$ can't do it so why should we bother".
A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
Simply put: system configuration is functionality orthogonal to an end user desktop, period.
KDE can be used as a tool to deliver an end user interface no more or no less so than curses or libc.
As long as the tasks can get done easily, it really doesn't matter if the interface is rendered as pixels or ANSI characters.
A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
The most recent examples I've used have been from DOS actually. (specifically the sound blaster pro configurator from Creative Labs, DOS5 circa 1993). The UI is just a means to an end to deliver a certain level of functionality to the user. The fact that a particular UI toolkit renders in ANSI rather than pixels does little to really hinder or help functionality.
The application still has to be designed sensibly for the task.
This is no more or less true of Win32 or QT than it is of curses.
So counter-example away. Claiming that it's not worth starting is just a lame excuse to not support your position.
The world does not end and begin with Windows or even WIMP systems in general.
Having started out with AppleDOS and GEM helps makes that more apparent (in my case).
A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
Typos abound. No warranties express or implied. :)
:)
I wonder if Rob will ever implement the ability
for use non-AC's to edit our posts.
Easy answer: None.
No X at all. Make it a server oriented distro.
I found Caldera 2.2 to be missing quite a few things. While it's nice that it's geared towards non-techie/non-linux users, it leaves a lot to be desired for someone who is.
/mbr from a boot floppy to get to my miniscule doze partition to install boot magic.
:)
For example, there's no rxvt, no compress, no uncompress, no pine, no jed/joe/jove/pico.
I guess you're supposed to use vi/emacs/kedit, but frankly vi's no fun and emacs can be slow, and kedit is no good if you're not running X.
The lack of rxvt in inexcusable, IMHO, because no matter how great kvt is, it just doesn't work with the vga font and there's no way to turn of utmp/wtmp logging, so it's no good for bitchx, and if you have 10 of the darn things open, you have 10 logins.
Likewise the lack of compress/uncompress. I know it's not used that much anymore, but it's still handy to have in a base install.
The installation is fairly nice. Since it's geared at desktop users I'm not going to scream to loudly about the fact that there's no non-X based install option. I experienced on hitch with the install, it automagically installs lilo to the MBB instead of the MBR since it comes with Boot Magic. I already had lilo installed, so I had to go back and fdisk
The startup screen is nifty, minimizing what you see on boot, change anything around, recompile your kernel, and you're bound to get a bunch of big red "FAIL"'s next to events though. The Caldera Open Admin System can be confusing, and the apps are not well integrated. They really need a gnome/kde control panel type interface that unites the apps.
I have to mention the price point. It's $29.99 at CompUSA, with a $10.00 mail in rebate. The RedHat box sitting next to it on the shelf is $79.99. Which is a newbie, who doesn't know if he'll stick with linux, more likely to pick up? Probably Caldera. Will Caldera help the newbie stick with Linux? Probably not.
At any rate, I've gone back to my home-burned Linux Mandrake 5.3 (RedHat 5.2 with kde and some updates), with an obscene number of hacks and changes.
Personally, I can't wait for a glibc based slackware.
I Agree! 'When' glibc is in Slack I'm goin'
that way! I just like the stuff. Slackware
is what I learned on ( and am learning), and
I find it easier that RH. Call me sick, most
do, but I keep Slacking.
Absolutely. And first on the list? Recent /. source...
Ok, I am neither a Linux user or a Windows user (I'm an OS/2 user, primarily). I've tried installing Linux in the past, but it usually winds up being taken off my machine because it's just too much of a headache.
I have to say that this time, I think Linux will stay on my machine for at least a little while. Caldera OpenLinux has by far been my most pleasant encounter with Linux to date.
The install process is much, much easier than RH 5.2 -- although it's not without it's problems. I couldn't install OL2.2 on hdc, b/c when I did it wouldn't boot, it couldn't be added to Boot Manager, nothing. I would up having to nuke NT (what a shame) and using that partition on hda as my Linux partition. Then, it worked ok. It took me about a day to figure that out.
Since then, I've had only a few problems. I haven't been able to get my sound card to work (a Crystal TidalWave 128)... yet... and it took me forever to figure out the trick to getting StarOffice to install. I still haven't figured out how to configure my printer.
On the other hand, I find the documentation that Caldera provides to be very good. While the user's manual doesn't go into Linux in-depth, it covers some very important things -- including how to configure a kernel, which I was able to do (hey, not a big deal to most of you, but _trust_ me, what a rush). I was able to install it on my laptop, and for the first time I can use a PCMCIA modem on it. And Caldera's web site has a great knowledge base, I'm very impressed.
I've seen some concerns that people feel Caldera is trying to "dumb down" Linux by making it boot straight to a graphical system. Trust me -- this isn't happening. KDE is an ok desktop (not the Workplace Shell, though!) but it can't do everything. I've already had to delve into the depths of man files and HOWTOs to get everything working.
What Caldera OpenLinux 2.2 _does_ do, however, is give us newbies a "safe" starting point -- a place that looks familiar to us. We'll make tiny little forays into the horrible world of the blinking command prompt, and if it doesn't work we'll retreat to a good solid game of Freecell or Reversi. When we actually do something right in that horrible place, we'll feel more comfortable with it. Sooner or later, we'll be able to edit configuration files with the best of you.
Anyway, it's not a perfect distribution, but it's a pretty good one.
Eviscerati.Org: All Hail the Eviscerati
I installed OpenLinux from the free CD Caldera was passing out at Comdex. It installed easily, and it works great. The problem I did have was when I used COAS to set up my sound card (GUS). COAS let me screw a round with the DMA ports and memory locations until I made the system unbootable. Any way, I reinstalled it and my GUS card worked fine as did Kppp and Word Perfect.
I think that COAS needs a lot of work to get it right, but it on the right track. Newbies need a distro that lets them install fast and get to work.
I use Debian at work, and it is very good too!
I have tried to install OpenLinux 2.2 on my box and I simply quit trying after 3 hours. I have been running Red Hat 5.0/5.1/5.2 and the RH installer always worked without an itch. Here are the problems I encountered: 1) If you try to install on an hard disk that already has ext2 partitions; you are screwed. You will have to use Partition Magic and reallocate all the space to one big primary partition. 2) The Lizard installer detected my vanilla ATAPI Toshiba CD-ROM but when it was time to install the software, I got some message that it didn't find any media to install from. 3) I tried the text-based installer. No Disk Druid to setup the partitions and when I got to configure the mouse, the installer could simply not deal with my Logitech Mouseman. Conclusion, it seems that the folks at Caldera have tested their installer from the perspective of new users that want to install Linux on a drive that shares space with Windows. It seems to work for that configuration. For people that already have some distro of Linux running, I would suggest to stay away from this product. It simply not suitable. Yethi.
-- Give him Head? Be a Beacon?
-- Give him Head? Be a Beacon? :P)
(If you can't figure out how to E-Mail me, Don't.
The novice user has plenty of reasons to modify his/her system configuration, not the least of which are installing new hardware, setting up a dialup ISP account, and adjusting display parameters. The fact of the matter is that a newbie is far more likely to screw things up beyond his ability to repair them under Linux than under Windows when making routine adjustments. By foolproof I don't mean bulletproof; I just mean an interface that any clueless twit can use for reasonably simple tasks. And I don't mean that it should be like Windows or Macintosh. It should be better than either. Substantially.
Saying that a newbie can more easily get into trouble with Linux than with Windows is no more FUD than saying that a newbie can more easily injure himself with a motorcycle than with a tricycle. It's just the way it is. Linux desperately needs training wheels. As far as I can see, there's nothing wrong with that unless, like Windows and Macintosh, it somehow becomes impossible to remove them.
Proud member of the Weirdo-American community.
As it happens, Mr. Leonard did not show me a copy of the review prior to publication. Frankly, I don't have any problem with the review as such. Nothing in it that I can see falls outside the realm of opinions about which honest people can disagree, and it does accurately reflect concerns held by some members of the non-technical user community.
I am well aware of the serious stability problems Windows has; such was my main motivation to adopt Linux for my personal use. In managing a mixed network of Windows, Macintosh, Linux, and AIX boxes, and a userbase of varying technical skill, it has been my observation that Windows (and secondarily MacOS) pose fewer usability problems for inexperienced users than does Linux+KDE. This is particularly true of routine system configuration. The average non-technical business user doesn't mind rebooting and having to seek technical support for the occasional reinstall as much as they mind a system that makes routine operations difficult.
It was a terrible review, and I think you are a shill. Clearly you have some kind of axe to grind...
Baseless personal attacks are always the last resort of the intolerant. If I am a shill, I am a shill for Linux. If I have an axe to grind, it is a thorough hatred for Microsoft and what Microsoft has done to the personal computing industry. Unfortunately, personal integrity forbids me to lie and deny that Linux has some end-user usability problems, or to refuse to acknowledge that Microsoft occasionally does something acceptably well.
The thick-headed dogmatic insistence that Linux is better in all ways than the competition will get Linux just about as far as the same attitude did for the Amiga and the Macintosh. Nothing can be improved until it is recognized as needing improvement.
Proud member of the Weirdo-American community.
The sense I got from my conversations with him was that he was overall positive about Linux, the progress it's making, and its prospects for the future. That perhaps doesn't come out very clearly in this review, but he was quite fair and reasonable and willing to learn in email.
Linux does have some serious shortcomings with respect for the point-and-drool Windows user, and some way to present a foolproof interface to those users will be necessary if we care to capture that market -- and I realize that not all of us do. There are legitimate concerns about fragmentation and incompatibility; the fact that they will probably be resolved in the near-term future doesn't constitute any kind of guarantee. These are things that I worry about, and I'm pretty confident about Linux.
The thing that most struck me about Andrew Leonard was that he seemed reasonable, friendly, and open-minded. I'd say he's probably a good journalist for us to approach -- politely, mind you -- to discuss our opinions about Linux and Open Source. Just bear in mind that the absence of a glowing review is not necessarily a slam, and that criticisms don't necessarily constitute FUD.
Proud member of the Weirdo-American community.
I don't know about everyone else, but software being free isn't as important to me as software that does what it's supposed to do reliably.
You have a good point when you say The problem, says O'Dell, is that there is a "strong tendency for configuration files to become hopelessly corrupted" if users try to use both GUI tools and command-line direct intervention at the same time.
Tools such as linuxconf always have a "shaky" feel to them. Furthermore, other solutions to this problem (AIX, NextStep, Windows) always seem to involve a binary configuration database.
I don't know if any real work is being done in this department, but GUI's such as KDE are always going to be pure eye candy if you can't do any system configuation there.
--
Business. Numbers. Money. People. Computer World.
Simply put: system configuration is functionality orthogonal to an end user desktop, period.
There are so many counter-examples that it's probably not worth even starting. Anyway, the world does not begin and end with standard unix.
--
Business. Numbers. Money. People. Computer World.
Actually I think I misunderstood you and we are actually in agreement. (orthogonal does not equal incompatible).
My original point wasn't that it was difficult with a GUI system (it shouldn't be), just that it's difficult with the stew of text config files in regular unix.)
--
Business. Numbers. Money. People. Computer World.
How many unintelligible requests for help are going to be flooding in when Ciruit City starts selling Dell and Compaq Linux boxes? This will be the true test of the Linux communities resolve as the next generation Linux owner may not be capable of installing their own OS. The door to the real world and its vast hordes is fast opening and if Linux wants the lions share of the market they have to be ready to handle absolute morons.
While in a general sense I like the distro, it is definalty not the one for me. I can't wait to get Redhat 6.0 So i can use both KDE and Gnome on a distro that I am somewhat familar with.
Jesus H _CHRIST_ I'm sick of articles like this. Here's my fave quotes:
fulfilling the predictions of open-source skeptics by beginning to
fragment into incompatibility, just as Unix did before it?
That's right, folks, this whole thing of having to recompile a @$%@!#$%#$ binary means that most unices are incompatable with one another. Also, I'm totally imagining that I have a workstation in front of me displaying programs running on _3_ "incompatable" unices.
no more cumbersome "mount" commands necessary to
access files stored there. I could get Netscape or WordPerfect
running with a minimum of labor. On my machine at work, I
connected via ethernet to the office network on my first attempt. At
home, to my enduring astonishment, I was even able to configure
PPP and connect to the Net -- on my first try.
_whatever_. If you can't use a command as simple as mount, you just plain don't need linux. As for binary applications.. erm.. like most other applications, ya, *gasp* type the command and it *gasp* works.
Ugh. Morons.
i browse at -1 because they're funnier than you are.
Just bear in mind that the absence of a glowing review is not necessarily a slam, and that criticisms don't necessarily constitute FUD.
Welcome! I can tell that you're new to Slashdot. :)
Cheers,
ZicoKnows@hotmail.com
fritos and swedish fish candies, those are my mucking (I don't call what I do hacking) foods of choice.
"I want peace on earth and good will toward men." "We're the U.S. government. We don't do that sort of thing!!"
Lizard, the new install tool by Caldera is nice for a new user just getting started, but if you don't have a supported video card it can be a pain in the a$&. Though COAS is nice, I was able to compile ide-scsi on the fly and burn a cd no problem.
"Imagination is more important than knowledge" -- Albert Einstein
None of the above, only use the source to make our own gui interface!!!!
"Windows 98 Second Edition works and players better than ever." -Microsoft's Home page on Win98SE.
I ate my tag line.
-=Ellis (D)25=-
So, think we could get another server on here just for the project, if we could form the project and get it going.
I have a couple of idea that I haven't seen much of in OS's that I think would be cool to implament.
Who would we get to head the group if we could get the ball rolling?
"Windows 98 Second Edition works and players better than ever." -Microsoft's Home page on Win98SE.
I ate my tag line.
-=Ellis (D)25=-
I thought they were only going to be putting LiNUX on the servers? Becuase the support for the common home user is just not there in the way of software and tollerance.
"Windows 98 Second Edition works and players better than ever." -Microsoft's Home page on Win98SE.
I ate my tag line.
-=Ellis (D)25=-
Well since Darwin is now opening their source, we could use that to help bennifit the distro, that is if we can orginize our resources well.
"Windows 98 Second Edition works and players better than ever." -Microsoft's Home page on Win98SE.
I ate my tag line.
-=Ellis (D)25=-
Hey anyone support this idea?
Give me an email, cisco-kid@cybermail.net
"Windows 98 Second Edition works and players better than ever." -Microsoft's Home page on Win98SE.
I ate my tag line.
-=Ellis (D)25=-
With all the diffrent *nix out there, we could make a linux distro far from the current linux that we see now. No since darwin is opened up, we have another scene to takle. I feel that would could make linux the ultimate OS for average home users, power users, gamers, servers, hard ware hackers, beuwolf stuff, ect. I'll be emailing everyone when I get home that reply in support of this idea. If I can get enough people to actually do something, instead of being lazy like most cracker groups, I will make a home page, probably on xoom.com, unlimited space *giggles*, untill we can get rob to back our idea fully after we get the orginazation of the plans and idea completed.
If you want to jump on the band wagon, just email me at cisco-kid@cybermail.net
I will reply as best I can, but I can't do it from work.... Damned proxy!!
"Windows 98 Second Edition works and players better than ever." -Microsoft's Home page on Win98SE.
I ate my tag line.
-=Ellis (D)25=-
that /. should roll it's own distro. Think about what would come from that. We have freshmeat serving up some great file, some good programmers and a ton of hardware hackers on here. I think we could take the lead in the LiNUX distro race.
"Windows 98 Second Edition works and players better than ever." -Microsoft's Home page on Win98SE.
I ate my tag line.
-=Ellis (D)25=-
You sound like the kind of person who doesn't mind running XF86Setup after installation, if the installation does everything else correctly. Although debian is not like that (it hardly does EVERYTHING correctly), my feeling is that it is the most consistent distribution out there. I have been running it since v 1.3 (though I had it installed for me) and only Debian installs packages correctly, as well as deletes them correctly. Thus there is relatively less pain if you screw up an important package like libc6 and don't want to reinstall every single thing that uses it.
P.S. for all you flamers: Yes, I have used redhat 5.0 5.1 5.2 and 6.0. I also tried Caldera on a friend's computer. Never seen Slackware though and hope never to go into that realm. 8)
I was thinking of how to intentionally fail my drug test... It would make a good memoir story someday.
http://www.salon.com/contact/letters/
aleonard@salon.com
When I wanted to install linux on a friends laptop I decided, I'd go buy the new Redhat disks (I'm a long-time redhat fan). The store I went to only had the 5.2 disks and the Caldera set, so I thought I'd experiment. Well, despite all my efforts, I couldn't get Caldera to work on my friends Thinkpad 560 (needs pcmcia cdrom support.) Eventually I just used my old Redhat disks whihc worked fine. Still in the mood for experimentation I installed Caldera on an old PII I had at home. Here the install went fine, though it seems that if you want to over-install another linux distribution, you need to use their tools (it wasn't happy just writing onto my previous partitions - I had to start their default install, back out of it after it had made the boot sector, then repartion the disk.)
The fact that there are only 4 install options (basically all or nothing) is annoying, as is the fact that it defaults to starting every imaginable service.
There appear to be some problems with adding users through the install GUI, though adding them by hand seemed to go just fine. I haven't done much more playing than that - all in all it seems like a step in the right direction for a mass-appeal linux distribution, but could still be alot better. The lack of support for that Thinkpad was pretty annoying as well.
I just want to make clear that I'm not questioning Mr Leonard's jounalistic ability; his articles on Linux, and geeky things in general, have been suprerb. But in comparison, this one stinks. It begins as a review of a new product, but halfway through the article it becomes apparent that it is really an article on Linux fragmentation, and a poor one at that. I'm not claiming that current GUI configuration tools are good (personally I despise Linuxconf and have had problems with Gnome), but they are better now than when they were nonexistant before. It really isn't an appropriate topic to focus concerns over fragmentation. I'd have no problem with the article if it wasn't attatched to a product review, and if brought attention to more important concerns, such as filesystem layout, library versions, init scripts, etc.
Andrew Leonard's columns are usually pretty good, but this review is borderline FUD. It follows the standard format: loads on the praise to establish warmth and credibility, and then slams Linux with a heavily biased report of negative issues. The issue here is fragmentation and incompatibility. Yet the examples he gives have no specific relevance to Caldera OpenLinux. They are not even specific to different distributions. The entire second half of the review makes the point that KDE and other GUI systems don't work well with each other, or when users tweak config files by hand. But nowhere does he say that he tried an alternate GUI on Caldera or edited a config file directly. This is not a fragmentation issue, because this area is already heavily fragmented, and always has been, because Unix simply does not have a standard configuration format or API, which makes this an application issue, not a distribution issue. What he fails to mention is that GUI configuration standards are actually converging as GNOME and KDE become the standard Linux GUI environments. His agrument is very shallow when you realize things are getting better, not worse. The real fragmentation problems, such as startup script differences and file locations, are mentioned in a single sentence with no examples.
I've found Caldera 2.2 to be exceptionally complete and stable. I've installed it now a couple of dozen times on four different kinds of machines, and have had only minor problems - its DHDPCD even works correctly out-of-the box with RoadRunner, although oddly, the OS complains it uses outdated calls. (Can't help on PPP - who uses that anymore, anyway? :-)) My 7-year-old daughter, who is not computer-savvy (real literacy first, "computer literacy" later), has installed 2.2 twice now on her own. She probably couldn't do that with Windows98, so we've cleared the ease-of-install hurdle.
:-) It is frustrating - I've spent probably 25 hours futzing with sound under Caldera 1.1, 1.2, 2.2, and RedHat 5.0 and 5.2 with three different hardware audio configs (Toshiba Libretto 50J, Dell Latitude CPi, FIC Sahara Databook). I'm still about 0 for 20, despite numerous helpful messages from slashdot users saying I must be a clueless newbie or a complete idiot, since eveything works fine for them. Oh, well - someday I'll be able to listen to MP3s on Linux - I think. If anyone has audio working under Caldera 2.2 with the above hardware, I'd love to hear about it.
StarOffice is a commercial product, so Caldera doesn't give away licenses to it. If you have a real copy of 2.2, the StarOffice key is on a label inside the cover of the Getting Started Guide. And you'll get another CD full of source with the real thing, too, so those are both invalid criticisms.
Caldera does make some assumptions that may be questionable, but they are not completely unreasonable. The biggest problems I see are:
1) You do need to select Custom Partitions/Expert or whatever it is if you already have Linux partitions on the disk. The Use Prepared Partitions option does not work well. There is also no option to do a full surface scan before the install, something I needed on one of my disks.
2) As you mention, if you boot off of the CD, rather than launch the install from windows, Lizard does not properly set up LILO, so on your next boot, it'll get as far as printing "LI" to the screen before hanging. This is not a problem if you use the included BootMagic thing, which I personally think is a pain, but I understand why it's there. This is a real problem if you're trying to build a pure Linux box, since you won't have a Windows partition to launch BootMagic from. If you do use LILO (created either by hand or with LISA), you don't get the graphical boot screens, which is either good or bad depending on your perspective. This whole issue needs some work - it's definitely the most botched area of this distro.
4) Lizard completes all it's hardware checking at install time, and provides no way to re-run/reconfigure at a later time. This makes it quite difficult to get everything working on a laptop that does not have a CD, since you have to install the image on another computer and then transplant the disk. If you do the install on a desktop computer, you'll be missing PCMCIA and other stuff you'll care about and have to add the missing packages by hand. This is admittedly a corner case for any install program, but it would be nice if it worked.
4) Really a KDE problem: Many of the KDE config screens, including the KDE wizard, are not usable from a 640x480 screen (buttons below the edge of the screen, etc.) This is just boneheaded design! While it's not necessary to force everyone into a "6x4" window for config, everything *should* work with no problems from a plain old VGA display. This makes KDE fairly useless on the Libretto unless you use a virtual desktop, which you should never *have* to use.
5) (Not really a Caldera problem.) I have not yet got sound working ever, under any Linux, so I guess it's no worse than all the other distros, but I had hoped for better this time around. I have come to believe that sound with Linux is impossible...
"The future's good and the present is nothing to sneeze at." - Roblimo's last
I got Linux up and running in no time flat---I was able to putz around and run different applications, I was able to get ethernet configured (work LAN)----It just works in this corporate environment. And ya know what?
Thats what Caldera is after. With this---they might get it.
All I needed was a working distro so I could work backwards and figure out how everything works. Now I'm learning to edit my own files---seeing how they work before being changed: It's all good.
Next stop --- Solaris. Thats where the money is, and this is a good tutorial for me.
There's no itch. There just isn't a horde of Linux newbies crying out for the fool_proof GUI interface to Linux. So the software hasn't been created, uhhh, made fool_proof.
When JoeSixPack and family see their neighbors and friends having a superior/appealing/amazing computing experience thanks to Linux, then they'll want it. Then they'll need that fool_proof GUI.
Hey, Slackware is my favorite dist!
Ok, I actually LIKE the command line prompt.
At home I have a quad boot of Windows95, NT, Redhat, and Slackware.
95 is for all those stupid apps that I need to use (for now!).
NT is specific for work related things that I do.
RedHat 5.2 (need to upgrade to 6.0) is for my school. Since I am doing a project for school and want to stay "compatible" with their system.
And I have Slackware for everything else.
It's my prefered OS/Dist.
So those who don't like to hunt and peck. I suggest Slackware!!!!
Steven Rostedt
-- Nevermind
Just for the record... PartitionMagic does not give you both the option to partition AND to delete a partition at the same time. When PM crashed, it thought that the process was complete. So when I booted up Windows again, I DID NOT have the option to re-do the partition. My only option was to delete the partition. I tried that, and since the process was never really completed, it said I had no Linux partition to delete. So I was in a catch-22. My point was that if I hadn't been familiar with fdisk and paritions, I would have been stuck at this point.
You're right, I might very well have been complaining if I had not been able to handle a more difficult install process, but that is not relevant. I realize that user-friendliness and user-control both have their ups and downs... I only wanted to give my impression as a new user.
--"A man's Palm is his best friend."
--"A man's Palm is his best friend."
(IIIx, that is...hehehe)
I am new to Linux but very experienced with Windoze (which I quickly discovered means nothing). I am a programmer, but all of my prior programming experience is for Windoze. While my experience hasn't been that helpful in the Linux setting, at least I am familiar with computers, scripts, etc. in general and can apply this to Linux. If I didn't have this experience, I would REALLY be screwed. Anyway, I bought OL 2.2 because I was afraid that being a Linux newbie, I would have difficulty getting anything else to run without a great deal of pain. My idea was that I would get OL installed and use it to learn the basics of Linux, and then move on to another distro. Well, I've had it installed for a week, and I am wishing that perhaps I had chosen something like RH 6.
For starters, Partition Magic crashed halfway through, so when I tried to use LIZARD to install, it said I had no prepared Linux partition. Luckily I am familiar with fdisk and I fixed the problem. Other than that, the installation went without a hitch, except the fact that I put in an incorrect parameter for my video card and had to run XF86Setup to fix it.
After some difficulty, I also got PPP set up, with no thanks to Caldera support. It's obvious that I just need to go through the HOWTO's'; they're much more informative, though they can be technical for a newbie.
My biggest complaint is that while the "totally graphical" interface is nice for a newbie, if everything doesn't automatically configure during installation (like my modem, printer, and sound card), you really need to dispense with the graphical stuff and get into the guts of the system. I wish I got to see my boot messages on boot instead of using dmesg afterwards. I have asked Caldera 3 times as to what some of the items in their graphical boot sequence represent, but have not yet gotten a response.
So, that's a newbies impression of OL 2.2. I will probably use a different distro next time, because I feel I will have more control over the install process and the system configuration. Plus, many of the references I have purchased use RH as an example, and some of the info is distro-specific. I also chose OL for the price, but now I wonder if I got what I paid for.
--"A man's Palm is his best friend."
--"A man's Palm is his best friend."
(IIIx, that is...hehehe)
Unfortunately, they were thoughless enought to leave a severe security hole in it.
This was posted to bugtraq last week:
(Andrew McRory)
Other than that gross oversight, it's a great product and is a huge step forward in bringing Linux to the masses.
___ This sig is in boldface to emphasize its importance!