Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Linux Business Operating Systems Software

Lycoris Build 71 Beckons For Your Desktop 265

Posted by timothy from the or-someone's-desktop-anyhow dept.
PenguinRenegade writes "Lycoris has released a new Beta, Build 71. Lycoris is not a Linux distro for those who already know Linux, but more for the masses, for those who want to migrate from Windows, and don't really want anything to do with the command line. Lycoris Desktop/LX equipped computers are available from Wal-Mart starting at $268.00 (build 46). It's a great OS for the masses, $30 or less, $19.99 from the company if you download your own and just want the Product ID. Registered users get REAL e-mail support and full access to IRIS, an RPM-based click-to-install program base." (There's no cost to download the beta.)
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Lycoris Build 71 Beckons For Your Desktop More

Lycoris Build 71 Beckons For Your Desktop

Comments Filter:
  • wal-mart is excellent for making a stand on something like this; I hope they continue to make offers like this. It would be interesting to see how many of these boxes are selling.

  • I see double! (Lycoris vs XP) (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Martin Kallisti ( 652377 ) on Monday April 14, 2003 @06:27AM (#5726631)
    Honestly, I haven't been looking at Lycoris earlier, but judging from the screenshots, I'd not say that they are making a migration easier. They're just cloning Microsoft Windows XP, right down to the default (I suppose) desktop picture. Luna is really one of the ugliest interface designs ever, but I guess that if this helps spread an IMHO superior desktop operating system to the unwashed masses who are still caught in Microsoft's web of darkness, the cloning is somewhat excusable. They could have made it a _little_ bit different, though. I wonder if a lawsuit's coming up...
    • if microsoft were to try to stop them, lycoris could simply pull up the case of microsoft v. apple, where apple lost in exactly the same situation, the court deciding that you couldn't prevent someone from creating a similar "look and feel". microsoft won't do anything about this... it would be just like flushing money down the toilet for the hell of it: pointless.
      • I thought apple sued Microsoft (i.e., Apple vs. Microsoft), not the other way around. Microsoft stole the look and feel of the Apple's Mac OS and used it in Windows. If I recall, the trial dragged on for 10 years, ending with Microsoft paying a $100 million settlement to Apple and agreeing to make Mac versions of Office and IE.

    • It's a great OS for the masses, $30 or less, $19.99 from the company if you download your own and just want the Product ID.

      Sorry, I choose not to pay the Lycoris tax with any PC I buy. I only drink FREE beer.

  • Great. (Score:5, Interesting)

    by nigel.selke ( 665251 ) on Monday April 14, 2003 @06:27AM (#5726633) Homepage

    I think it's great that people and companies supporting Linux are finally starting to reach the masses with their message. It seems the only things that are really missing from Linux (and other *ixes, for the most part) are games and a few key apps like Photoshop, Flash, Dreamweaver etc etc. Since I'm not a graphics guy and I don't play games, the switch was pretty easy for me to make on the majority of my PCs.

    Personally I prefer FreeBSD + KDE, but I think any market share taken away from Microsoft on the desktop will be good for diversity. Of course, for gamers and graphics nuts, switching over will be more troublesome. Hopefully even that will change as Linux gains more market share and companies start realizing it and diverting more development efforts towards non-MS platforms (ideally cross-platform, although I'd imagine the prospect of supporting too many platforms would be prohibitive for some companies).

    • I'd personally like to see a distributor put a lot of effort into making gaming easy. Gentoo is a great platform for gaming, if you are geeky enough to know how to install and maintain it, but for the rest, there really isn't much out there.

      It would be relatively simple for Lycoris to spend some time tweaking WINE and/or WINEX to work with the most well known and played games that work fairly well, though not often by default on newbie distros (e.g. Half-Life), and to provide the binaries/source for ported

    • Re:Great. (Score:2, Funny)

      by Glamdrlng ( 654792 )

      Since I'm not a graphics guy and I don't play games, the switch was pretty easy for me

      You don't play games?>> Infidel!

  • Lycoris dropping the ball with version numbering (Score:5, Insightful)

    by sc00p18 ( 536811 ) on Monday April 14, 2003 @06:28AM (#5726635)
    It seems like their target audience is the kind of audience who is wooed by flashy 1.0's and doesn't want to have anything to do with the word build. So why don't they leverage that to their advantage? Is Lycoris still so unfinished that they can't slap a 1.0 on it?

  • Linux for the masses... (Score:3, Funny)

    by MosesJones ( 55544 ) on Monday April 14, 2003 @06:29AM (#5726638) Homepage

    Like Windows for the enterprise.

    Its just plain Howard Stern style wrong.

    • Re:Linux for the masses... (Score:4, Insightful)

      by boaworm ( 180781 ) <boaworm@gmail.com> on Monday April 14, 2003 @06:35AM (#5726651) Homepage Journal
      Have to agree. Linux wont be mainstream until John Doe can bring a copy home, install it with a few curses and reboots, and then install all the crappy software/games on "2003 Demo Game PC Gamers" DVD and run them without a huzz.
      Its kinda absurd to choose an OS based on personal affection rather than knowing it supports the applications you want to run. I can actually understand why companies run Windows. They like (ms) office, (ms) office runs on windows, they run windows. Quite easy.
      • until John Doe can bring a copy home, install it with a few curses and reboots,

        Well, then consider it done! Debian has always provided a nice (n)curses interface to installation! ;)

      • Linux at work vs. linux on the desktop (Score:5, Insightful)

        by skillet-thief ( 622320 ) on Monday April 14, 2003 @07:03AM (#5726703) Homepage Journal
        Have to agree. Linux wont be mainstream until John Doe can bring a copy home, install it with a few curses and reboots, and then install all the crappy software/games on "2003 Demo Game PC Gamers" DVD and run them without a huzz.

        Linux will not be a home entertainment OS until it becomes used more at work. The way I see it working is like this:

        1. Linux takes over web server market... done;
        2. Linux takes over office server market... coming fairly soon;
        3. Linux slowly works its way onto the office desktop... next few years.
        4. Linux starts to become accepted at home by people who have learned to use it at work (and know what permissions are, stuff like that).

        By the time we get to the last step, all the frustrating things for n00bs should be pretty much worked out. I don't think that Linux needs to start by being a home user OS. It will end up that way, if all goes well.

      • Not at all. Linux is already far easier to install than Windows for even moderately competent home users. I can talk my mother through an install of Linux and only tear out a few handfuls of my hair, as opposed to even trying to get Windows to boot more than twice in a row - a sure cause of early baldness.

      • Or, of course, until it's pre-installed on more than a handful of systems. For most end-users any OS is too difficult to install. I end up having to install/upgrade OSes for my non-techie friends regularly, including Windows.

        Personally I haven't found a modern Linux distro that isn't easier to install than Windows, and, while I'm willing to accept that at least part of that may be down to me knowing what I'm doing, I don't think your Mr. Doe is going to have an easier time installing Windows.

        • Indeed. I know exactly what you mean about doing installs/upgrades for family and friends. I'm going home for easter and so far I'm scheduled to rebuild 3 windows PCs for my family. On the bright side, they did pay for my flight out, so I won't complain too much. :)

          Of all the machines in the house, the only one that's running reliably is the Debian firewall/router I set up for them almost 2 years ago now, which I administer remotely via SSH. Usually that means apt-get update once a week or so to keep up

  • This is exactly what Linux needs. (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 14, 2003 @06:29AM (#5726641)
    The thing about Linux is that it has always been designed by geeks for geeks, this is its biggest strength but also its biggest weakness.

    Now Linux is very stable (although not with Gnome, if there are any Gnome developers reading this please make it more stable as the user interface is far better than KDE IMO), it supports OGG, it is incredibly secure and it is lightning fast when compared to the bloat that is windows.

    Unfortunately most usrs can't get along with it. The command line is a clunky way of doing things compared to an intuitive GUI and simply a throwback to when computers didn't do graphics. Tweaking things is difficult, sure there are lots of options but I still couldn't figure out an easy way of chjanging the screen resolution.
    It lacks style. This isn't such a problem for us geeks as we want something that is clean and functional but mr windows user wants anti aliased fonts and fading effects on the menubar.

    The good thing is that the Lycoris guys look they are sloving some of these problems with their no nonsence distribution. If we can give people something that looks like windows but has the stability and speed of Linux we can go a long way to establishing linux as a major player in the OS arena.

    • The command line is a clunky way of doing things compared to an intuitive GUI and simply a throwback to when computers didn't do graphics.

      This statement alone makes me doubt the rest of what this guy has to say. GUIs are good for simple tasks you don't do very often. The command line and scripting languages have the power to automate and achieve complex tasks.
    • Given that the most popular Windows audio player -- Winamp -- comes with Ogg support built into the default install, how does this differentiate Linux?
    • Recently I downloaded and installed the Mandrake 9.0 free distro. The installer was a lot simpler then I remember it ever to be before(last time I used mandrake it was a 6.0). And it found all my hardware without me putting in any effort. When it came to booting the system up for the very first time I looked very nice and "pretty" from the [OK] screen that had a nifty little background, to the x windows system automatically logging me into one of my normal user accounts without me being forced to input a us

    • Re:This is exactly what Linux needs. (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Telex4 ( 265980 ) on Monday April 14, 2003 @07:34AM (#5726777) Homepage
      The command line is a clunky way of doing things compared to an intuitive GUI

      In my experience, teaching newcomers, the GUI is more intuitive but the command line is more powerful, and many are very grateful for having learnt how to use it. Not everyone likes it, but let's not try to bury it like Windows has. You don't need to use it anyway, so I don't see what the problem is :)

      Tweaking things is difficult, sure there are lots of options but I still couldn't figure out an easy way of chjanging the screen resolution.

      This makes me wonder what distribution you're using. Every newbie-orientated one I've ever come across has a really easy to use control center with an obvious option to change the screen resolution. And tweaking things isn't really possible in Windows, so it's a credit to GNU/Linux that you even can :)

      This isn't such a problem for us geeks as we want something that is clean and functional but mr windows user wants anti aliased fonts and fading effects on the menubar.

      If you install any of the recent distros (Mandrake 9.1, RedHat 9, SuSE 8.2) you'll fidn both these things there. In fact, they've been there for a while. KDE is now able to look a whole lot more stylish than Windows, and does so by default.

      I don't want to sound like another advocate pretending it's all there, but your complaints are mostly outdated or wrong :)
    • usualy you don't need to touch commandline, if you don't want to and you have chosen newbie distro

      the *big* difference is - when windows corrupts, you go reinstall, os, all software, etc ...

      when linux corrupts - you can reinstall os, you don't need to reinstall most of the apps, and you can have a friend (or support for your distro) to fix the problem without reinstalling

      the only reason why nobody is using commandline on windows is, that it can't do almost anything
    • "Now Linux is very stable (although not with Gnome, if there are any Gnome developers reading this please make it more stable"

      GNOME is very stable for me. It (the core components like panel and Nautilus) almost never crash, and if one core component crashes it will just restart and everything else will continue like nothing happened.

      If GNOME crashes very often then you should fill a bug report [gnome.org] and telling the developers exactly what crashes, when, and how to reproduce it. Just saying "it's unstable" does

  • wow, misread THAT one (Score:4, Funny)

    by lingqi ( 577227 ) on Monday April 14, 2003 @06:35AM (#5726652) Journal
    ...Registered users get REAL e-mail support and full access to IRIS...

    I thought it read "IRIX" and the train of thought went something alone the lines of

    euphoria: IRIX boxens for $289 from Wal-mart!

    dawn of disillusionment: Why would I use a hacked up linux distro if IRIX came with it for free?

    total disallusionment: Awww crap it's IRIS, not IRIX.

    bitterness and depression: Awww crap it's IRIS based on PRMs.

    [goes back to Gentoo, sighing]

  • Click on... (Score:5, Funny)

    by cs02rm0 ( 654673 ) on Monday April 14, 2003 @06:37AM (#5726657)
    ...hardware compatibility list. You've got to appreciate a 404 for that!

  • Defaults to non-root account (Score:5, Insightful)

    by arvindn ( 542080 ) on Monday April 14, 2003 @06:39AM (#5726659) Homepage Journal
    Among the newbie friendly distros I'd pick this one because it defaults (IIRC) to a non-root account. If distros like Lindows that set you up as root become popular, it would kill off the perception of Linux as a secure OS. People don't care/understand how secure the kernel/servers are etc; if you have a bunch of newbies clicking on executable attachments then the public is going to perceive it as virus prone. Therefore if you are going to encourage your granny to try linux pick a distro that doesn't follow Bad Computing Practices(TM).
    • I am in total agreement with you on that issue, but at the same time there are many people coming from a windows world that don't get the whole multi-user aspect of Linux. Because of this I understand why companies would default to a root user. We also have to remember that many people are very forgetful. How many times have you heard people who are forced to use multi-user operating systems forgetting their root/administrator account because they never used it and wrote the thing down.

    • If you set mandrake to boot the gui interface by default after startup, it automatically logs in to the non root account.
      • ?? You need to be more specific in some way. A GUI startup just gets you to the login prompt in a graphic screen. Perhaps it's running as root, but it doesn't matter, as it's just a login screen.

        OTOH, I do seem to remember that there was some choice of selecting an account to automatically log into. I never used it, but the language seemed to suggest that it would use whichever account you selected. Perhaps root is the default choice for that configuration? But I'm rather sure that the language indica
        • It has been sometime since I last installed mandrake thanks to urpmi (that is what makes mandrake my dfault choice among all linux distros) but what I meant was that mandrake asks you if you want to start x by default. And in such a case it doesnt even ask you for a password while logging in, much like XP. But that means that the auto login option doesn't, IIRC, work with a root account. I think then you have to enter a password. And in any case root is not the default configuration, that much I remember di

  • Lawsuit pending (Score:2, Interesting)

    by ElGanzoLoco ( 642888 )
    From Lycoris's Website (http://lycoris.com/products/desktoplx/)
    "Power Flower", it says.
    Their XMMS skin looks like iTunes, too...

    These guys will face lawsuits both by Microsoft AND Apple... Yay! That's what I call platform oecumenism!

  • So Linux became Windows XP for the cheap ? (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Bender_ ( 179208 ) on Monday April 14, 2003 @07:27AM (#5726758) Journal
    The frequent usage of the word "familiar" hints very much at what lycoris became: A cheap Windows XP clone. All the description and advertising is trying to explain that I almost get the functionality of Windows XP. However why dont buy the real thing then ? I want extended functionality and improvements.

    Yeah, but I guess it will just end like: "Oh, you are using lycoris/linux. Can't you afford Windows?"
  • This announcement was sent out 5 days ago via email and is announcing the new release of a **beta** with their new daily build system. It was even posted to distrowatch two days ago.

    This is not "News for Nerds", this is old info which for those people who are interested will ahve already received via email or on other websites.

    On the plus side surely it makes it easier for /. to brush of the duplicate posting of this story in future as they can claim it is a new daily build ;-)

  • Beh (Score:2, Interesting)

    by empathy808 ( 625136 )
    I don't use linux. The closest I've come is one failed attempt to make redhat work. It didn't. It just pissed me off. I'd like to run linux. But I'm not sure what the point would be. Once you took away all of my Adobe/Macromedia programs and my Win32 Quake 3, there isn't a whole lot appealing about running a *nix. I think that the only other thing I really use my computer for would be roaming around the internet. And yes, WIN2k sucks a bit for doing anything, but its not bad enough that I'd want to instal

    • Re:Beh (Score:2, Interesting)

      by methodic ( 253493 )
      Might I suggest VMware?

      Im a diehard UNIX user; I love Slackware, I love Debian, I love OpenBSD. Unfortunately, like you, Adobe isn't porting Photoshop and Macromedia isn't porting flash to UNIX anytime soon.

      So I have XP Professional installed (which runs fine), and I use VMware for all my UNIX needs. I track -current in OpenBSD and I check out any new releases (like Slackware 9.0). The best part, you dont need a new computer or hard drive. Once youre done messing around or testing or whatever, delete the

    • Good question.

      The advantages Linux has for a desktop user:

      • Stability. I've heard of people not having crashes on Windows, but I have to reboot my work PC every few days, and I lose 15 mins waiting for it to come up. I have only ever seen Linux crash once, and that was when I tried to hot-swap an ATAPI DVD drive.
      • Security. You say you don't care, but if something bad happens, you might suddenly start caring.
      • Remote Administration. Probably not relevant to you, but an end-user who has access to exp
      • I have to reboot my work PC every few days, and I lose 15 mins waiting for it to come up.

        Days?!? Dude, and I'm not exagrating, I have to reboot my XP machine every few hours most days. I hibernate it to take it home at night, but usually still endup rebooting when I bring it out of hibernation in the morning.

        This Linux (Gentoo / KDE3.1) box has been running for the better part of a month (I rebooted to test one of Linus' dev kernels).

        ~~~

        If you have two or more machines in the house, and you do
        • I have to reboot my XP machine every few hours most days.

          Dude, what did you do to that poor XP box? Granted, I hate XP's interface and will never use it, but it is based on the NT kernel. My coworker's Win2k box is up to 52 days uptime, and is neck-and-neck with my FreeBSD 5.0 desktop in our uptime battle. I managed to hit 120 days once in Win2k back when I ran it on my desktop -- his record is 97.

          I can't imagine XP being that much worse.

    • Re:Beh (Score:5, Informative)

      by be-fan ( 61476 ) on Monday April 14, 2003 @08:55AM (#5727101)
      If you have no reason to use it, then you probably shouldn't be using it. Don't fix what isn't broke. On the other hand, there are a lot of reasons to use Linux, if you have the right usage patterns. Why I use Linux.

      1) I program. Development tools (especially GCC) are better on the Linux side, and free to boot. I don't like IDE's I prefer a bunch of xterms and VIM. Sure I could do the same thing in Windows, but Cygwin is a little too laggy for my taste (fork() is really slow).

      2) My gaming is limited to a few Linux games (NWN, Quake), a few older WINE-able Windows games (CounterStrike, StarCraft), and PSX emulators. They all work fine enough in Linux to suit me. For real gaming, I turn to my Gamecube, which I like better than 99% of PC games anyway :)

      3) I've got a lot of freedom to choose software file formats. My usage of MS Office formats isn't anything that KWord or (in a pinch) OpenOffice can't handle. Usually, all my communication with the outside world is done with standard file formats like PDF, HTML, etc.

      4) I run Mathematica and Matlab on occasion, which have (cheap!) Linux student versions.

      5) I do 3D modeling, and SideFX has an Apprentice version of Houdini available for Linux.

      Other than that, I do the same stuff everyone else does. I listen to MP3s on JuK (a KDE jukebox), I talk with my friends on AIM, send funny pictures over the school network, the usual. Since I'm used to Linux, and not very used to Windows (I stopped using it around when XP came out) my workflow is a lot faster, and the tweekability of KDE allows me to optimize the computer to my work habits much more than I can in Windows.
    • Why bother? You seem to have your mind made up allready.

      If you are not interested in an environment which is more stable, faster, gets the most out of your hardware then why would i put my time into converting you. If you are only interested in using name brand software (Adobe and Macromedia are) then hey, please stay with your current setup.

      If you would like to explore new ways, tools and software and if you aren't afraid of investing time into learning new tricks then i would probably invite you to give

    • But I'm not sure what the point would be. Once you took away all of my Adobe/Macromedia programs and my Win32 Quake 3, there isn't a whole lot appealing about running a *nix

      In my experience, quake 3 runs much better under linux than it ever did in windoze. If you aren't willing to learn just a little bit, and understand the reasons for using linux over that other OS, that's too bad for you. I prefer to be productive with my machines, rather than me having to serve them. This is why I use linux, and

    • Convert you (Score:2, Informative)

      by penguinrenegade ( 651460 )
      Empathy808 - e-mail me at dot.slash.penguinrenegade@spamgourmet.com and I'll help you convert to Lycoris. That goes for anyone who wants to check out Lycoris. PLENTY of volunteers to help answer questions in the forums, too!

      I'll answer any questions you might have, too, PERSONALLY.
    • Reasons to use Linux:

      1. Security. Linux is much more secure than any Windows OS.

      2. Stability. My NT4 box at work crashes several times a week. The old Win95 box crashed several times a DAY! My Linux box at home hasn't crashed in YEARS!

      3. Price. Although Windows itself comes with your PC, Windows software does not! I don't remember exactly what Office costs these days, but it's WAY more than Star Office. And Open Office is FREE!

      4. Fun. You don't sound like someone who would appriciate the fun par
      • 1. Security. Linux is much more secure than any Windows OS.

        A properly configured Windows box is more secure than a badly configured Linux box - it all depends on the user.

  • Supportless Linux (Score:5, Insightful)

    by lateralus ( 582425 ) <yoni-r@nospaM.actcom.com> on Monday April 14, 2003 @07:51AM (#5726826) Journal

    My father runs Linux at home and is as happy as can be. The only reason this situation exists is that I SSH into his machine every week and build/fix/configure/backup whatever is wrong or out of date.

    I'm happy he runs Linux. He's happy that his box magically updates without him every seeing or doing anything. This is the kind of hands off tech support I like to get from my plumber, mechanic and company IT department. Why shouldn't the end user enjoy this model as well? I could theoretically fix and update a dozen Linux boxes per day through SSH. A room full of geeks could take care of hundreds a day.

    Anyone can run Linux if they have a dedicated geek or live support contract. Currently the clueless have only geeks to turn to. With a company that does everything (I repeat: everything) through live support there can be a Linux box anywhere anytime.

    Companies are not leveraging Linux's remote access abilities for the end users. This gives the user a perfect box an a constant stream of cash for the support company. Most will not care if you log into a part of their system and do a weekly fix/backup/upgrade as long as you present it in the right way. The privacy concern is no greater than giving your box to a computer shop for a couple of day.

    I doubt that any given mob of customers can be more difficult and demanding than my dad, but I guess we all feel like that sometimes.

    The above model is actually taking place right now. How many of you log into another Linux box and fix it every week? All I'm suggesting is to put a bunch of us in the same room while we do it and place a company logo outside the door.

    The above idea has some obvious problems with it but I'd like to think that what we all do for our families family could possibly scale.

    • Re:Supportless Linux (Score:3, Interesting)

      by bruthasj ( 175228 )
      The difference is that you know it's in the shop for a couple of days, but you don't know who or when someone is crawling around their computer via the Internet. (Unless your dad knows w, who, last or lastlogin and /var/log/secure, etc.) There's a blame factor here, too. If it's in someone's shop, it better be secured, or it's their fault. How do you draw the same analogy over to the Internet and this service?

      I had this problem with one of my customer's. We have a multi-million dollar software package
      • To avoid the need for your customer to leave the modem connected all the time (and to get through firewalls, etc), you need to get the customer's computer to originate a TCP connection that lets you tunnel an SSH connection from your system back to the customer. I haven't heard of anyone doing this, but it should be possible.

        Now, I doubt you really want to perform upgrades without the customers' knowledge. The mysterious nature of that arrangement could lead them to blame anything out of the ordinary on
    • Companies are not leveraging Linux's remote access abilities for the end users. This gives the user a perfect box an a constant stream of cash for the support company. Most will not care if you log into a part of their system and do a weekly fix/backup/upgrade as long as you present it in the right way. The privacy concern is no greater than giving your box to a computer shop for a couple of day.

      OMG, imagine the possibilities!

      _BOFH_Mode=ON_
      SCANNING...
      open /home/victoria/MyPics/me&jennie.PNG
      +gulp+
      "Hmm

  • The biggest hurdle to the Linux desktop... (Score:3, Insightful)

    by ites ( 600337 ) on Monday April 14, 2003 @07:52AM (#5726830) Journal
    ... is the attitude of Linux purists whenever a company releases something designed for the masses. Face it: any product that will be acceptable to the hundreds of millions of desktop Windows users is going to *have* to be dumbed down, commercial, and over-prettified. Something like Lindows.

  • Acceptance (Score:5, Insightful)

    by rf0 ( 159958 ) <rghf@fsck.me.uk> on Monday April 14, 2003 @07:55AM (#5726840) Homepage
    Not trolling but what I think people would expect:

    I like to see thing that will help Linux be accept by the masses but what I would want to make sure that any Linux distro should be able to do the following without me having to open a command window

    Open MS Office files
    Play games
    Surf the net

    As much a M$ might be a monopoly they have spent millions on the UI which works for 95% of the people 95% of the time. Why would someone accept anything less even if it a 1/3 or the price? I use Linux all the time and its great, but would my dad? Don't think so

    Rus
    • No, it doesn't work for 95% of the people. 95% of people happen to understand how it works, and they take advantage of that.

  • The Installation Issue. (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Bocaj ( 84920 ) on Monday April 14, 2003 @08:00AM (#5726854) Homepage
    For those of you saying that "Linux won't work for the desktop until my grandma can install it.", please remember your grandma can't install Windows either. Being mainstream is not about how easy it is to install. It's about being OEM installed by major retailers. Most people never install a version of Windows from scratch. The upgrade releases are usually easy, but you get driver and dependancy problems sometimes. This is especially true of the NT/2000/XP line. I find that anyone who can run Windows preinstalled can run Linux preinstalled.

  • Consider the following (Score:5, Informative)

    by ewanrg ( 446949 ) <ewan.grantham@gmail.STRAWcom minus berry> on Monday April 14, 2003 @08:09AM (#5726887) Homepage
    Our company has Windows on the desktop, and Red Hat Advanced Server on our servers. Our programmers have to X-Window into the Linux servers when they do server programming.
    Why don't they have Linux on their desktops? When we looked at moving folks over, we ran into the following:

    Testing the Red Hat, Lycoris, and Lindows desktop offerings we would have to buy a number of additional licenses - while we already have a campus license for MS Windows and Office.

    Both Lycoris and Lindows seemed to have trouble recognizing some of our hardware - particularly Firewire and Wireless Networking.

    In all three cases trying to use the available options for working with MS Word documents (used by virtually all our clients) showed compatibility problems with any of them that had a large number of tables or that used automatic labelling of Figures.

    As a final straw, there is currently no way to sync a PocketPC with appointment and contact data on any of the Linux offerings.
    My point is that no one is going to switch to Linux just to be running Linux to do the same things they do on Windows. The ONLY way that folks are going to be convinced to make the switch is to have a Linux that does something folks can't do easily or cheaply in Windows, and then promote the heck out of that.
    Personally, I think that the Gimp is a start in the right direction - and that Lycoris and Lindows isn't.
    Just my .02 worth...
    Please take a moment and check out some soothing images [ewanphotos.com] if my commentary has stressed you :-)

    • Re:Consider the following (Score:4, Informative)

      by b17bmbr ( 608864 ) on Monday April 14, 2003 @11:45AM (#5728417)
      Testing the Red Hat, Lycoris, and Lindows desktop offerings we would have to buy a number of additional licenses - while we already have a campus license for MS Windows and Office.

      huh? even if you bought a copy instead of a downloaded version, you still install it on unlimited machines. methinks you are unaware of the GPL. for hardware compat. try mandrake. yes, there is going to be file problems, but you were talking about programmers for your servers. and what exactly do you mean they have to "X-window into the linux servers..." how else might you do this other than on *nix?

      i have used linux as a desktop OS for a few years. the problem is that everyone expects windows. it's like going into a great sushi restaraunt when all you've ever eating is fried catfish.

    • Re:Consider the following (Score:4, Interesting)

      by GiMP ( 10923 ) on Monday April 14, 2003 @02:02PM (#5729483)
      Instead of ruling out options due to your own ignorance, hire a consultant/contractor who has extensive experience with Linux and have him select the distribution and develop a written routine for installation (since he will likely not install more than a couple machines himself).

      If you stick with Lindows or Lycoris, sure you won't be able to copy it due to the license of software bundled with Linux; however, Redhat does not require a license, although Redhat does sell support contracts.

      In regards to hardware 'not working', there is a lot of hardware that works in Linux. You should not simply skip a distribution because IT didn't setup the Cd burner, setup the CD burner yourself.

      You could use completely for free: Debian, Gentoo, Mandrake, Slackware, and a horde of others.

      I personally recommend Debian because it has APT which allows you to download and install programs via 3 simple words ('apt-get install name-of-program). Gentoo is a great distribution; however, it requires more effort to install and will require you to compile all software from portage (like APT) which you wish to use. You may like Mandrake 9, it sets up a lot of hardware for you (more than any other distribution); however, it uses RPMs like Redhat so it is not as easy to maintain as Debian and Gentoo.

  • Free (Unsupported) Download (Score:3, Informative)

    by CyberPsyko ( 472791 ) on Monday April 14, 2003 @08:18AM (#5726929)
    You can choose from these [lycoris.org] mirrors. This is the full version, but with no tech support.

  • Linux Needs Distros Like This (Score:4, Insightful)

    by roomisigloomis ( 643740 ) on Monday April 14, 2003 @08:34AM (#5727001)
    I am not a coder or sysadmin but I do love technology, especially Linux. I have gone through a number of distros since 1999 and I think the move toward more user-friendly desktop Linux distros is great. Those that can and enjoy getting into the guts of an OS should do it no matter what distro they choose. The rest of us just want something that works and isn't owned by a monopoly. I've been using Xandros 1.0 for the past month and I must say this: it just works! Sure, I have some print over the network issues which will get ironed out in time. But, really, it's the first distro that has allowed me to turn off my Windoze box for a week. I woke it up to get some files I need and also to use Quark Xpress. Just my two bits; I could be wrong.

  • Not a bad OS at all! (Score:2, Informative)

    by zachjb ( 221132 )
    After looking through their web site and reading what is actually contained inside of this OS, I am actually curious enough to download it and give it a look-see.

    It has everything that everyone would need in an OS, plus a lot more. That's one thing that I love about Linux. It comes of literally hundreds of applications to get your jobs done quickly and easily.

    Now one of the best attributes of this distribution was mentioned in the description of the story; a free online-rpm based installer. Lindows wan
  • This page [presroi.de] from my website shows some interesting thing. How often are pictures recycled?
  • " It's a great OS for the masses, $30 or less, $19.99 from the company if you download your own and just want the Product ID."

    That makes it sound like you can't download it for free. AFAIK you have always been able to download it for free. For example the latest beta is available here. Someone can feel free to correct me if I'm wrong.

    http://ftp.sunet.se/pub/Linux/distributions/redm on d-linux/beta/
  • As much as I like the Lycoris distro, I hope they've improved the performance. It seems to run about 25-40% slower than Mandrake for me.
  • During my experiments with various Linux Distros, I came across Lycoris, it was build47 if I remember correctly. First, I, as many others, was under the impression that Lycoris was for sale only. Later I found out that the unsupported version is available for download, for free from their ftp. Installation was a breeze - The SOLITARE game during installation was a nifty innovation, which made the installation seem to be extremely fast. The desktop was a standard KDE desktop. However the icons were nice XP s

Slashdot Top Deals

Math is like love -- a simple idea but it can get complicated. -- R. Drabek

Close