Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Debian Software Linux

Another Xandros 2.0 Deluxe Review 225

Posted by michael from the linux-for-your-mom dept.
JimLynch writes in about his review: "If we had to define Xandros 2.0 with one word, we'd pick 'usable.' This time around, the folks at Xandros have refined their product significantly and come up with something that makes Linux quite comfortable and easy to use, even if you're a total newbie to the OS. Obviously the Gentoo crowd won't be interested in this distro, but Windows users who haven't used Linux before or have had bad experiences with other distros will particularly enjoy this release. The time to begin the desktop migration to Linux might very well have arrived with Xandros 2.0." An earlier review was also favorable.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Another Xandros 2.0 Deluxe Review More

Another Xandros 2.0 Deluxe Review

Comments Filter:

  • Comment removed (Score:3, Interesting)

    by account_deleted ( 4530225 ) on Tuesday January 20, 2004 @04:00PM (#8035082)
    Comment removed based on user account deletion

    • Re:XPDE? (Score:4, Insightful)

      by searleb ( 168974 ) * on Tuesday January 20, 2004 @04:05PM (#8035140) Homepage
      did you see the screenshots [xpde.com]?

      That's a lawsuit just waiting to happen... All the sub-apps like the Task Manager and all the Properties windows are a perfect copy! Very impressive.

      • Re:XPDE? (Score:3, Interesting)

        by gowen ( 141411 )
        That's a lawsuit just waiting to happen
        Only over the name; otherwise Microsoft would be hoist by their own petard [wikipedia.org]
      • No daily builds since 08/20/2003. Maybe they've had some second thoughts?

      • Re:XPDE? (Score:2, Funny)

        by armyofone ( 594988 )
        did you see the screenshots?

        Heh - yeah. I got a kick out of the one labeled "KDE tray applications work". I pulled it up and found a picture of kscd displaying an error.

        Way to proof-read your website guys! ;-]

      • Re:XPDE? (Score:3, Interesting)

        by grolschie ( 610666 )
        Perhaps MS might be keeping quiet about all this, delaying and hoping for the day that it gets included in numerous GNU/Linux distributions. Then MS can sue multiple GNU/Linux distributions in SCO-style (over some what they term as "IP" theft - not that I agree with those two terms).

        Trust me, MS will be WELL aware of the existance of XPDE. Why are they not acting?

      • Re:XPDE? (Score:5, Interesting)

        by hackstraw ( 262471 ) on Tuesday January 20, 2004 @05:29PM (#8036139)
        Seeing shots like this really make me embarassed to use Linux.

        I use Linux because of what it has to offer me.
        I dont use Windows because it has nothing to offer me (verified by a phone call with M$ last week:).

        I dont want Linux to look/behave/feel like Windows.

        Why on earth would someone pay the same amount of money for something that looks and feels just like windows (shutter) but has 0% of the software and hardware support? Wanna impress me, try ripping off OSX first, or for crying out loud rip off a Mac slogan and "Think Different".

        • Re:XPDE? (Score:3, Insightful)

          by grolschie ( 610666 )
          I dont want Linux to look/behave/feel like Windows

          Linux is also about choice. What you like, someone else won't like - and vice versa. That's why you can choose not to install XPDE, whereas others might choose to.

  • Changeover time? (Score:5, Interesting)

    by TheSpoom ( 715771 ) * <{ten.00mrebu} {ta} {todhsals}> on Tuesday January 20, 2004 @04:01PM (#8035096) Homepage Journal
    OK, I've been thinking about making "the big leap" to a Linux distro for a while, and this Windows application compatibility looks really intriguing. Can someone give me an idea of how well it works, and any configuration / compatibility snafus it might have?

    The only things, at this point, that would really prevent me from wanting to use Linux as my primary OS would be the ability to run Windows apps well (let's face it, I have a lot of apps on my system that work well already, and I don't want to have to lose access to them or have to reboot into Windows to use them), and the ability to play games / DirectX-based programs (I've heard WineX has this ability, any comments on how good it is / how easy it is to use / configure?).

    I've recently been experimenting with KDE [sourceforge.net] under Cygwin [cygwin.com], which works surprisingly well except for a few glitches like not displaying JPEGs correctly (I've heard they fixed this in the latest version). Any comparisons?
    • But you'd be wise to check compatibility ratings for games on the transgaming forums and the winehq.com application database. They are invaluable for determining if your favorite games will run on linux. I have been able to get all of my favorite games running (warcraft III, Neverwinter Nights, Oni, starcraft) and I was just using normal wine, hacking the configs. There are a lot of resources for getting stuff to work under linux with wine (frankscorner.org is really great), but if you want stuff done ea
    • there was a copy of crossover in a lab i worked in for a short time. it wasn't as straight forward of installing windows SW as winXp is. (i.e. pop CD in hit install) but for everything i tried with it, i had a very favorable experience. Wine is good too but there are things that were hard for me to find in wine that crossover office puts a nice button right there for me.

      as soon as i can convince my mom off AOHell i'm building her a Xandros machine.
    • Which runs MS Office.
      • I don't *just* use M$ Office, as stated in my original post. Hell, I'd be perfectly willing to try OpenOffice, but again, there are some Windows apps that have no equal or superior solution available on Linux as of yet, and that is why I need good Win32 support.

    • Re:Changeover time? (Score:3, Informative)

      by asyky ( 740855 )
      If you want to find out about windows compatibility go to the wine site [winehq.com]. They have a list of applications and how well they will run under linux, see if they have what you need. Should have explained this first, wine allows windows applications to run on x86 linux machines.

      As for winex their site [transgaming.com] they have something similar. Search [transgaming.com] and see if the game you want will work.

    • Re:Changeover time? (Score:3, Insightful)

      by Anonymous Coward
      If you want a Windows experience, use Windows. If you're openminded and you want to try Firebird, Thunderbird, OpenOffice, Gimp, XMMS, Korganizer, Evolution, Gramofile and the tons of cool apps available for Linux, then try a distro.

      I don't mean this as a troll but you're setting yourself up for a major disappointment if you just want to have a Windows experience on a Linux machine. Linux is not a cheap Windows. It's Linux.

      • Re:Changeover time? (Score:3, Informative)

        by pyros ( 61399 )
        It should be pointed out that Firebird, Thunderbird, OpenOffice.org, and even the Gimp are all available natively on windows.

        • Re:Changeover time? (Score:2, Informative)

          by Anonymous Coward
          Excellent point. If you want to try Linux, first run Firebird, Thunderbird, OpenOffice.org, and even the Gimp in Windows for a few months. That's how I knew my wife would accept LInux and my parents would not.
      • Already using Firebird and Thunderbird regularly (I replaced IE on my Quick Launch), and have tried Gimp. Saying something like "Linux is not Windows" is useless to me; everybody knows that. I want to be able to do the things I do now quicker and better. I think it's this sort of attitude that slows Linux's progression into the desktop world.

    • Re:Changeover time? (Score:5, Informative)

      by no longer myself ( 741142 ) on Tuesday January 20, 2004 @04:38PM (#8035518)
      Running win32 apps under Linux is one of those areas where YMMVS (Your Mileage May Vary Significantly). The compatibility layer known as Wine works differently from distro to distro, and from win32 app to win32 app. You even have different versions of Wine that support certain sets of apps, and other that don't. Wine(x) is far from perfect, so don't go in expecting it to be a deus ex machina. Unless you're trying to port your game collection over, Linux really does have just about all the apps you need natively. You'd be surprised at how nicely the "important" stuff runs. I *highly* recommend getting a second PC ($200 at Walmart) and resolving to try Linux for a solid 6 months before making any real judgements. If you think you know all about Linux because you tried it for a few weeks, and you just don't like the way it feels, then you really don't know what you're talking about. It's not Windows, and we all know it.

      I myself still use a few old win32 apps out of sheer complacency, but they don't run flawlessly, and switching to Linux is definitely an uphill battle. Unless you already have a bunch of geeky Linux friends, you can probably expect not to make any either... But Linux has it's own rewards for those who stick with it.

      You'll just have to find out for yourself. Good luck, and may Linus be with you! ;-)

      • I've been facing a similar dilemma, though I have some experience with desktop Linux (and a lot with servers).

        Unfortunately, I'm not ready to live without Photoshop, Illustrator, AfterEffects, SoundForge and Flash MX. And I suppose I would probably absolutely have to run Excel etc every once in a while.

        So I've been thinking about just running two computers all the time and having a KVM switch swap my input devices between them.

        That way I could use Linux as my main software development and netstuff platf
      • Wine(x) is far from perfect, so don't go in expecting it to be a deus ex machina.

        Actually, Deus Ex [transgaming.com] runs quite nicely under Winex. I still play it regularly on Linux.
      • But (so I understand) your mileage ought to be significantly better if you leave the Windows partition alone and set Wine up to use native DLLs.

        That'll end up being mainly for games, possibly Office if you really can't let go. Everything else is pretty well covered by native applications.

    • Native apps are better (Score:3, Informative)

      by mlg9000 ( 515199 )
      Let me start off by saying you really WON'T need your Windows apps after switching to Linux. That's old news. Now you can get Linux native apps that do that same things as their Windows counterparts and do it just as well. (Just as easy to install too) I run Linux on my laptop and XP on my desktop and there's nothing I can't do with my laptop and Linux native apps that I can do on my desktop. To get to that point took more work on my part, but far less then it would have a year ago. Plus... if you do f

      • With the state of 3D and video card driver support, openGL, etc... they still don't run as well as on Windows systems

        Huh? Get an NVidia card and go to NVidia [nvidia.com] and download their drivers. NVidia uses a unified driver which means you get the same features under Linux as you do under MS Windows. I find that OpenGL games ported to Linux run better under Linux then under MS Windows, though that is just MHO.

        WineX allows you to play some of the newer games. Though there are a bunch out there that will be MS

    • Re:Changeover time? (Score:3, Informative)

      by t0ny ( 590331 )
      Just like most of these so-called "beginner" versions, it will most likely only be easy to somebody who has used Linux for years.

      Four years ago, on the advice of someone here, I tried out Mandrake and some other one (can recall the distro), because it was supposed to be 'easy'. Ya, real easy- on one distro, the video wouldnt display on either of two computers, and on the other it the video and network cards to be installed manually. So I wasted a few more days trying to get SOMETHING besides a command pro

    • I have 3 big showstoppers here at work...

      Adobe Premiere.

      Adobe After Effects.

      and DVD Lab.

      all three have no equal in Linux.

      No cinderella or Main Actor are NOT a replacement for Premiere, they are not even close to being alpha-ware quality.

      There is nothing that does what After Effects does.

      and there is nothing that will author a Video DVD with menus.

      In other aspects of video creation and graphics? Linux has it hands down, but the basics for video editing are not there and will not be there for a really
      • Have you tried any vegas software? I mean for windows. I used to be a premiere user and then I switched to vegas video and it rocks.

        not that it will help you switch to linux. i am in the same boat (with video editing). i tried cinerella and didn't like it near as much as vegas or premiere. I just bought another harddrive for when i edit video that boots windows (i only edit video every month or so as a hobby).

  • But is it free software? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Ed Avis ( 5917 ) <ed@membled.com> on Tuesday January 20, 2004 @04:08PM (#8035178) Homepage
    The review doesn't mention one of the most important criteria: what are the copying conditions for Xandros?
    • Check out the license here [xandros.com]

      In addition to the freely distributable Software Programs, some versions of Xandros Desktop may also include certain Software Programs that are not distributed under the terms of the GPL or similar licenses that permit modification and redistribution. Generally, each of these Software Programs is distributed under the terms of a license agreement that grants the licensed user to install each of the Software Programs on a single computer for the user's own individual use. Copyi

    • Nope (Score:2)

      by wiredog ( 43288 )
      Has the crossover plugin. Well, the Deluxe Edition does.
    • It's Debian's Sarge release with a couple non-GPL'd goodies in the mix. Xandros meets licensing requirements by making source available on an FTP server.

      If you select software based on ideology, you may be put off by the bits of proprietary code. I'm not. More to the point, the market for this product won't care and, in fact, have probably never heard of the GPL.

  • My primary criteria is not met... (Score:5, Interesting)

    by RobertB-DC ( 622190 ) * on Tuesday January 20, 2004 @04:10PM (#8035195) Homepage Journal
    The following line blows my criteria for a Mom-ready Linux distro:

    Price:
    Xandros Standard $39.95, Xandros Deluxe $89

    Yes, I'm cheap. But I got Knoppix from these guys [tuxcds.com] for like three bucks, and that's just 'cause I was too lazy to configure the CD burner to do it myself [knoppix.net].

    When I screw something up on the Linux box, my wife shakes her head and says "You get what you pay for." On the other hand, she's not too excited about shelling out $100+ for Windows, and I'm not too excited about shelling out $40+ for Linux. Besides, if I weren't screwing up my installation all the time, how would I learn?

    Of course, I could always do what one of my relatives did. He downloaded a pirated copy of WinXP Professional, and doesn't feel the least bit guilty. He was amused when he tried to apply a patch and got a message like "Dude! It's pirated! Go look for another download!". As a programmer (who enjoys getting *paid* to code), I just smile, while trying not to breathe through my nose... at least he doesn't ask me for tech support.
    • At $40+, you are paying for support, brand, and peace of mind. That is 'support' as in technical support for yourself, and financial support for the developer.

      At $3, all you are paying for is media costs and s&h.

      Get a grip, man!
    • If you're too cheap to buy something, then no business will consider you as a potential customer.

      Folks like you simply justify people's belief that Linux is about not paying for software, one way (open source) or another (piracy).

    • I saw Xandros on the cover-DVD of one of the UK linux rags the other day. Maybe you could get it that way, that should be cheap enough.
    • What's a fair price to pay for the value of a distribution like Xandros. $40 seems like a fair price to me. Seems like a good distro on CD would be worth as much to me as any of the Special Edition DVDs of TheLord of The Rings/Matrix/Star Wars/Insert-your-favorite-movie-here.

  • Origionality (Score:5, Insightful)

    by zelurxunil ( 710061 ) <zelurxunil@gma[ ]com ['il.' in gap]> on Tuesday January 20, 2004 @04:17PM (#8035271) Homepage Journal
    Hmmm is this really any improvement? The biggest complaint many people have with Microsoft and Windows, is that its proprietary nature stiffles any innovation. I'd much rather see someone make a desktop that expands beyond XP then tries its hardest to emulate it. Id be more excited about a DEXP, Doesn't Emulate XP then an XPDE.

    • Re:Origionality (Score:3, Insightful)

      by tommck ( 69750 )
      "The biggest complaint many people have with Microsoft and Windows, is that its proprietary nature stiffles any innovation."

      I think this is the only forum that would mark this "Insightful".

      When's the last time your mother said that Windows proprietary nature stifles innovation? Most people have issues with its stability and security.
      Microsoft has spent countless millions of dollars on research into useability. Unless you're going to foot the bill for similar research, the easiest way to make

    • Re:Origionality (Score:2, Insightful)

      by SydShamino ( 547793 )
      >> The biggest complaint many people have with Microsoft and Windows, is that its proprietary nature stiffles any innovation.

      No, the biggest complaint about Microsoft and Windows is that their monopolistic nature stifles innovation. Proprietary isn't inherently bad. Lack of interoperability is bad.

      With Xandros, you are running Debian Linux. Sure, there are some non-open source bits in there, but if Xandros hacks you off too much, move to another Linux distros. They are all Linux, and they are al

  • Push push push... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by D-Cypell ( 446534 ) on Tuesday January 20, 2004 @04:18PM (#8035279)
    Linux on the desktop will happen when its ready to happen. All this pushing does nothing to aide linux.

    All that will happen is less experienced users will hear all the fuss and see phrases like "A free windows alternative" and attempt to give it a go.

    Assuming they find their way through the installer, they will find that their modems, web cams etc dont work and various other niggly issues that still cause alot of problems.

    The brave end-user that tried it out will head back to windows, never to enter linux territory again and whats more, will likely tell all his friends not to bother. The hype will be countered with anti-hype and things stay as they are.

    When linux is viable on the desktop (for Joe Public) it will happen, trying to push it before this point will just be detrimental.

    I cant understand the push anyway. Does the linux community need to validate its existance by taking on the evil empire?
    • Thing is, the installer on (insert mainstream desktop distro here) is better than the installer on (insert NT4, 2000, or XP here). However, "installation" for those who choose a new XP box is this:

      Click I agree twice, click Yes, register now, type in your name, rank, and serial number (OK, so your name, address, etc., etc.), click Next, click OK, and say hello to your new computer.

      Linux on Joe Blow's desktop will never be viable as long as hardware manufacturers don't work with Linux (Intel, USR, and Cone
      • Thing is, the installer on (insert mainstream desktop distro here) is better than the installer on (insert NT4, 2000, or XP here).

        Nonsense. You need to look at two things during installation: the top of the screen and the bottom of the screen.

        Most of the time you can get by just by pressing "enter" and "I agree". Partitioning may look intimidating but is amazingly easy. On a blank drive you just press enter twice and it partitions the whole drive and formats it using NTFS. It then copies the base system

        • Re:Push push push... (Score:3, Insightful)

          by be-fan ( 61476 )
          Most modern Linux installers are easier than the WinNT installer. Instead of an intimidating partition screen, they have a simple button that says "partition automatically." They setup networking automatically, instead of bringing up a network settings dialog. Best of all, they have sane defaults, and copious explanatory text.

          If Longhorn has pretty graphics and nice HTML with "what the fuck does this do" buttons, then it'll be as good as the SuSE installer, which already has these!

  • Lame (Score:2, Insightful)

    by westyvw ( 653833 )
    What are they giving back to the community? Name one project that they support and fund.

    Also, to you idiots who keep going on about Linux and the desktop. I have to use a total of 5 computers. 3 desktop, 1 latop and 1 server. Only on of them is windows. It is the one not ready for the desktop. I would rather use KDE or Gnome then windows any day. Face it windows just isnt ready for the desktop!

  • Best Desktop Linux Released To Date (Score:5, Informative)

    by reallocate ( 142797 ) on Tuesday January 20, 2004 @04:24PM (#8035357)
    I've been using Xandros Desltop 2.0 for a few weeks, coming to it after several years with a number of other distributions.

    It is, indeed, a slick piece of work. Installed as advertised. Detected and offered the correct drivers for all of my periperals, including my printer. Saved me the trouble of chasing down and installing some Mozilla plugins. Crossover works as advertised. The tweaks to KDE are well done and present a professional image.

    The standard install does not deposit the usual retinue of servers and development tools on your drive (most are available on the 2nd CD or via download). That makes sense for the market Xandros is targetting. (Makes sense for me, too. On my home desktop box, I don't need 'em.)

    If Xandros targeted the geek market, included the usual geek software, rewrote their manual, and changed their advertising to downplay the Windows thing, this distribution would be seen by geeks as the best desktop Linux released to date. Most geeks won't look at it that way, but they'll be wrong.
    • "this distribution would be seen by geeks as the best desktop Linux released to date."

      Hardly. Geeks would rather use something that's truly free. Once you've used Linux for a bit installing a free Linux distro along with few Mozilla programs and WINE isn't that big a deal.

      My fear with Xandros, Lindow, etc is that people new to Linux will come to think that paying for your Linux distro is normal and they will continue to keep using these mostly proprietary distros. It's not like I've never paid for a box s
      • You are incorrect. Xandros is not "mostly proprietary". Why do people keep trotting out this candrd? Do you really think Xandros wrote several hundred proprietary apps that just happen to look and behave as their open source equivalents?

        Xandros is comprised of Debian's Sarge release. The only Xandros code I see is the tweaked KDE code (patches supplied to KDE), their installer and their file manager. A long way from being "mostly proprietary.

        People who are prospective Xandros buyers could care less abou
      • Just becouse a company charges a price for something does not make that product automaticly propitary. The GPL is all about Free as in Free Speech, not Free as in Free Beer. As long as Xandros and company keep the entire source open than there is absolutly nothing wrong with charging for it instead of just letting people download it for free.

        IMO, this is where the Linux cimmunity has gotten it wrong. We think that "Free Software" means you dont have to pay for it and that is not the intention of the GPL.

        G

  • Linux Is not ready for Desktop (Score:4, Informative)

    by 9812713 ( 641418 ) on Tuesday January 20, 2004 @04:27PM (#8035387)
    I have read the review, and all the other ones that are floating around on the net, and yes, beside Knoppix (www.knoppix.net) Xandros is stepping in the right direction to complete the bridge for Home Linux users. Not to say Xandros doesn't have flaws (Slow Loading, No 2.6 Kernel, And it didnt get all my hardware). Then again Windows Xp didn't get all my hardware either. Either case, they have pretty much made a seamless gap for people looking try linux, and have the ability of dual booting. One of the features I enjoyed was their File Browers. It has been re-written to make it appear as tho you are in Windows, and don't have the evil Linux (*nx) file system Structure. Flaws with it: * Any game you play with a game pad - Need to download, and install modules. * Sometime when accessing your CDRom, it will say it doesn't exist, and has an error about mounting /var/.../../.. ? * Slow booting, and Shutdown * I have to manually force it to use ACPI 4 Not ACPI 3, 2,1 or APM 4,3,2,1 .. Why all the choices? * Xandros Networks has a button called "Update All" don't seem to work, or at least the 4 time I tried it. * And last but not least, Not a aXandros Only problem, some windows games will not work under WineX. Final Comment: -> Very stable, Using RiserFS works flawlessly, and you get one of everything.. (Browers, text editor, chat program)

  • From a Xandros User (Score:5, Informative)

    by heironymouscoward ( 683461 ) <heironymouscoward@yah3.14oo.com minus pi> on Tuesday January 20, 2004 @04:35PM (#8035484) Journal
    Started with Xandros/1.0 a while back. Nice simple package, installs all by itself, but a little dusty around the edges. But hey, it brought a number of old PCs back to life as simple browser/email/Office boxes, no hassle.

    Chucked Xandros/2.0 deluxe onto a box (from which I'm typing this). My main machine, now. The switch from a W2K notebook was remarkably easy. I did use CrossoverOffice to install MSIE because we need this to test some applications. But most everything else has gone the native Linux way.

    Xandros' good points: Debian, the file manager, seamless integration with Windows networks, good selection of packages, clean and dry user interface (compared to the 'how much more can we add' horrors of Lindows 4.5). Everything a 'normal' user needs within easy reach, and very little poking under the hood to make it all work. The file manager is especially lovely, though I suspect a large part of that comes from Konqueror. Double-click on _anything_ and something useful happens. Archives magically uncompress, ISO images magically get burnt to CD, Windows executables run immediately (assuming CrossoverOffice is there), RPMs get launched in the Xandros installer. It "just works", and that's the greatest compliment I can give any software.

    Xandros' weak point is the lack of some useful packages in the standard sources. To burn DVDs for instance I needed to install K3b and a number of auxilliary tools myself, some from source, some from RPMs and other packages. But then exploring and installing one's own packages from source is part of the fun of getting the system you want.

    Linux is an operating system with depth (as are most Unix systems). Xandros wraps this up so nicely that you almost get that Windows experience. But when you open the wrapping, there is solid metal underneath, and it feels good.

    I forgot how limiting Windows was, how many comprimises there are in the platform, and to tell the truth after a decade of using mainly Windows, I was a little scared to jump to a Linux distro. Xandros made this move easy, so easy that I did not once think 'Oh, forget it'.

  • Quit knocking Gentoo (Score:3, Insightful)

    by mal3 ( 59208 ) on Tuesday January 20, 2004 @04:35PM (#8035486)

    Why does everyone knock on Gentoo claiming it's hard to use. I'm a linux newbie and have been for about 5 years. I tried Caldera, couldn't get the hang of it. Tried Red Hat didn't like it either. Tried Gentoo, I love it. It's the first distro that didn't leave me confused after the install. Sure Red Hat and Caldera installed easier, but Gentoo was better documented, and since I had to do many things manually I learned what would need done in the future if I needed to change something. For instance under Red Hat I didn't know what I needed to do to add another hard drive to my system, or to change network cards.

    With Gentoo during the install I learned how to create filesystems, configure and compile the kernel, and lots of other stuff. It takes more work, but I wouldn't call it difficult. Grandma couldn't do it, but my dad or my 13 year old cousin probably could.

    • Re:Quit knocking Gentoo (Score:2, Informative)

      by supun ( 613105 )
      Getting Gentoo up and running is harder than most distributions since you have to do the work yourself and not depend on some install program. However, if you can follow directions and have basic computer knowledge, it's not that hard. Just takes time :)

      Once up, Gentoo is easy to maintain. There is ample documentation and forum support. You just have to get used to tools such as "emerge", "rc-update", "env-update", "etc-update", "modules-update", etc.
    • "I'm a linux newbie and have been for about 5 years."

      Umm ...
    • Thanks, you've said a mouthful, and I totally agree with you. Next ppl need to be educated about how Gentoo is not totally unstable; things change, and the Gentoo project has matured very rapidly in the past year. I'm currently running gs-sources (gs == gentoo-stable) kernel on my server, with only -x86 (stable) packages and sane USE flags. It's as solid as any other Linux thank you.

      CB
  • I really like it. No, it's not free, but it's super easy to install and manage. I could recommend it for small offices, no problem. Hardware detection is awesome, network detection, printer configuration, browse my shares. A breeze. I do enough configuration during the day, it was worth the money to me for a no-brainer Linux installation at home. And that's exactly what you get. One disc, in the drive, answer four or five questions and walk away. Done.

    The biggest problem I've had is the sound serv

  • Xandros 2.0 Desktop was given away free on the cover of Linux Magazine [linux-magazine.com] in the UK this month.

    The install went like a breeze. I really liked it compared to the Mandrake install because it asked for all the usual information (ip address/dhcp, root pass, users and passwords etc etc) up front rather than after the install process.

    My impression of the desktop was rapidly lowered when it booted up into KDE after the install. I'm a major KDE fan, so why the default browser was Mozilla rather than Konqueror?

    An

    • so why the default browser was Mozilla rather than Konqueror?

      They're aiming to be Windows-like, and Mozilla is an app that crosses the Lin/Win border. Granted, most Windows users are more familiar with IE, but the folks who are already familiar with Mozilla or Netscape will presumably be more comfortable with that, than with the completely-new-to-them Konqueror.

      Also, the Gecko engine is on more web developers' testing lists than KHTML is (though Safari's starting to change that), so there should be few

      • Yeah, I think Xandros chose to use Mozilla because of it's rendering prowess in relation to Konqueror 3.1. Konqueror 3.2, with a whole bunch of Safari fixes, starts to bridge the gap between itself and Gecko browsers. I'd expect Konqueror 3.3 (and the next version of Safari) to bridge it fully.

        I'd like to seen them at least use MozFirebird though, it behaves more like an KDE app than Mozilla does.

  • Reviewer bias (Score:3, Insightful)

    by gribbly ( 39555 ) on Tuesday January 20, 2004 @05:53PM (#8036465)
    I have never used Xandros, I'm sure it's fine. But the habit of the reviewer of saying things like "even a total newbie to Linux will have an easy time navigating" really bugged me. How does he know? Did he (a) have a total newbie (or, even better, several of them) try it? Or (b) did he just play with it and think to himself "hmm... this is _really_ easy for me, so it must be at least fairly easy for a newbie".

    Since he didn't go to any lengths to claim it was (a), I'll assume (b). In which case saying something like "a total newbie will find this easy" is quite meaningless. Why? Because - as anyone who has experience with usability testing will attest - it's really hard to predict what a "total newbie" will and won't find confusing. _Especially_ when you're an advanced user (say, a reviewer on "extremetech.com".

    That's all.

    grib.
    • If I recall correctly, Jim's a relative newcomer to Linux--he wrote his first review maybe eighteen months ago. It's a problem, though--can a noob really write a thorough review? In this case, I'm sure Jim remembers his early experiences.

  • Bad points: no Americals Army??? (Score:3, Insightful)

    by 3Suns ( 250606 ) on Tuesday January 20, 2004 @07:16PM (#8037392) Homepage
    The article lists 3 negative points:
    1) No VPN "wizard"

    This is absurdly nitpicky. It might be a neat extra feature, but I don't think any OS has a VPN wizard in the base install.

    2) America's Army isn't bundled.

    Excuse me? Are you insane? Why in the name of heaven would Xandros bundle a 3D game with their OS that is being targeted at corporate desktops? Windows doesn't bundle any games besides a few amusements of their own, and I can't think of another distribution that would package any major 3rd-party game, let alone one that is as politically loaded as America's Army. Linux is very international, you know... What ever happened to acquiring software and installing it? Who says it has to be bundled with the OS?

    3) No Gnome

    While I would be the first to argue for Gnome over KDE in the first place, including Gnome with Xandros would really be the wrong decision. Gtk libraries are an inexcusable omission if that's the case, but Gnome is an entirely separate desktop environment. Xandros is taking a stand for one DE and I respect that, given that they are targeting their distribution to a very specific market. Windows doesn't include Litestep, OSX doesn't include a full OS9 environment, so I fail to see the precedent among commercially-targeted OSes. Both Gnome and KDE are designed from the ground-up to work in a vacuum, and any interoperability is, at the moment, kludgey at best.
    • Harping about incomplete VPN support is one thing; complaining that they didn't include your fave kewl game in the distro is a bit of tunnel-vision.

      Even assuming the developer allows it to be freely distributed, there's plenty of reason a company (not referring to Xandros in particular here) might not want to include America's Army in their distro. 1) It'd add a whole 'nother CD to the package, which is more than any other single app demands. 2) It was developed as promotional tool, and the company may

  • Must parity be achieved? (Score:3, Insightful)

    by DaveJay ( 133437 ) on Tuesday January 20, 2004 @09:31PM (#8038804)
    Once upon a time (late last year, actually), I read an article about an electric car. It's a very expensive and impractical one in many ways, mind you, but they got one part really, really right: the range on a single charge was approximately 300 miles.

    Now, you can read that two ways. Since I'm familiar with electric car technology, I know that you're lucky to get 45 miles out of a single charge in most electric cars, and the best ones can stretch to about 90. I also know that my little Nissan Sentra has a range of approximately 360 miles. So I looked at that 300 mile range number, and thought, "Holy Crap! They just leaped from 1/4 the range of my Sentra to 5/6 the range -- that's phenomenal!"

    The person who wrote the article, however, presumably wasn't familiar with the technology. Or perhaps he drives a car that gets 40+mpg and carries 16 gallons. I'm not sure why, but they looked at that 300 mile range and called the range "extremely limited".

    This is how I see these "is Linux ready for the desktop?" discussions.

    If you've been playing with Linux and Windows for a few years, and then you try something like Xandros, you're likely to say "Holy Crap! They have made a huge leap forward in hardware compatibility, integration, ease of installation and use, functionality and compatibility, akin to the functionality of Windows 98!"

    If you've been playing with Windows exclusively, and you don't see or understand the progress that has been made in the last few years, you're likely to say "Well, I clicked something and got an error message I didn't understand, and it didn't set up exactly like my Windows box did, so I don't think it's ready for the desktop."

    I can play 3D shooter games. I can run 95% of the programs I want for work and play. I can listen to streaming radio stations, download account information from my bank, and SSH into my email server at home to bypass the company firewall. It's not parity with Windows XP, but it's getting mighty close.

    And it's a heck of a lot more ready for the desktop than Windows 95 was -- and we all used that once upon a time.

    • > Or perhaps he drives a car that gets 40+mpg and carries 16 gallons. I'm not sure why, but they looked at that 300 mile range and called the range "extremely limited".

      After driving 300 miles in your Nissan, you can find a gas station, fill up, and be good for another 300 miles in a few minutes. With the electric vehicle, after 300 miles you probably need a recharge that takes hours and recharge points aren't as easy to find as gas stations, or you need somewhere that will swap out a whole battery pack

Slashdot Top Deals

"Engineering without management is art." -- Jeff Johnson

Close