Slashdot

Right here? This is me not purchasing it. :)

Didn't Mandriva just do the same - by default the download includes Nvidia drivers and PDF etc?

http://linux.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=07/10/09/1757214 [slashdot.org]

So the product is controversial because they worked with other companies (who may not be RMS's version of Open Source Advocates) to create a product that will work well with other systems and try to give features that Customers want. Life is sometimes a lot better when you decide to work with the system other then fighting it all the time.
        There is a common misconception that everyone needs to change the world, for most people they just want to get by. Without the Morality of it all Linux is a Good OS not great but good, and technically not worth all the zealotry. So for the majority of people who needs a Good OS that is inexpensive Linux is a good option if they need to pay some price for a distribution to get improved compatibility so they can get along with their lives easer then all the better.
        Microsoft, Apple, ... are not the enemies they are competitors. There is a difference between the two. Competitors you can work together for a common goal enemies you can't. Microsoft and Apple are willing to work with Linux distribution makers if they realize they can benefit from it. The Linux Zealots who have make Microsoft their enemy have loss out on a chance to expand what they can do.
        So if I can now go to a web site and view Quicktime and Microsoft Format then all the better and if it is supported my Microsoft then there is a better chance (not complete) that the next version wont entirely kick me out).
        Being a constant activist really wares people down and actually makes them miserable people. Where if you can work within the system you will feel better and probably get more good done.

I've never used Linspire, but in terms of licensing file formats such as Quicktime and Windows Media, I think they're on the right track. People want an OS that works out of the box, and that includes media tasks. If it doesn't the average user has very little patience to make it work right.

Why no ment6ion of freespire? http://www.freespire.org/ [freespire.org]

I install Linux over Windows about once every three or four weeks for friends. One of the first things to do is add mp3 support, and also ATI or nVidia support if need be. This used to be a hassle with Fedora, so I switched to installing Kubuntu. Now, this may make our lives even easier. How many Linux installs get MP3, DVD, or other proprietary support installed anyway? Why should we bash a company that is willing to include it from the get-go. I'll look into the non-OSS version of Freespire this evening, RMS be damned.

I know it's an oft-repeated argument, about whether or not to put the GNU/ on that product or platform. But extending the usual meme slightly may shed some new light on that debate. I'm just hoping it won't produce flame instead.

Linspire isn't just Linux. It's not even just GNU/Linux. Some might call it GNU/Apache/Qt/Linux/etc. Now it's GNU/Apache/Qt/Microsoft/Adobe/Real/Linux/etc. Pretty soon, your "free software" is going to have more corporate badges than a brand new laptop.

As simple as that. 99% of my Linux hassles is with proprietary, closed crap. Open stuff tends to Just Work after reading the friendly manual.

A big problem with Linspire was its former CEO, Kevin Carmony. They guy is a snake-oil salesman with no technical expertise. The idea of bundling all this closed, proprietary crud and paying to license codecs isn't all that terrible- people who don't want it have plenty of other Linux distributions to choose from. Though Linspire went overboard and ignored perfectly good FOSS alternatives in several cases. But Mr. Carmony's double-talk and criticism of Free and open source software alienated a whole lot of people. He doesn't understand the basic Unix security model, and despite his later denials, Linspire did indeed deliberately create only a root user during installation up through Linspire 5.0, and had zero documentation for educating their precious "new Linux desktop users" on the importance of security fundamentals.

Then a bigger problem was Linspire itself was poo. It had many broken parts, and their much-hyped CNR didn't offer anything that users wanted. But you did get a genuine, time-wasting infuriating Windows-like experience with bales of crapware, nagware, and trialware that just wouldn't shut up and go away.

To make matters worse, Carmony badmouthed FOSS principles and deliberately misstated the meaning of "free" in free software when he released Freespire. I know, the word "free" meaning "libre" is problematic anyway, and Carmony made it worse. He pretty much spit on the very community that made it possible for Linspire to exist.

So. Maybe a new CEO will make it all better. Time will tell.

This is great. The first thing I do when I setup a new Windows/Mac/Linux machine is to install all the standard stuff that nobody includes. Ex:

Windows: WinAmp, XVID, FireFox...
Mac: Flip4Mac, VLC, DIVX, ...
Linux: MP3 support for XMMS, Video drivers, ...

I understand why Linux distros can't install this stuff. It requires licenses, and the OS is free.

But I would gladly pay $50 for a distro that had this. Most end-users would too (many of them pay me far more than that for time it takes me to do it manually). The Slashdot editorial ^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^Hheadline makes it sounds like Linspire paid for a Novell-like or SCO-like patent license. That isn't what the press release says. It says they included some codecs.

Every year is supposed to be the year of "Linux on the desktop" yet whenever an article comes out about Linspire trying to make that happen, all the geeks jump on them like they are awful. Linspire is trying to make Linux easy and friendly and a pretty package. Yes, they rebranded RPM/DEB modules as "click-and-run" Yes, they pay licenses for stuff so you don't have to download it. They provide a service to the end-user, and we should be happy for every new Linux user who installs it and says "Hey, this is really great! It has everything I need" instead of complaining and making them look like Microsoft's evil twin brother.

I guess this post will be voted down into ovlidium. Anyway, I have to say this:
I've been using Linspire since their first beta (when they were called Lindows). It was a pretty decent distro, like a "moderm Debian, with KDE as default desktop manager". It had the "problem" with the root issue, but there was anything that prevented root to switch to a standard non privileged user. Lets go to today situation. This version is based in Ubuntu (instead of Debian), so it starts with all feature most Linux users wants (since Ubuntu is without dispute, the #1 Linux distro). Most people I know install over Ubuntu the "automatix" or some script to install Flash, JAVA and all codecs 99% desktop people use (remeber that a base Ubuntu installation don't even play mp3). I also use Ubuntu in another machine (have 2 notebooks and 1 server), but I bought a HP Pavillon dv5000 (Turion 64 model) and Freespire was the only distro that recognized the wifi card out of the box. You can make it work with Ubuntu and the Windows drivers, after following a 3 page step by step guide. I love Linux and love learning, but there is a moment when I want to do samething else than working for my computer.
The main difference now in Ubuntu and Linspire is the Linpire is defaulted to KDE instead of Gnome. CNR (Click and Run) is another important difference, but I guess Ubuntu will have day in the future).
So from a technical perspective, Linspire now is not so bad (in my opinion, it is even better, but this is debatable).
From a legal perspective, Linspire did a deal with MS not to promote MS claims on their patents as most people says, they did it to protect their clients (they are a commercial distro) and they use this fact to sell security (buy our distro, you won't be sued as some non computer companies were sued by SCO). From a commercial view, it was a smart move. I would like to see Canonical and Red Hat what they will do when MS lawyers go for them.
Regarding open source, Linspire did a lot contributions like Gizmo, Nvu, Lphoto and now the CNR (cnr.com), they are all open source (not just free). But the most important contribution is Freespire 2.0 (www.freespire.org) that it has also most of the propietary codecs, but without the Linspire brand (for what is worth).
IMHO, Linspire doesn't deserve to be treated as it were the LinuxOne stock scam (remember 1999?).

[...] proprietary software and formats such as Quicktime, Windows Media Player, Flash, Real, and Microsoft OOXML

Quicktime is absolutely, 100% non-proprietary at this point... h.264, MPEG-4 (ASP), AAC, MP3, are all open standards. They require patent license fees, but so do most open standards, including the WiFi card your probably using...

Windows Media is at least mostly open, with VC-1 now an SMPTE standard.

Microsoft is working towards standardizing OOXML as well. It's getting a lot of heat for not being entirely free, while ODF is, but that doesn't make it proprietary.

Real also isn't a very good example, with a player having long been provided for free use on any available Linux system.

Of note is that only the Slashdot summary made these mistakes. TFA did not mention these as proprietary. It did incorrectly mention many other open standards as being proprietary: MP3, Java, PDF, Flash, etc. though at least Flash was proprietary in the past. It also confuses proprietary software (closed implementations) eg. Acrobat, and proprietary standards eg. PDF.

So you mean all the people using Linux without buying a distro are going to use their clout as non-paying customers to not buy Linspire too?