Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
GUI GNOME Windows Linux Technology

Chinese Pirates Launch Ubuntu That Looks Like XP 580

Posted by timothy
from the day-late-6.83-yuan-short dept.
An anonymous reader writes "Ylmf, famous for pirating Windows XP, have just released a version of Ubuntu that looks just like Windows XP. Really, really similar. Apparently because Microsoft were cracking down on the actual Windows XP pirating — though I think they will still suffer for ripping off the GUI exactly." Of course, if that's the sort of look you like for your desktop, you need not risk any download cooties or language barriers; a reader in the Ubuntu Forums suggests this instructional video for giving Gnome the XP treatment.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Chinese Pirates Launch Ubuntu That Looks Like XP

Comments Filter:
  • why? (Score:4, Funny)

    by JWSmythe (446288) <jwsmythe&jwsmythe,com> on Monday December 28, 2009 @02:29AM (#30568718) Homepage Journal

        Why would I want a perfectly good Linux machine to look like a Windows machine?

    • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

      by kamikazearun (1282408)
      From what I can see, it doesn't just look like a windows machine, (unlike most windows themes for ubuntu) the GUI behaves like windows too. This would mean people who were earlier using Windows would be a bit more comfortable using ylmf's ubuntu rather than the regular one.
      • Re:why? (Score:4, Funny)

        by Anonymous Coward on Monday December 28, 2009 @03:29AM (#30568932)

        the GUI behaves like windows too

        Just add a cron script that has a 5% chance to reboot the system every half hour, and you're there! :P

        • Re:why? (Score:5, Funny)

          by ozmanjusri (601766) <aussie_bob&hotmail,com> on Monday December 28, 2009 @03:56AM (#30569040) Journal
          and you're there!

          Not quite.

          You'd need to find some way of slowing down file transfers too, add an a few dozen random "utilities" to the systray, set it to check in with Ylmf every few weeks and nag you about it, run another dozen or so malware and anti-malware apps in the background to eat some extra RAM and cpu cycles, send all your financial details off to the Russian mafia, deduct $90+ from your bank account for every app you've installed and lock itself so only 3 themes work.

          That'd be a bit closer to the Windows Genuine Advantage experience...

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

        by Gordonjcp (186804) on Monday December 28, 2009 @05:44AM (#30569356) Homepage

        This would mean people who were earlier using Windows would be a bit more comfortable using ylmf's ubuntu rather than the regular one.

        I don't see why it would make a difference. If you drive a Volkswagen and then go and drive a Toyota, the indicator and wiper switches are the opposite way round on the steering column, and the instrument panel looks different. If you're really lucky, reverse gear is in a different place on the gate, too. You don't get people whining about how they need to make the Toyota look exactly like a Volkswagen before they can drive it - they just accidentally wash the windows instead of indicating a few times for the first hour behind the wheel. Then they get used to it.

        Having never used Windows before it took me about two hours to get my head round XP, mostly due to having to learn how to solve complicated GUI puzzles to find setting that I'd normally use the command line for (like "Start -> Control Panel -> Network -> Connection -> TCP/IP -> Advanced -> set IP address" rather than "ifconfig eth0:0 192.168.1.100" to alias an ethernet port - the exact path through the GUI may be wrong). If you can't learn to live with the differences you probably have some underlying psychological condition that needs addressed.

        • Re:why? (Score:5, Insightful)

          by Alain Williams (2972) <addw@phcomp.co.uk> on Monday December 28, 2009 @06:10AM (#30569440) Homepage

          I don't see why it would make a difference. If you drive a Volkswagen and then go and drive a Toyota, the indicator and wiper switches are the opposite way round on the steering column, and the instrument panel looks different .... Then they get used to it.

          The trouble is that most people don't do this, it looks different so they panic and can't use the machine. I have seen people unable to use their machine because the icons have moved around — I kid you not!

          Having never used Windows before it took me about two hours to get my head round XP,

          You are exceptional, as a most of us who read slashdot, we will take something new as a challenge, play with it & try to understand how it works — then start using it.

          The thing that most of us geeks fail to understand is that most users have little insight into how their machine works, they know that if they press this button something happens; but the why escapes them (even a why that is ''obvious'' to most of us). Because of this if anything changes they are no longer on familiar territory and become worried.

          This could be fixed by teaching/training that dealed with a computer/word-processor/... by teaching understanding — but even if a user gets any training the teacher probably does not have the insight to do this. Also such training would take a bit longer and be harder than the ''point, click, do'' courses that are most of what is on offer — so they would not sell in spite of the long term benefits.

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

            by Ogi_UnixNut (916982) on Monday December 28, 2009 @08:37AM (#30569944) Homepage

            The problem is not the people, it is how they are educated. For example, they are taught from school onwards that a "PC" has windows on it, with MS office, and that a "Mac" exists that is not a PC, and looks totally different, but does a similar task.

            This is why most people I know will sit in front of a Mac and accept that it is not going to work like windows, and are even more tolerant of kinks, quirks and differences.

            To do a car analogy, it's like someone being taught that a Honda is a "car", and there is this other thing called a "motorbike" that looks different and is used by fewer people. This Honda has a unique interface like no other car (but may be similar to them). If people drive Honda's all their lives, then they get into another car, they will freak out and get confused, because in their mind All cars should work like the Honda. If they were to get on a motorbike, they would realise "yes, I was told, different to cars" and will actually expect the unexpected, they will be aware that it's different and they will engage and try to learn how to operate it.

            I've see this with people. My former gf's mum was like this. My former gf tried to switch her to Ubuntu, but her mum freaked out at the different buttons, the different "look" and the different order of her icons. After a couple of days she flat our refused to use Ubuntu. This same person would then go on to get a Mac, and spend 4 months trying to learn how to use it. The Mac's interface was more alien to her than Ubuntu's, but in her mind Macs were supposed to work differently to PC's, so this was ok and she just needed to learn. To her Ubuntu was still a "PC" and therefore must look and act exactly like Windows unless something is badly wrong.

            My brother was in the same boat, at school they were teaching him this PC=="MS Win & Office" thing, and he would always have trouble when he borrowed my machine. So I went and taught him how to use an OS, Word processing and other office software, in general. NOT Windows, Word and he rest of MS Office. Now he is comfortable using pretty much any OS, in fact he prefers Ubuntu now, only booting windows in a VM for his "e-textbooks", that only work on IE with windows, and he isn't interested in computers (being a humanities student).

        • Re:why? (Score:4, Insightful)

          by oshkrozz (1051896) on Monday December 28, 2009 @09:13AM (#30570120)
          You can not compare a GUI to a CLI ... to change the IP right click on My Network (either on the desktop or in the start menu) and choose properties Select the Interface and choose Properties then select TCP/IP ... (3 steps) Ubuntu System --> Administration --> Network Select Network Log in Change values ... uuuh hey look also 3 steps ... If you are a CLI snob then use the freeking cli ... oh wait ... that's because you spent 2 hours to moan about it rather then 5 seconds on google to find out the CLI command on XP (or after 10 min of not finding it 5 seconds on google with ... how to change IP in windows XP) btw for those lazy people .. the cli in XP is: netsh int ip address "" .... various commands like static to set static and so on set completely overwrites the interface add adds the new IP/mask/whatever to the interface
        • Re:why? (Score:4, Funny)

          by BobMcD (601576) on Monday December 28, 2009 @10:13AM (#30570628)

          This would mean people who were earlier using Windows would be a bit more comfortable using ylmf's ubuntu rather than the regular one.

          I don't see why it would make a difference. If you drive a Volkswagen and then go and drive a Toyota, the indicator and wiper switches are the opposite way round on the steering column, and the instrument panel looks different. If you're really lucky, reverse gear is in a different place on the gate, too. You don't get people whining about how they need to make the Toyota look exactly like a Volkswagen before they can drive it - they just accidentally wash the windows instead of indicating a few times for the first hour behind the wheel. Then they get used to it.

          The first cars [wikipedia.org] came into popular use over one hundred years ago. The computer [wikipedia.org], relatively speaking, is only about fifteen to twenty years old. Certainly the internet is about the same age, and it has completely redefined what a computer even is.

          Car analogies aren't really applicable because the car was in heavy use when these people were born. They have never known life without one. Compare the same to a teenager today and perhaps you'd see less resistance to learning a new way to operate a computer.

      • InstallXpGnome.sh (Score:3, Interesting)

        by AliasMarlowe (1042386)
        If you really want an ugly XP look on top of Gnome, then just use the InstallXpGnome.sh script, as illustrated in this French video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FocT2fFBU50 [youtube.com]

        Why do such a perverted thing to Ubuntu? To get it past the thought police at work, perhaps. Of course, they might wonder why your PC looks different on the network, and find out the truth when attempting to apply policies (like pushing updates to antivirus or windows) or other Microsoft domain masochistic practices.
    • by jginspace (678908)

      Why would I want a perfectly good Linux machine to look like a Windows machine?

      You might not want but the audience is Chinese and perhaps this is what they do want. It glorious to get rich; it's not so glorious to be spending your precious time clicking around trying to get used to vagaries of Gnome.

    • by tftp (111690)

      It reduces the shock factor when you introduce a new worker to his new computer. He may ask a few questions later about OpenOffice and the mail client though.

    • Re:why? (Score:4, Insightful)

      by Bios_Hakr (68586) <xpticalNO@SPAMgmail.com> on Monday December 28, 2009 @02:44AM (#30568782) Homepage

      A very good question. If someone went *all out* and coded the Control Panel and the MMC, it might be okay. But as far as the primary desktop, I really see no need.

      As for the underlying stuff, it would allow people already familiar with Windows (MCSEs mostly) to make an easier transition. Looking at Ubuntu, 99% of the functionality is the same. I can setup screensavers (and power profiles), configure networks (including wireless), and install/remove programs. If someone emulated that stuff, my peers would have one less system of clicks to learn.

      Particularly, I wish the MMC was better emulated inside Ubuntu. I can partition drives, start and stop services, add users and groups, control file shares, and check the system logs from inside one interface.

      And the hardcore people (script gurus and PowerShell users) could (would probably) always learn the underlying systems.

    • Re: (Score:2, Informative)

      The PHB is looking over my shoulder.

      • PHB: What is that
      • me: Linux.
      • PHB: That hacking thing? ZOMG HAX PINKSLIP!!10101
      • me: ???
    • by Gerzel (240421) *

      You want the fantasy that Windows works?

    • Re:why? (Score:5, Funny)

      by shentino (1139071) on Monday December 28, 2009 @04:06AM (#30569084)

      To overcome pro-windows bias.

      Think of it as the linux version of the Mojave experiment.

    • Re: (Score:2, Interesting)

      Why would I want a perfectly good Linux machine to look like a Windows machine?

      The geek factor, obviously.
      Besides, you can use it to make fun. Just imagine a new student, or a secretary, trying to comprehend what is wrong, when they try (against the policy of the institute) to install their favorite game/chat/other distraction.

    • by jonaskoelker (922170) <jonaskoelker@gnu. o r g> on Monday December 28, 2009 @05:42AM (#30569352) Homepage

      Why would I want a perfectly good Linux machine to look like a Windows machine?

      Don't you get it? In China, 2010 is the Year of Linux on the Desktop.

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by mjwalshe (1680392)
      they are probaly scamming people who think they are buying windows XP
  • Open source windows (Score:2, Interesting)

    by mrcaseyj (902945)

    When Microsoft was convicted of monopoly abuse, the judge should have forced Microsoft to release the source code of XP under the BSD license and thereby restore true competition to the operating system market.

    • Re: (Score:2, Funny)

      by binarylarry (1338699)

      And in turn release a plague of garbage OS code on mankind.

    • Yeah, and how would it turn out? Microsoft would have gone broke, Apple would be unable to pick up the slack of Microsoft, Linux wasn't in a usable state, viruses/botnets would run more rampant due to the lack of updates and a lack of security via the obscurity of the source code. Yeah, if today that happened we would have competition. In 2001/2002 all that would happen would be the collapse of the computer industry. Today the main reason why Linux isn't adopted is due to Windows programs, back in 2001/2002
      • by zeroduck (691015)

        Similarly, getting even connected to a network wasn't straightforward or as easy as XP. Linux would have died.

        I don't know about you, but the first *nix (FreeBSD 4 or 5) system I used, network setup was much easier than Windows. Hell, I still have to download drivers for the nic on every clean Windows install. Now getting XFree86 working right back then on my shitty hardware, thats another story (and now, using Ubuntu, I've never had graphics not work out of the box--although that can't be said of every

    • by westlake (615356)

      the judge should have forced Microsoft to release the source code of XP under the BSD license and thereby restore true competition to the operating system market.

      The most likely result securely anchoring Windows as the OS of choice for the masses.

  • by BadAnalogyGuy (945258) <BadAnalogyGuy@gmail.com> on Monday December 28, 2009 @02:43AM (#30568774)

    User: What a pretty GUI you have.
    YImf: All the better to confuse you with, my dear.
    U: And what strange fonts you have.
    Y: All the better to break your layouts with, my dear.
    U: And what a lack of app support you have.
    Y: All the better to irritate you with, my dear.
    U: And what terrible hardware support you have.
    Y: All the better to eat up your time with, my dear!

    Just then the hunter entered the house and cut the YImf right down the belly.

    • You do know that in the original version of Little Red Ridding hood there was no hunter/woodsman?
      • by dbIII (701233)
        True but it was also a warning about getting raped and murdered by strangers, and at some point it was considered too scary to warn kids about such things.
  • by linguizic (806996) on Monday December 28, 2009 @02:54AM (#30568824)
    Finally Linux gets a decent GUI!!! [ducks head]
    • Re: (Score:3, Funny)

      by Herkum01 (592704)

      While intended as a joke, isn't this what Windows fan boys have been saying for years? "It does not act like Windows, it is not not ready."

      Well now someone took a can of paint and slapped it all over Ubuntu, and it looks like Windows. I guess it is ready for prime time!

      • Still need the applications and games.
        • It has a lot of games. Compatible with hundreds, it appears.

          http://www.playonlinux.com/en/ [playonlinux.com]

          But installing them is still round-about.

          • Interesting site, thanks for bringing it to my attention.

            However, it looks like its based on WINE and despite all the progress the WINE project has made in the last few years there are still applications and games that will not run, or run poorly, under WINE.

            Until game/application companies start to provide versions of their games/apps that work natively on Linux this area will continue to be one of the holds up mass adoption of Linux.

            FYI, I've been Linux only for over 3 years.
            Desktop, laptop and firewa
      • by dbIII (701233)
        MS Windows doesn't act like MS Windows anymore - "I'm a PC, and ripping off OS X badly was my idea".
        Looking after a few dozen desktops used by developers that like to tweak things is a really good way to see how inconsistant the MS windows environment really is. Hmm, I wonder which side of the screen I have to move the mouse off to get to the hidden start menu on this one.
        Since Win 3.11 was ready for prime time I suggest you fanboys stop taunting with the "is linux ready for the desktop yet" line. IMHO it
  • Graphics (Score:5, Interesting)

    by xant (99438) on Monday December 28, 2009 @02:55AM (#30568828) Homepage

    I don't read Chinese, and I'm not about to download that--but is the point supposed to be that pirating windows is illegal and repainting Ubuntu is not?

    Here's the thing: based on the screenshots, it's virtually certain that they used the copyrighted graphics that come with Windows to make this. Depending on how thorough they are, they may have used a fair amount of copyrighted text, as well.

    As such, they are still "pirates". Why not just keep pirating Windows? What does this accomplish for them, exactly?

    • Re: (Score:2, Interesting)

      by Anonymous Coward

      Well, for starters, they end up with a more secure and stable product.

      This is not a troll. Windows may be secure (for some values of secure, and after investing a lot in malware scanners), but pirated Windows is notoriously crappy. Even MS acknowledges that (exaggerates it even - it's a good story for scaring your customers straight).

    • Re:Graphics (Score:4, Interesting)

      by Zemran (3101) on Monday December 28, 2009 @04:48AM (#30569234) Homepage Journal

      copyrighted graphics ???
      copyrighted text ???

      Sorry Dorothy but this ain't Kansas. IANACL (I am not a Chinese Lawyer) but I doubt that the broken US concept of copyright will go far in another country, especially one like China. Plagiarism is seen as a compliment there so M$ would get laughed at if they complained about it. To say that someone is copying your product is one thing but to say that someone has made their product look like your product is another.

  • Why would somebody spend this time to make a 2009 OS look like 1999 OS??
  • Why still? (Score:2, Insightful)

    by craagz (965952)
    Why is Microsoft still pursuing Win XP cloning? Now that it has ended support for Win XP? Let them pirates be!
  • by mugurel (1424497) on Monday December 28, 2009 @03:23AM (#30568906)
    a cron job?
  • once people discover how well it works compared to their usual Windows experience.
  • by CodeBuster (516420) on Monday December 28, 2009 @03:25AM (#30568912)
    Anyone here on Slashdot who knows me knows that I am not a big fan of copyright in general as a concept and certainly not the current US implementation which has been really skewed against the public since the Copyright Act of 1976 and followed with real gems like the Copyright Term Extension Act (a.k.a "The Mickey Mouse Protection Act"). However, having said that; doesn't Microsoft own the copyrights on the Windows XP icon set? It seems to me that they could still quash this in the United States because it appears that the icon files have been ripped verbatim from Windows XP.
  • Pirates (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Evro (18923) * <evandhoffman@gmaPARISil.com minus city> on Monday December 28, 2009 @03:26AM (#30568916) Homepage Journal

    Now that "real" pirates are back on the world stage, maybe we can get rid of this dumb use of the word pirate? I, at least, was pretty confused for a couple of seconds as to why pirates would do any sort of software trickery.

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by mccalli (323026)
      Now that "real" pirates are back on the world stage, maybe we can get rid of this dumb use of the word pirate? Look - the term pirate has been in use to describe copying software for decades. Once upon a time in my reckless* youth, I copied software too and I called it pirating. I got it from people calling themselves pirates, as released by groups like the Pompey Pirates [final-memory.org]. The word wasn't forced on us by some manipulating media, we wanted to be called pirates.

      I'm strictly reformed these days, and have be
    • Re: (Score:3, Funny)

      by FrostedWheat (172733)
      What should we replace it with? "I ninja'ed the latest copy of Photoshop" just doesn't sound right.
  • Links (Score:2, Informative)

    by a0schweitzer (1702404)

    The Linuxologist ran a story covering the video [linuxologist.com] (and accompanying conversion script), mentioned by the OP, a while ago. Apparently there's an entire project [online02.com] for a gnome GUI conversion to make it look like XP.

    I think it's pretty useful for convincing family members to make the switch to Ubuntu and cut down on personal Windows-related maintenance time.

  • Meh... I'd rather have it use the Windows 2000 UI.

  • Yes, it does make sense. Apparently the demand for Windows on-the-cheap is high in China, so in order to provide what the customer wants, at the price point they want, and without pirating XP, they came up with this. Everything is legit and everyone is happy (well, everyone except MS).
  • Excellent! (Score:4, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward on Monday December 28, 2009 @03:53AM (#30569030)

    This is so perfect it isn't even funny. I can now replace the XP on my parent's computer with Linux and they won't know the difference. The "family support plan" just got a whole lot easier for me.

  • Linux XP (Score:5, Informative)

    by ahabswhale (1189519) on Monday December 28, 2009 @04:03AM (#30569066)
    The Russians already did this: http://www.linux-xp.com/desktop/2010-release-notes/ [linux-xp.com]
  • by Animats (122034) on Monday December 28, 2009 @04:06AM (#30569082) Homepage

    The typical "open source" solution to a badly designed GUI is to make the GUI reconfigurable, with "skins" or "themes". This is an admission of failure.

    Blender, the animation system, is about to do this. All 3D animation systems are complex, but Blender has an unusually confused GUI, with changes in each release and out of sync documentation. So, in the next release, 2.5, Blender will support "themes", plus some scheme for custom Python code to rework the GUI. Now the developers can blame the user.

    The other classic vice of the Unix/Linux world is the one-way GUI. Input is graphical, but output is in a text window, because the GUI is wallpaper over some text-oriented application. This comes from a design flaw of UNIX - when you run a subprocess, you can pass in a list of arguments, but all you get back is an exit status and maybe a text stream. "exit" should have had "argc" and "argv" parameters via which the subprogram could return structured results to the caller.

    For a painful example of this problem, make a wireless network connection with a Linux EeePC. All the GUI gives you is success or failure. Errors are hidden in a text window with incredibly confusing blither from about six programs used to set up the connection, several of which produce error messages in normal operation.

    For better or worse, the Mac got this right back in 1984, and it's still worth reading the Macintosh User Interface Guidelines. Two rules often forgotten: "You should never have to tell the computer something it already knows", and "An alert box consists of a sentence explaining the problem, and a sentence suggesting what to do about it." The idea that you should never have to tell the computer something it already knows means that it's not acceptable to make the user copy information from one place to another. The Linux community does not get this at all, and the Windows community sometimes forgets it.

    • by slim (1652)

      For better or worse, the Mac got this right back in 1984

      Funny you should say that, because my abiding memory of using Macs in the mid 1990s was "Application Hypercard has quit unexpectedly due to error #{error number}"

    • Re: (Score:2, Interesting)

      by Mystery00 (1100379)
      Blender's GUI is great, it has a learning curve because it's a complicated program, like most 3D applications and takes a while to get used to. But there is absolutely nothing terribly wrong with its GUI, in fact it is faster and more efficient than the Max or XSI's.

      Why? Because artists made it, and they know how they want to use their own program for their own work more than you do.

      Blender is getting customisation support only to make it more accessible to people that are too stupid or too lazy or don't ha
    • by Cyberax (705495) on Monday December 28, 2009 @04:36AM (#30569204)

      "The other classic vice of the Unix/Linux world is the one-way GUI. Input is graphical, but output is in a text window, because the GUI is wallpaper over some text-oriented application. This comes from a design flaw of UNIX - when you run a subprocess, you can pass in a list of arguments, but all you get back is an exit status and maybe a text stream. "exit" should have had "argc" and "argv" parameters via which the subprogram could return structured results to the caller. "

      From what century are you writing this? 18-th or maybe 19-th, I wager?

    • by Arker (91948) on Monday December 28, 2009 @05:47AM (#30569370) Homepage

      You are almost right, partly. :)

      For a painful example of this problem, make a wireless network connection with a Linux EeePC. All the GUI gives you is success or failure. Errors are hidden in a text window with incredibly confusing blither from about six programs used to set up the connection, several of which produce error messages in normal operation.

      I have an EeePC and I know *precisely* what you are talking about. I agree it is bad, but I disagree with your solution entirely. This problem is amenable to a much simpler solution, there is no need for any drastic architectural changes. The basic architecture here is sound, there is no reason why the GUI-box should not just report success or failure and leave the actual diagnostic output to another box that the user only has cause to invoke if there is a problem. The real problem here is that errors are reported even when nothing is wrong. The best I can see this is due quite simply to the fact that no one is willing to pay one or two employees (they dont have to be highly skilled, just computer literate enough to track down scripts and edit them) to finish the job when they make a distribution. In this case, there are error on the EeePC that are normal all over the place, not just in this one box, but bloody everywhere. They are caused by using generic scripts, designed to work on an extraordinarily broad range of different installations, with no customisation. It is a relatively tiny amount of work to go through these scripts, figure out which lines are actually unneeded and inappropriate on *this* distribution, and remove them. Simple as that.

      Now, when I fire up a newly installed white-box, I see a lot of similar spurious error messages scroll by. This is to be expected - I am using a general purpose distribution and it makes sense for the default scripts to have this result and to expect the person installing it to go ahead and take a few minutes to customise the scripts and get rid of the spurious commands, either by deletion or simply commenting them out. The only complaint I have in that setting is that it does, on occasion, seem unreasonably difficult to track down the scripts in question, as if the builders of the distro never even thought of anyone wanting to clean the thing up post-install. This attitude, or my perception of it, grates the nerves, it is just shoddy engineering. Error messages should NOT be normal, and an OS installation cannot be said to be complete until they are all cleaned up. When the user sees an error message they should be able to have confidence it is a real error. Instead they learn that it is 'normal' to have spurious error messages all over the place, they learn to ignore them, and then when there is a real error message that does need attention - it is ignored too.

      On the EeePC, however, it is not excusable at all. This is a very specialised distribution created *specifically* for this hardware. There is no excuse whatsoever for these scripts not to have been cleaned up so that they produce no error messages on their intended hardware before the image was burned, period.

      Another very annoying feature of that particular Operating System is that it does not support swap partitions. This really boils down to the same problem - the company producing it obviously couldnt be bothered to budget just a handful of hours with someone familiar with linux for this thing! More specifically, it appears that Asus was told by the manufacturer of the SSD used that it should absolutely never be used for virtual memory. This advice could only have come with someone that is familiar with Windows, but not with computers in general and certainly not with linux specifically. SSDs do have a limited number of read/write cycles, you see, and Windows WILL thrash virtual memory whenever given it, without rhyme or reason, it just insists on rewriting it fairly often. Allowing Windows to use an SSD for virtual memory is a very bad idea. But Linux does

    • all you get back is [...] a text stream. [...] could return structured results to the caller.

      Parsers. 'Nuff said.

      Two rules often forgotten: "You should never have to tell the computer something it already knows"

      I'd like to extrapolate that: you should never have to tell the computer the same thing twice. You should be able to make the computer act on general rules.

      I really hate that with Network Manager, I can't tell it "whenever you see one of the essids [home, work], connect automatically". Why the hell do I have to spend my precious time clicking stuff when I already know what I'm going to click on?

      (Linux lets me express general rules about what my computer should do, in the language of shell scripts etc.; for that, I love it. Thanks also to wpa_supplicant's roaming mode.)

    • by johnw (3725) on Monday December 28, 2009 @06:48AM (#30569542)

      The Linux community does not get this at all, and the Windows community sometimes forgets it.

      On this front, the Linux experience is worlds better than the Windows one. My biggest frustration when trying to sort out problems on other people's Windows boxes is the frequency with which one gets an error message which amounts to "Something went wrong, but we're not telling you what." The big mistake which the Windows developers make is hiding information from the user so even if you are capable of understanding the technical aspects of the problem, you're not allowed to see them.

      It's true that the average user either ignores technical information in an error message, or goes into a panic when it appears, but there should always be *some* way of getting at it. Windows is dreadful in this respect.

  • by erroneus (253617) on Monday December 28, 2009 @04:19AM (#30569132) Homepage

    For the longest time while Microsoft was busy solidifying its monopoly position on the desktop, it did nothing short of encouraging copyright infringement by actually reporting "pirated copies" of its OS in its reported figures.

    Once that mission was accomplished and any sort of competition was put behind them, they started using stronger means to protect their software. But perhaps the measures are too strong in today's "Linux curious" environment.

    When a Linux desktop distro looks exactly like Windows XP, people already know how to use it. And with WINE being in a rather mature state, lots of software will run just fine... (including malware, I'm afraid...) It still will not be long before people realize they are not using Windows, but are quite able to use it... they will also realize that they CAN use it and may not need Windows after all. Perhaps this is something Microsoft doesn't want people to know.

  • by hduff (570443) <hoytduff.gmail@com> on Monday December 28, 2009 @04:27AM (#30569166) Homepage Journal

    Make WinXP look like KDE http://www.tech-atom.com/windows/ultimate-linux-transformation-pack-for-windows-xp.html [tech-atom.com]

    Make GNOME look like WinXP http://ubuntu.online02.com/xpgnome [online02.com]

    Make WinXP look likeUbuntu http://pc-hacks.blogspot.com/2007/10/make-up-over-your-windows-look-like.html [blogspot.com]

    Make WinXP look like Enlightenment http://www.litestep.net/ [litestep.net]

    Make Linux look like Win95 http://fvwm.org/ [fvwm.org]

    It all makes my head hurt.

  • by tyroneking (258793) on Monday December 28, 2009 @06:08AM (#30569436)

    .... just what I need to fool my clients into using Ubuntu instead of crappy Microsoft XP.

  • why it looks like XP (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward on Monday December 28, 2009 @07:10AM (#30569608)

    So a friend who's working on the Incognito LiveCD project have got news from people being beaten and jailed by police in china. And how did they got discovered? Well, they used the LiveCD at a internet café and the owner realized that that's not windows and called the police.
    Having linux looking like windows could be a privacy feature.

  • by peter303 (12292) on Monday December 28, 2009 @09:34AM (#30570306)
    Chinese are nortious for stealing others people's source code and trying to sell it under various guises.
  • doesn't look like XP (Score:5, Informative)

    by barnacle (522370) on Monday December 28, 2009 @09:52AM (#30570450) Homepage

    It appears that the screenshot was taken from the real Windows XP, and Ylmf OS does not look much like XP, but rather exactly like Gnome.

    Here's a screenshot taken from someone who installed the ISO in VMWare and changed the locale to English: http://i50.tinypic.com/2lar9s0.jpg [tinypic.com]

"Whoever undertakes to set himself up as a judge of Truth and Knowledge is shipwrecked by the laughter of the gods." -- Albert Einstein

Working...