Lycoris - Linux for the Masses? 441
Dejected @Work writes "MSNBC.com, a definitely sketchy source of Linux information, just came out with an article "Linux for the Masses" about the ease of installing Lycoris(formerly Redmond Linux) on the desktop. The author even concluded you can 'fall in love with an ever-easier-to-use operating system.' It sounds like great news but am I missing something?" Several favorable reviews of this distro recently. It looks like all you have to do to get the reviewers on your side is to let them play solitaire during the install. :) Update: 04/13 14:53 GMT by T : Eric Krout also suggests the two-part review (part one and part two) over on monolinux.
Sounds good to me (Score:3, Insightful)
There are still some complexities in linux that most people will have a hard time with, such as installation and configuration of programs. Its getting better. RPM really helps out alot of people (I like it alot), but not everything uses RPM. I am having a terrible time getting Quake working on a Redhat 7.2 distro here right now (as well as problems with DVD decoding and Divx).
Linux for the masses is great, but lets not let the masses over-simplify it or take it to the lowest commom demononator. And let's not bloat it either (i know redhat is a hog, but it works pretty well)
Tibbon
Re:Sounds good to me (Score:2)
We need to solve that problem once and for all, then you can have Lindows style click and run installs.
Re:Sounds good to me (Score:2, Insightful)
The really big advantage that Windows users have is a larger userbase, which just makes it so much easier to find a Foo for Dummies page for pretty much any foo.
Granted, you can find instuctions on foo for Linux, too, but it's often harder to find, and much more likely to be a Foo for Techies document.
If Linux were to seriously start to gain acceptance on the non-techie desktop, it would be the beginning of a virtuous circle; the increased userbase would favour further adoption...
Re:Sounds good to me (Score:2)
Part of the reason it seems that way is that with the current state of Linux comprehensibility for the new or "average" user, you pretty much *have* to RTFM in order to get things to work the way you may want! However, I have found the accessibility of those ahem, *fine* manuals is excellent, much more so than any online windows documentation (for all user levels.) Even back in '94/95 when I was beginning to play with Linux, the available HOWTO documents were invaluable though not intuitive to locate (at least for dummies like me)
As a side note on comprehensibility, does anybody remember the original Macintosh's getting-started manual? Wasn't that a thing of beauty...
Re:Sounds good to me (Score:5, Insightful)
Linux for the masses is great, but lets not let the masses over-simplify it or take it to the lowest commom demononator.
Why not? You wouldn't have to use it! I would love to see a Linux distro that is brain-dead simple to install and oversimplifies everything. I want a distro that automagically detects my hardware and installs a few basic tools, X, GNOME (no flames please), Mozilla, and OpenOffice. I want a distro with as few config options as possible. I want a distro that's simple, dammit.
Would I ever use such a distribution? No, but I wouldn't be the target market. My Mom would be the target. My roommate would be the target. My grandparents would be the target. Most people don't want a lot of choices in their computing life. They just want something that they can use with as few headaches as possible. Why are we so reluctant to provide that?
Heck, it's not like Debian would go away if we made an OS that played to the "lowest common denominator". What are you so afraid of?
Re:Sounds good to me (Score:3, Interesting)
You've just described my little sister. She's used Red Hat's Linux with heavy customizations from me for over 3 years. Questions I have had this month include;
That she uses Linux vs. Windows means nothing, except that she knows I don't support Windows. If she wants Windows, she can get help from someone else.
Linux for the masses is great, but lets not let the masses over-simplify it or take it to the lowest commom demononator. And let's not bloat it either (i know redhat is a hog, but it works pretty well)
You're making a mistake with this reasoning;
Windows users get a standard set of programs; remove seemingly unneeded programs and your system will not work properly.
Except for the kernel sources, there is no standard "Linux". There are only distributions. Remove or add anything you want -- if something stops working, it's probably because something you removed was logically necessary.
Lycoris is a distribution, though so are Tomsrbt, Lindows, and the one bundled with a TIVO. These four aren't similar, and they shouldn't have to be.
In most situations, if a distribution is bloated or too lean, it only means you haven't changed it beyond the defaults. You're not alone in this, though.
Example: A friend reciently went on a rant about Red Hat not having a GUI. I asked what he did during the install, and he answered "I don't know, I asked for a Linux server and they gave me Red Hat". Red Hat's default server configuration is to not install X; servers don't need a GUI and having X around by default introduces problems in a server environment.
Let me guess... (Score:2)
To those people I say: BLAH!
Look at Mandrake, hell look at Red Hat. Both distro's are so easy to install we are only waiting on post-install improvements.
RPM or DEB? They need to get a tad easier, then maybe we can be closer.
Why linux isn't ready for the desktop (Score:2)
OEONE Homebase (Score:2)
OEONE is easy to use, its not windows based, no one ever complained about it being hard.
The reason Linux is hard is because its trying to be Linux and Windows at the same time, when you let Linux be Linux and build the GUI around Linux's strengths, Linux becomes easy to use.
The only problem is the installer situation, once thats fixed I expect Linux to begin to dominate the Desktop.
Using a Flash based GUI could work fine for most people considering the CPU speed they have now.
Also directFB and other projects have ways of making the GUI better.
Lastly, you could use Mozilla and render the GUI using XUL and have something thats nicer than current Linux GUI.
Linux's problem is X, its that simple. X render is not powerful enough, or easier enough to use, if it takes years to be easy enough to use thats too late.
I dont see IBM, or Anyone funding improvements to Xrender, I dont see Gnome developers working on improving Xfree, I dont see Gnome developers even working on making things innovative, they are busy copying windows.
Theres nothing wrong with copying windows, but you can never copy windows better than Microsoft.
A dangerous path to follow (Score:5, Insightful)
Desktops like KDE and to (and to a lesser extent, GNOME) copy Windows so shamelessly that they bring expectations, especially from novice users. The wild cut and paste in UNIX is enough to frustrate most novice users. The ripped off UI minus the "normal" (read: Windowsesque) behavior is enough to make most novices believe that Linux is nothing better than a second-rate windows. I've seen this first hand: my neighbor installs RedHat/KDE and it looks like Windows, and what does he do when the first misbehaving X app takes over half his screen (without revealing the "close" widget)? He realizes that he's in over his head, and goes back to Windows.
It's a terrible idea to out-Windows windows. If they don't carve out their own UI, Linux will always be playing catch-up on the desktop.
Re:Redhat is not desktop linux (Score:2)
Lindows has marketing, Lindows has ease of use, (Score:3, Informative)
Lindows has alot of money, Michael Robertson is a billionare, and he has support from others, Lindows isnt going anywhere,
Its $99? $99 will be for access to warehouse and what not, remember Lindows is GPL which means they MUST release the code, just let your friend burn you a CD, You wont be able to log into the warehouse without your friends password but you'll have Lindows.
Who in their right mind (talking consumer, not geek here) would throw out a perfectly good copy and replace it with a pay Linux? No one. Linux will always appeal exclusively to geeks, no matter if anyone on
Word of mouth, the fact that while Lindows isnt free, by using it you get access to thousands of free programs which costs money to use under Windows,
Also add the fact that your windows programs will work in Lindows.
Lindows is a good OS with a good plan and if they market it correctly they can be as successful as redhat, right now it depends on how they market it.
Lindows is set to make their money on services like warehouse and click n run, I dont think they can stop people from distributing Lindows for cheaper or getting ISOs from friends.
Re:Lindows has marketing, Lindows has ease of use, (Score:2)
If I think I know Michael Robertson like I think I do, he will get his crack-squad team of lawyers to phenegel their way out of GPL requirements. Something like that.
Word of mouth, the fact that while Lindows isnt free, by using it you get access to thousands of free programs which costs money to use under Windows.
Umm, so you're saying open source programs for Linux are free, and open source programs for Windows cost cash money? Uh-huh. There are some great open source programs for Windows, like VirtualDub (adobe premiere for the cheap/penniless), cEdit (chock full of features programmers' editor written in VB), and WebCam2000 (webcam snapshot/http server) to name a few.
Yes, OSS is available for Windows.
people in windows dont know about gimp (Score:2)
Lindows will introduce millions of people to open source like they did with mp3s, and i think they can make a business if like with mp3s open source takes off and becomes mainstream, mp3.com made money off free mp3s!
Re:people in windows dont know about gimp (Score:3, Funny)
WTF kind of picture is that?
Maybe the NSA needs to do this when they cut 'n' paste a 6-inch resolution satellite image of an entire axis-of-evil country into a powerpoint slide for W. (They are reported to have a budget that enables them to actually buy Adobe software.)
Re:people in windows dont know about gimp (Score:3, Informative)
Hell, my scanner, which is like 6 years old, can do 4800 DPI (interpolated). At 4800 DPI, it would only take a 2.8 inch square scan to take up 700MB. Mind you, that's pretty insane resolution.
Re:Let me guess... (Score:2)
Debian does this. Gnome, KDE and Windowmaker menus are all updated automatically when you apt-get new software. It's one of those nice little touches you notice after you've been using it for a while...
A couple of Lycoris links (Score:3, Informative)
Re:A couple of Lycoris links (Score:2)
Re:A couple of Lycoris links (Score:3, Funny)
I would've done more, but the site seems to have gotten /.ed as I was writing this helpful post.
Re:A couple of Lycoris links (Score:4)
I want to consider their distro but I can't get to it. I'm sure there are people reading this telling me to be patient, but I think that when you are promoting an OS that gets its fame as a server OS, your fucking Internet connection to the rest of the fucking world should not get frozen up when you get popular.
Re:A couple of Lycoris links (Score:2)
I don't know, that's why I'm asking.
Solitaire during install?! (Score:4, Funny)
Think I'm kidding? Never underestimate the resourcefulness of the average idiot.
Re:Solitaire during install?! (Score:4, Funny)
That wouldn't be such a bad thing if they did it on a different machine each time...
Cheers,
Jim
I think chess would be better (Score:2)
Even aol and yahoo offer chess, besides if you let them set up the modem first they can connect to a server and play chess with other people, chess can easily consume 30-40 minutes and would be perfect for long 7 dvd installs. hell add IM program like gaim or kopete in there and they may not even remember to exit the install
Re:I think chess would be better (Score:5, Interesting)
Now that isnt a bad idea. If you had some corporate backing, or some dedicated volunteers, you could have an install-im with a live person at the other end. That way, if you needed any help you could chat with a helpful install buddy. Tell me that wouldnt impress reviewers.
Of course, most of my early problems were getting a damn PPP connection up...
Thats an excellent idea! (Score:2)
Re:Solitaire during install?! (Score:2, Interesting)
I think this is a really good example of an "innovation." It's something that anyone, including Microsoft with all their human interface research facilities, could have done, but no one thought of it before Lycoris came around (that I know of).
Re:Solitaire during install?! (Score:5, Informative)
Solaris 8 gives you a web browser during the install (after network setup), which I think is fucking brilliant...
Re:Solitaire during install?! Caldera did this! (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Solitaire during install?! (Score:2)
When Caldera's install started writing lots of stuff to the hard disk, the Tetris game would not have time to accept user input, and you'd lose. What fun.
Re:Solitaire during install?! (Score:2)
2 years ago or so?
I remember that one. Big waste of time. The computer would finish the install within 30 minutes, but I would waste an extra hour playing the stupid Tetris game.
I'm glad that most modern distributions show a boring progress bar.
Lycoris(formerly Redmond Linux) (Score:3, Funny)
Reviewing the review... (Score:5, Interesting)
The most interesting aspect to me was that they sell cheapish desktops and laptops preinstalled with their distro. There are other Linux preinstallers, but most of them seem to aim at the geek mainstream or the server business.
There is no reason Linux can't be a major desktop player technically or practically, but the marketing muscle has always been absent. Lycoris may be a great product, but I don't see where it changes anything on that marketing power front.
Still, I may just buy their cheap desktop for my technophobe mother-in-law who doesn't know Windows or Linux. I will bet she will have no problems using the machine and will never ever wish she had Windows, or even really know that she isn't using Windows.
Re:Reviewing the review... (Score:2, Interesting)
Considering that, however, I found it disappointing that they only included a more or less stock kernel that didn't support a SCSI card that SuSE has included support for since 6.0. Considering their target market is newbiest of newbies, these people aren't likely to patch and compile their own kernels.
Re:Reviewing the review... (Score:3, Interesting)
Install and Marketing (Score:2)
But, is it REALLY better than Mandrake (or RedHat) for the end user in the long run?
Reguardless of the answer (I say No, Mandrake ROCKS, RedHat is Slick, and are desktop OS's now) you may say yes. Even still...
This is a company Mandrake (or Red Hat) should get a VC to finance the buyout of now for 2 reasons:
I MADE my mother install Linux... (Score:4, Funny)
Now she thinks she's a guru
Re:Reviewing the review... (Score:2)
Is it better? I've been using OS X as my main desktop for almost two months now, and it's really pretty annoying. There are so many rough edges and bad interface design decisions. It feels like they threw out all the lessons they learned in 9 genrations of the MacOS and started from scratch, making basic interface errors. I'm seriously considering switching to Linux or Win2K (i use them both on my laptop).
security? (Score:2, Insightful)
Oh like that other OS? (Score:2)
Re:Oh like that other OS? (Score:2)
Maybe just want the linux desktop needs (Score:5, Insightful)
While many linux experts will see this as a negative, you have to recognize that KISS is what no other linux distro has mastered since Corel left. I for one welcome this change. Pick the "best" desktop apps, and package them on a easy to use desktop. In this case I think the concept of less choice has worked.
Re:Maybe just want the linux desktop needs (Score:2)
The lycoris update process is Painless and simple - it asks for the root password if it needs to install anything new and otherwise it's just some progress bars and informatipon on the updates - simple and efffective
Im all for one single simple linux i can use in a corporate environment out of the box - the other 400 are great but every user has different needs
The best bit of the article (Score:4, Funny)
worth reading just to see an MSNBC reporter type those words!
That's Great, But... (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:That's Great, But... (Score:4, Informative)
If their hardware probe didn't find something, find out the name of the driver and do a 'modprobe drivername' and then submit a bug report to them saying that it did not install it automatically.
Keep in mind that they don't have the manpower or money to test this on all possible hardware. But if you tell them, they can fix the autodection for other people with your soundcard and they will probably give you some line that you can add to
Re:That's Great, But... (Score:2, Informative)
Eegads! One of the VERY first things I had to learn how to do was a kernel config and compile. This was back in the day of RedHat 5.2 (My first distro), and I was getting it to use the 2.2 kernels. I NEEDED to do a compile for it to work my onboard sound and a few other things as I recall.
Plenty of people have written up little HOWTOs on the subject. With Xconfig it's really NOT hard at all. A little time consuming to read all the helps for the things you don't know if you need or not, but not difficult.
The stable Linux kernel is one of the best written pieces of software around, based on the occurences of warnngs I see during compile time.
I recommend a vanilla kernel from the stable branch, unzip it and go on in. Type make xconfig and off you go. when you're done a make dep ; make clean ; make bzImage ; make modules ; make modules_install will do most of the work.
Then there's the bit about getting things where they belong. An easy make install does the trick. If you're using LILO edit the
This is VERY brief, but I'm just trying to say to people that a kernel recompile is NOT to be feared. Look for instructions on Google, I'm sure they're out there.
Jonathan
It's not about a game (Score:2)
Lycoris is on a roll!!! (Score:2)
I think its nice to see a successful desktop linux, hopefully Lindows will also be successful, add Mandrake and you have 3 competiting desktop OS's which means we will get good products.
What Lycoris has to consider however is how they will make money, Lindows i think is onto something with the warehouse idea, Mandrake is looking for community support which is really unstsble and not something i'd be quick to invest in.
Lindows looks like the most profitble, Lycoris however has OEM deals which impress me alot.
This guy is getting fired. (Score:3, Funny)
First he gives an accurate description of his experience installing Linux and names several positive and truthful attributes. Then he says
"...watch the BBC on RealPlayer"
He's asking for it.
Comment removed (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:This guy is getting fired. (Score:2)
heh, that's kinda funny :)
as mindless to install as Microsoft’s Windows. (Score:2)
Linux for the masses? Why? (Score:2, Interesting)
The reviwerer already had WindowsXP installed and working, so why does he need this? For the pure geez-whiz factor of I'm running this linux stuff? Probably. Even as an intro to linux the easy to use distros are really just training wheels that you won't take off until you meet, greet, and spend a lot of time learning the command line, services/daemons, etc.
Now for the pro's. A company that doesn't want to drop money on MS or Apple desktops that doesn't need certain commercial software that isn't and probably will never be available for Linux might just fall in love with this. Handing this to a teenager, adult, or grandma and telling them that they can't run their favorite apps anymore or even use AOL is simply self-defeating and neing starry-eyed about open source.
Re:Linux for the masses? Why? (Score:2)
Maybe so he could put it on his laptop and his desktop system. Maybe so if he decides to throw in some new hardware, he doesn't have to phone anybody for permission. Maybe so he can upgrade when and if he wants, not when it's decided for him in a year and a half. Maybe he wants a faster, more secure system. Gee whiz, he's running Linux. Why not?
Re:Linux for the masses? Why? (Score:2)
I thought the same thing when I reread my post, but at the same time if you purposely give a linux machine to someone who doesn't have any windows/mac or little windows/mac experience for evangelical reasons only then that person will eventually find out that yes they can change their screen resolution without editing some text file or buy a device from CompUsa and actually get drivers for it with a different OS.
Secondly, if OSX is such a great example of an OS that uses open source/unixy parts why not just recommend that to this hypothetical new user? If someone is going to drop a grand or so in hardware a ~$100 easy to use OS isn't going to break the bank. If this newbie doesn't share your love of open source, why should they suffer under arguably inferior software for what they're trying to acomplish e.g. AOL connectivity, IM, Quicktime, Windows Media formats, etc. Worse, if this user uses mac/windows at work, wouldn't it be in their best interests to give them a matching OS? They would be learning more and be less of a hassle to tech support. "Well at home its in my
Lycoris vs Lindows Vs Mandrake (Score:2)
How will mandrake compete with OEM contracts?
How will lindows compete with the linux community?
Lycoris looks like a good step... (Score:2)
If this gets people out of their Windozers and into Linux, at least superficially, this is A Good Thing (tm) and should be encouraged. If it is a rip on XP and XP is what the newbie is used to, then cool, they'll get acclimated quicker.
Go buy a copy! (Score:2)
They're definitely worth supporting, because they truly are trying to bring Linux to the masses, and making it easier for people to make the switch from Windows.
Disclaimer: I'm pro-choice in terms of OS -- but I do use Windows XP as my primary OS, I think its great, and that Microsoft has done an outstanding job on it. Anyone who disagrees should at least give it a spin before complaining about it.
Lycoris Price Comparison (Score:2, Informative)
If it works well enough to be a Windows replacement, I would be more than willing to get it. However, I'll hold off until a few more reviews of it come out. It certainly beats having to pay Microsoft anywhere from $100-300 just for the operating system.
antitrust case related ? (Score:4, Insightful)
What color is your USB hub? (Score:5, Interesting)
RedHat, SuSE, and Debian cater to the everything comes in a single box paradigm. This is great for the people who've used Linux before and have a feel for certain apps and thus choose to install them. Others have a feel for different apps and thus install those, this continues until there's a dozen dozen various installations of the same distribution. For people new to Linux this is wholly confusing, I've been using Linux for years and I still get confused when I've got six CDs full of stuff. I think Lycoris fits into a very nice niche of Linux users, ones who want to just turn something on and get work done. Like the tag line it seems like it could be very nice for general consumers as they'd be hard pressed to tell you what operating system was on their computer anyhow.
Hopefully the companies building beige box PCs bundling Linux will take note of Lycoris and give it a bit of a bigger install base and popularize it. RedHat is a good company but it seems like they're definitely going in a more corporate user direction which is of course fine, more power to them.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:What color is your USB hub? (Score:2)
What Lycoris does that none of the other Linux distros really do is limit your options (maybe some do
but why nitpick).
I've long made the argument that Linux will have to be "dumbed down" to appeal to the masses. But this doesn't need to be done at the expense of those of us who do, in fact, enjoy being innundated by millions of different configuration permutations.
I believe this is where Microsoft went very wrong: Creating a "one size fits all" environment which deliberately obfuscates the ability to perform custom configurations. Had Microsoft had the foresight to include both "the masses" and the rest of us (geeks), maybe we wouldn't be sitting here on
semi-trollish.. (Score:4, Insightful)
Why does "easy to use" seem to translate, almost precisely "looks exactly like windows"?
OS X, while not flawless, is living proof that the evolution of computer interaction is not over, can people PLEASE stop acting like the M$ desktop is the only way to make an interface?
Re:semi-trollish.. (Score:2)
Re:semi-trollish.. (Score:3, Informative)
Re:semi-trollish.. (Score:2)
I love it, sorta (Score:3, Interesting)
Seems they've done a great job replicating the Windows XP look-and-feel in Linux which should reduce the learning curve for new users. I was a "techie" in the Microsoft world and heaven knows Linux was a complete change for me. I couldn't figure out how to move a directory for weeks after switching!
However, for those who have donw some climbing on the learning curve it's probably a bad idea to run this distro. After all, why make Linux identical to Windows? I applaud their effort but for the geeks among us it's probably a step backwards. Good news is, I doubt we're their primary target market.
I have Lycoris on my network. (Score:4, Informative)
It's a VERY easy distro to use. It's NOT for power users. You are very limited in what you can do. They make it very hard to fuck up your system. It has a customized version of KDE (which is VERY good in my opinion). It's near impossible to add Gnome to the desktop. It uses Caldera RPM's so you can just grab them off of Caldera's site.The install was so easy, she did it herself. (She is not tech savvy). She did it while I was in the shower. I had to redo it so I could see for myself. I think it's an excellent distro for mom & dad. However, power Linux users will get frustrated by it's lack of choices. There are no servers installed (except sshd). Not even an ftp server, or Apache. (which is by design...Mom isn't supposed to be running a webserver on the machine she does her taxes on, ya know?) All in All, I give it 9 out of 10 for newbies, 4 out of 10 for veterans.
Another review and maybe less biased and first (Score:2)
PS it was posted yesterday as well - before MSNBC
http://www.monolinux.com/modules/news/
Freeware? (Score:2)
Nah, couldn't be.
Suggestion (Score:4, Informative)
The best review out there isn't exactly a top-secret either, as is apparent below.
1] http://www.tuxreports.com/modules.php?op=modload&
2] http://www.tuxreports.com/modules.php?op=modload&
3] http://linuxtoday.com/news_story.php3?ltsn=2002-0
4] http://linuxtoday.com/news_story.php3?ltsn=2002-0
5] http://pclinuxonline.com/modules.php?name=News&fi
6] http://pclinuxonline.com/modules.php?name=News&fi
7] http://newsvac.newsforge.com/article.pl?sid=02/04
8] http://newsvac.newsforge.com/article.pl?sid=02/04
9] http://www.distrowatch.com/index.php [distrowatch.com]
Thanks.
Everything just doesn't work (Score:2)
Basically, people don't want to have everything and anything. While it's true that a diverse selection of software packages, utilities, etc. has more of a chance to fit exactly what you need, people don't need exact solutions when it comes to consumer markets. In fact, most people don't even need customized solutions at all.
This can explain why Linux does so good in the server and critical markets where 100% fitting solutions are required, and at the same time it explains why Linux isn't growing at exponentional rates into consumer markets like some though it would.
That's why there is only one dominant Office suite for Windows, and why consumers tend to side with Microsoft in terms of things having integrated components such as web browsers and media players. It's just easier. No one really cares what software they're using as long as it gets the job done.
People outside the IT field don't have time to sit down and go through a dozen or more programs for a single task -- like playing a video file. In today's instant gratification society, people demand point and click usability. There's no time to compile the latest SDL release and then find a media player, compile it, configure it, etc. Kernel compilations for the regular user are defiantly out of the question unless some amazing new ease of use feature is developed in the future.
This is why a lot of Linux distributions haven't done so well with the consumer. You can throw as many CD's and as many free (as in beer and speech) solutions, programs, libraries, and development environments you want at the consumer and watch as they turn blindly to the technically inferior, monopolistic offering that also happens to be proprietary and not free.
This situation is mainly the product of the Linux enthusiast's personality. Most geeks are by nature introverted and withdrawn from society to some extent (myself included) and rarely can see the big picture of what the general public might think about Linux when it's billed as a competitor for Windows. People don't care about how architecturally sound a solution is or the kind of characteristics programmers look for. That's why programmers make poor business people and business people make poor programmers. See the dot com chapter for more examples of this.
Software has and will for probably some time be a business of how fast can you get something done, how cheaply, does it work, and will people buy it. Besides that, you can do whatever you want but will be only be useable fodder for a selective few -- a minority who choose to spend hours laboring over configuration and setup for even the most mundane tasks. Anyone who has ever worked in user level support can attest to the fact users want things and they want them NOW.
This may come as a big fat epiphany to the Linux world who hope to mirror Bill Gates' vision with an open source solution, but it's how it is. You can't change society no matter how hard you try. So now it's about how we can work around society. Lycoris seems a logical evolution as other distributions have failed (getting saved by customer charity doesn't count here).
But instead of having a closed-source monopoly, we are at a risk of having the same but open source with whatever distributor ends up becoming successful.
Anything that makes computers more usable... (Score:2)
Lycoris = Redmond Linux? (Score:2)
How soon before we learn that Lycoris is funded by M$?
Growing awareness (Score:4, Insightful)
And it's got everything an average user could want in terms of software, including browser, email, IM, photo editor, video and mp3 players, games, even an office suite -- something that MS hasn't even got around to incorporating into the OS! It even includes a KNapster file sharing client. Bet you don't get anything like that with XP. It will even delete your old copy of Windows for you. (How convenient.)
On top of that all, you can download it for free, or pay less than $50 for a CD and support. Or you can buy a machine with it pre-installed for less than $500.
This should perk up the interest of Joe Average computer user.
Ironically, this article is on a website co-owned by MS.
Seriously though, I have been noticing lately that there has been a general growing awareness of Linux among the "masses". Case in point: a friend of mine just got her first home computer last week. It has WindowsXP, but she isn't particularly pleased with it. She told me she would have liked to have gotten a Linux computer but she needed Windows in order to be compatible with software she used at work. [gaymart.com]
Trickster Coyote
Illusions are real. Reality is an illusion.
Just what the doctor ordered (Score:4, Insightful)
Missing the point? (Score:4, Informative)
The weakness with Linux today isn't ease of install - hell, Redhat has been trivial to install for at least a couple of versions now, even on the weirdest hardware Joe "Dude, You're Gettin' a Dell" Sixpack is likely to have.
Installation is ALREADY pretty brain dead, even to the most clueless newbie. At most, they're looking at a 5 minute call to their vendor / friend / LUG / 7-year old neighbor.
The trouble comes when they want to run the stupid elf bowling program some cow orker sends to them. Or when they want to free up some drive space. Or when they want to install a game. Or install ANY new software via four to six clicks of a mouse button.
Put the creative energy in the right direction, and Linux WILL win. This isn't it. This is the road more travelled.
-l
Re:Missing the point? (Score:3, Insightful)
After getting the basics installed, all I had to do to install everything I wanted was basically, "emerge xfce eterm mozilla gaim openssh
It's really fantastic. In addition, they have tools to automatically update the RC scripts, so you don't have to fool around there. It's flexible enough for someone who knows their way around, e.g. me, and simple enough for a next-to-newbie to use. If you tacked on something like drakconf to this, I'd recommend it to all my friends.
Re:Does it rhyme... (Score:2, Funny)
Just to be truly nerdy (Re:Does it rhyme...) (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Does it rhyme... (Score:2)
Downside: you're not an uber-geek anymore, you're just another guy running linux. That Linux sticker on your honda went from unique to trendy.
So it's a trade-off, but the end result is that it's still a free, open-source operating system, written by and for the people. More people coding for it can only be a good thing.
That's my opinion.
Re:Easy to use Linux from Redmond? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Easy to use Linux from Redmond? (Score:2)
Re:Easy to use Linux from Redmond? (Score:5, Insightful)
That's what the distrbutions are there for. Linus produces what he thinks should be produced, and as the baseline kernel distribution it's inherently going to be somewhat conservative. Distributions then modify this to suit what their customers want, regardless of whether it's something that Linus would want in the kernel or not (see supermount, for instance - users want the convenience of being able to use removable media without messing about mounting and unmounting it. It's an ugly patch and Linus is never going to include it in his kernel. Distributions add the patch. Everyone's happy)
I guess that's the downside of Open Source. You can't make everyone learn the CLI like they should.
There should be no requirement to use the CLI. Many users just want to be able to turn on the computer, send an email and turn it off again. In what way does forcing them to use a CLI improve their life?
EGO (Score:4, Insightful)
"You have to learn the commandline and thousands of commands"
Desktop User "I just want to get the web, play some games and burn some CDS"
"But the commandline gives you power to write scripts and manipulate programs in a more concise way!"
Desktop User "But I'm not a programmer, I just want to get on the web and have fun!!!!"
"Its more fun to play with commands and look like an elite linux haxor!!"
Desktop User "I just want a Desktop thats easy to use, linux sucks I'm going to try OSX"
Re:Easy to use Linux from Redmond? (Score:4, Insightful)
This sentiment is the exact reason why Linux isn't more widely used as a desktop operating system. Linux at present is a geek toy and a server OS. It will never be more until/unless Linux developers start re-evaluating the validity of the quoted statement above.
Re:Easy to use Linux from Redmond? (Score:2)
Re:Easy to use Linux from Redmond? (Score:2)
This sentiment is the exact reason why Linux isn't more widely used as a desktop operating system. Linux at present is a geek toy and a server OS. It will never be more until/unless Linux developers start re-evaluating the validity of the quoted statement above.
Read the article. Some Linux distro developer did
Meanwhile, the argument that you should know what all the levers in your car do, and know what all the buttons on your microwave do, and know what all the tools in your toolbox do, still sounds awfully reasonable to me. People should learn the CLI on Linux, Windows, or Mac OS X, exactly because it's there!
That's not to say that people have to learn to love the CLI, or use it all the time. But it may just turn out to be the best tool for some tasks. If nothing else, most people really should know enough to move around their filesystem in a CLI, in case they have to restore files by hand someday (say, after booting from a bootdisk when suffering from a corrupted registry or boot manager or the like).
New Moderation label needed! (Score:2, Insightful)
"...point-n-drool API." & "I guess that's the downside of Open Source. You can't make everyone learn the CLI like they should. *sigh*"
Proof, yet again, that we urgently need a NEW moderation label added to "flamebait", "troll", "offtopic", etc.
That label would be: "Linux Bigot"
Re:Easy to use Linux from Redmond? (Score:2)
Re:Oh Christ, not again (Score:2)
Its so stupid to purposely make something hard (Score:2)
If linux were easy to use, they wouldnt be linux haxor elites anymore would they?
So they force commandline down peoples throats
Look commandline does have its uses, like for programming, debugging code, compiling programs, even configurations.
But for everything else, a GUI is always better, why use commandline for Desktop stuff? I can see if you are running a server and need statistics which update consistantly, or you need a way to display information without slowing the machine down
But you dont need commandline to burn MP3s, chat, play quake, i mean come on
people even port QT to the commandline, and quake, and chat!! Seriously
The GUI is better at these things, the GUI is better for everyday use
I know the commands but i only use the commandline when I need to install something, its actually easier to install via the commandline than via graphical installer
cd programdir &&
installed
Then
perhaps a standard for for installing programs are needed but most of the time its easier than windows, until you have dependency problems
Typingg is not faster than clicking, also (Score:2)
Commandline is faster for commands you only run once in a great while likee installing or configuring something
but when you have to type the same commands over and over you will make typos and you'll be pissed when bash doesnt understand
Its much faster to click a button than type
licq -chat -msgusr 2302032 -msg hello how are you -spellcheck -sendmsg
Please, if you think thats easier than just clicking their icon, typingg the msg, and hitting enter, i guess you must have quick fingers and you never once make a typo.
Lindows has an AOL client built in. (Score:2)
http://www.lindows.com Lindows.com [lindows.com]
Re:i must say.. (Score:3, Funny)
Re:This changes nothing. (Score:2)
and hell, these "masses" distributions don't even claim to provide anything "better" they provide "cheaper" and "no MS fist around your balls"er
Re:Can you say "Bundled Software"? (Score:2)