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

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Linux Software

Lycoris - Linux for the Masses? 441

Posted by michael from the slobbery-praise dept.
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.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Lycoris - Linux for the Masses? More

Lycoris - Linux for the Masses?

Comments Filter:

  • Sounds good to me (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Friday April 12, 2002 @09:55PM (#3333009)
    I like the idea of linux for the masses, and I am all for the teaching of others to use linux- but that being said; there are so many people that don't even understand Windows 98 (let alone 2000) that I would be afraid of them using linux because they would be constantly coming to me. The people that can't find their 'run' command in windows- you know who I mean.

    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
    • Hows RPM help at all? RPM sucks, dependency issues are what makes installs hard.

      We need to solve that problem once and for all, then you can have Lindows style click and run installs.
    • Whilst you have a valid point, there are similar problems to the ones you cite to greater or lesser degrees with Windows, too.

      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:5, Insightful)

      by megaduck ( 250895 ) <dvarvel@@@hotmail...com> on Saturday April 13, 2002 @02:18AM (#3333694) Journal

      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)

      by Spoing ( 152917 )
      I like the idea of linux for the masses, and I am all for the teaching of others to use linux- but that being said; there are so many people that don't even understand Windows 98 (let alone 2000) that I would be afraid of them using linux because they would be constantly coming to me. The people that can't find their 'run' command in windows- you know who I mean.

      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;

      1. How do I install the software from the CD that came with this new printer? (I walked her through CUPS and mentioned the new fancy features of her printer.)
      2. Do I have to format diskettes under Linux when I take them from a Windows machine? (Yes, she did get confused and formatted a diskette that had data on it before she clicked on the floppy icon.)
      3. Why don't I have any scanner programs? (She has four different ones, under the Graphics menu. Half of them have names with the word "scan" in them.)
      4. What's a cookie? (I forgot to disable the warning message for Konqueror and she used it for the first time last week -- first time in 3 years.)

      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;

      1. Mac users get a standard set of programs; good and bad.

      2. 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.

  • ...there will be 100 [at least] people who write in "Linux doesn't belong on the desktop"

    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.
      • Linux is ready for the desktop, perhaps if you Gnome people stopped tryinng to copy Windows every move you'd have a Desktop GUI.

        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)

      by Gizzmonic ( 412910 ) on Friday April 12, 2002 @10:41PM (#3333169) Homepage Journal
      Installation isn't the problem, and it's a shame that so many Linux distros concentrate on this and forget about the day-to-day operations.

      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.

  • A couple of Lycoris links (Score:3, Informative)

    by glen ( 19095 ) on Friday April 12, 2002 @09:58PM (#3333025)
    The Lycoris home page [lycoris.com] and screen shot gallery [lycoris.com].

  • Solitaire during install?! (Score:4, Funny)

    by Rayonic ( 462789 ) on Friday April 12, 2002 @09:59PM (#3333028) Homepage Journal
    I can just see it now: Clueless newbies installing "Lycoris" over and over again just to play more solitaire. And all the while they'll be saying, "I thought this Linux thing was supposed to be more efficient than Windows."

    Think I'm kidding? Never underestimate the resourcefulness of the average idiot.

    • Re:Solitaire during install?! (Score:4, Funny)

      by wirefarm ( 18470 ) <.ten.cdmm. .ta. .mij.> on Friday April 12, 2002 @10:28PM (#3333124) Homepage
      I can just see it now: Clueless newbies installing "Lycoris" over and over again just to play more solitaire

      That wouldn't be such a bad thing if they did it on a different machine each time...

      Cheers,
      Jim
    • Why not chess? Give them a game linux users actually play, solitaire is what people who cant use the internet properly play.
      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)

        by Bald Wookie ( 18771 ) on Saturday April 13, 2002 @12:21AM (#3333422)
        hell add IM program like gaim or kopete in there and they may not even remember to exit the install

        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...
    • I've read a couple reviews of Lycoris since they changed their name, and I remember every one of them had mentioned playing Solitaire during install. Could they be on to something here?

      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).

  • Lycoris(formerly Redmond Linux) (Score:3, Funny)

    by 56ker ( 566853 ) on Friday April 12, 2002 @10:00PM (#3333033) Homepage Journal
    Just as well they changed the name - otherwise people would start thinking M$ had started bringing out Linux distros. :-D

  • Reviewing the review... (Score:5, Interesting)

    by evilpenguin ( 18720 ) on Friday April 12, 2002 @10:03PM (#3333045)
    Based on what I see in the review, it does indeed look like they've done a good job producing the "anti-geek" Linux distro. I never thought there was any reason not to use Linux as a desktop OS, but I have always throught that the best qualities of Linux (no central control and ownership) were also the reasons it would not succeed on the desktop: No marketing, no power to challenge the Microsoft OEM stranglehold.

    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.
    • I've used Lycoris before myself. It's pretty solidly built and should be familiar to anyone coming from a MS Windows background, in fact it seems geered for the consumate Linux newbie.

      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.
    • "it does indeed look like they've done a good job producing the "anti-geek" Linux distro."

      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:

      • They obviously have good marketing or connections to get a good revew from MSNBC, and Marketing for a Linux distro is more imprtant now than it has EVER been. And we all know this is key.
      • If they really (I haven't tried the distro) are slicker in ANY way... That work should be folded into the work of a big established distro. There is no reason "Redmond Linux" should be slicker than Mandrake, and Mandrake not take that away (if it's GPL, but the right thing to do is NOT take the GPL code, but BUY the GPL coders who had the talent to do it!).
    • For the fact that instead of calling me up every day, and me having to drive 100 miles out there once a month and have to waste an hour of my time defragging or installing Bonzi Buddy for her, I can now just ssh in and do everything there. I even put icons on her desktop like "Click ME for MAIL!!!", "Click ME for Word!".
      Now she thinks she's a guru :) She's actually spreading the word about how she has no problems. She has SOME, but I ssh in twice a week and detele all the NEW FILE.txt and NEW FOLDER 79 in her home directory :)

  • security? (Score:2, Insightful)

    by Socratis ( 449796 )
    A larger user base could end up reflecting badly on linux in that hoards of less-competent users could set up servers with such wild security idiocies as having user names and passwords the same - then blaming the o/s when they get rooted.

  • Maybe just want the linux desktop needs (Score:5, Insightful)

    by bogie ( 31020 ) on Friday April 12, 2002 @10:13PM (#3333077) Journal
    Since Corel left there has been a void, that even Mandrake doesn't fill. Lycoris Desktop may just fill that void. Lycoris has a very easy install, easier than Mandrake. The best part is the well thought out desktop. And like Corel, instead of the 50 text editors you usually get,you a slimed down selection. There is only one mp3 player, one browser etc. IMHO they have eliminated the confusion most users suffer when they first use linux. They have set up an environment where you just sit down and get your work done. You want to type a letter, simple use Kword. There is none of this "do I use kword,abiword,openoffice,etc" confusion.

    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.

  • The best bit of the article (Score:4, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward on Friday April 12, 2002 @10:16PM (#3333085)
    It knew my video card and monitor, asked me to confirm the monitor's screen resolution and asked where I wanted to install the OS. I chose to use the entire hard drive: erase Windows and start from scratch. The installation begins.

    worth reading just to see an MSNBC reporter type those words!

  • That's Great, But... (Score:3, Insightful)

    by inepom01 ( 525367 ) <inepom01@NOsPAm.hotmail.com> on Friday April 12, 2002 @10:18PM (#3333093)
    I installed Lycoris on an extra machine I had without a problem... until it turned out it didn't have drivers for my sound card. (Not a rare one either- ECS K7S5A motherboard onboard sound) Now what? Needs a kernel recompile which I don't have time to learn how to do and which most users wouldn't be able to learn even if they tried. If this were windows, however, I'd be able to just download the driver and point-and-click install it. As far as I know, Linux doesn't have anything like that. Until it does, it will be out of reach of the massess.

    • Re:That's Great, But... (Score:4, Informative)

      by Stacdaed ( 242217 ) on Friday April 12, 2002 @10:46PM (#3333180) Homepage
      Lycoris, like most modern distos have every driver in the world build as a module so you will never have to do this.

      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 /etc/modules that will make it load on boot.
    • What's this I hear about a Kernel recompile?
      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 /etc/lilo.conf to add your new kernel, don't replace your old one, you may need it. If you're using grub you'll see an error at the end of the make install, it's meaningless, just means that the LILO bit failed.
      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 looks like all you have to do to get the reviewers on your side is to let them play solitaire during the install.
    Well, another distro (I think it's Mandrake) offers Tetris instead. But I don't don't the important difference is the particular game you get the play. What matters is the ability of the Distro maker to focus on the needs of the user [slashdot.org]. Most distros just don't know how.
  • Hows their stock doing? Anyone else here thinking about making an investment?

    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)

    by SkulkCU ( 137480 ) on Friday April 12, 2002 @10:32PM (#3333131) Homepage Journal
    Does the reviewer know who he works for?

    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.

  • that's a good intro, I almost fell off my chair...
  • I think some people really need to come down to earth about linux when it comes to the home market. The power of linux is not the GUI or any arguably "easy to use" features its the fact that its a great and free server. Many home and business users are still fighting their way throught the desktop model of PC use. As easy as Windows is, its still "high tech geek stuff" to, in my experience, 90+% of its users.

    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.
    • 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?

      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?
  • How will lycoris compete with click n run?

    How will mandrake compete with OEM contracts?

    How will lindows compete with the linux community?
  • ...towards a demystified Linux for the masses. If memory serves me right, isn't Corel based on Debian? According to the article, Lycoris is based on Corel Linux. Which suggests apt-get is more than a possibility here.

    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.
  • You know the best way of supporting these people is to go to their store [lycoris.com] and buy something. Get a developer version if you can spare the extra $10. Show them with your money that you support what they're doing. I just did.

    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.
  • After reading about how Lycoris was available pre-installed on a laptop, I checked the prices on Pricewatch [pricewatch.com] and found the laptop is available, with the same refurbishing configuration, for about $650 pre-shipping (shipping adds $20-$30, depending on the store). With a free DL from a FTP site, you can save some money and do the install yourself. Not only does this save money , but users can recreate the article for themselves, if they wanted. I understand the extra money goes to supporting the OS, but even if you went out and bought the software, you would save more than $80.

    • Thinkpad 600e $650
    • Laptop Shipping $20
    • Lycoris distro $29.95 or $39.95
    • Lycoris Shipping $7.95 vis FedEx
    • Total: $717.90 (assuming All discs are purchased from company)

    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)

    by terrymr ( 316118 ) <terrymrNO@SPAMgmail.com> on Friday April 12, 2002 @11:24PM (#3333282)
    Can this be an attempt to prove that linux is effective competition to windows to placate the judge ? seems weird that it's on an MS affiliated site.

  • What color is your USB hub? (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Graymalkin ( 13732 ) on Friday April 12, 2002 @11:34PM (#3333304)
    What Lycoris does that none of the other Linux distros really do is limit your options (maybe some do but why nitpick). Contrary to the belief of Linux users in basements around the globe, this is not a bad thing. Lycoris does right where others have done wrong. Instead of giving the option of a billion different file managers and command line ftp clients they simplified the software package down to something manageable. One serious hurdle in a Linux installation is knowing what programs you want and which you don't want.

    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.
    • Comment removed based on user account deletion

    • 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 /. arguing about the merits of one Linux distro over another. Instead, we'd be arguing the merits of COM over .NET!

  • semi-trollish.. (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Xzzy ( 111297 ) <sether@@@tru7h...org> on Friday April 12, 2002 @11:37PM (#3333311) Homepage
    ..but it had to be said.

    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?
    • because you cannot explain to a non-technical person that "easy to use" != "is like windows"; to them easy to use does mean it has to be exactly like Windows, because that's the only thing they know how to use (as far as that applies) and consequently find everything else "hard"

    • Re:semi-trollish.. (Score:3, Informative)

      by C. Mattix ( 32747 )
      Easy to use often is "looks exactly like windows" when you consider the ease of use of any system is directly related to the amount of experience you have with it. Since most Joe Six-Pack users have had experience with Windows, that is what they know. If they can take that body of knowledge and apply it to a new system then they will like it better. Why is Ctrl-V paste and Ctrl-X cut? Wordstar. People knew those shortcuts from the old system, and since the software makers wanted to make it "easier to use" for new users, they kept the same bindings. How many people use Emacs key bindings in non-Emacs editors? It is the same principle. People like what they already know and hence look at it as "easier." Is QWERTY the best keyboard layout? When you think about it not really. But since we all know it most of us view it as the easiest, when it would actually be much easier to put all of the most common letters on the home row.

  • I love it, sorta (Score:3, Interesting)

    by coupland ( 160334 ) <dchase@hotmai[ ]om ['l.c' in gap]> on Saturday April 13, 2002 @12:09AM (#3333391) Journal
    Based on the web site I've gotta say: I love it, but I'll never run it.

    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)

    by xtremex ( 130532 ) <cguru@bigfoot.cWELTYom minus author> on Saturday April 13, 2002 @12:13AM (#3333403) Homepage
    I bought my wife an IBM NetVista and Redmond Linux was the ONLY distro that detected the video card w/ the Flat screen monitor. (Mandrake 8.1 only had it in 800x600 with tweaking)
    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.
  • Monolinux is carrying a review of lycoris in 2 parts written by a corporate IT manager and looking at lycoris from a possible business desktop use, its a good read and less hype filled and believable than MSNBC's - i reccomend it.

    PS it was posted yesterday as well - before MSNBC

    http://www.monolinux.com/modules/news/
  • I'm shocked and amazed that a million zealots haven't already pointed out that the reviewer erroneously called Linux "freeware". Could the Slashdot community actually be becoming tolerant? More mature?

    Nah, couldn't be.

  • There seem to be a lot of comments about how this distracts from Linux's main vision on the distribution scene where you have everything -- literally -- but rather I see this as something very good and representing a wakeup from a dream world.

    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.
  • Is a good thing. Unfortunately, we're still at least several years away from this - this is how people interact with computers now [lightspawn.org]. I just hope "we" get there first.
  • Ok being the paranoid scitzo I am.

    How soon before we learn that Lycoris is funded by M$?

  • Growing awareness (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Trickster Coyote ( 34740 ) on Saturday April 13, 2002 @03:43AM (#3333854) Homepage
    You gotta like this. An article in a mainstream e-rag gushing about how easy it is to install Linux.

    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)

    by sydbarrett74 ( 74307 ) <sydbarrett74@NOSpam.gmail.com> on Saturday April 13, 2002 @04:05AM (#3333910)
    Lycoris seems to be just what the doctor ordered: a chance to experience the power of Linux without having to turn into a system administrator just for the privilege. Let's face it folks: 98% of the computer-using population could care less what runs under the bonnet. They don't want to have to twiddle obscure radio-button options, nor choose amongst 50 different window managers and 200 file managers. They simply want to get work done. Whilst we geeks may bemoan the lack of options and curse Lycoris because we can't eke 2% greater speed out of it, most people simply DON'T CARE about the technical minutiae. They'd be glad to be relieved of Microsoft's increasingly more onerous licencing restrictions and higher prices. And as always, if you don't like the Lycoris distro, don't run it! Run SuSE, or Debian, or Mandrake, or ....

  • Missing the point? (Score:4, Informative)

    by Loligo ( 12021 ) on Saturday April 13, 2002 @04:05AM (#3333912) Homepage

    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)

      by wedg ( 145806 )
      I tried Gentoo Linux after reading about it here on /., and I must say that it's not my desktop system. Why? Ease of installation - not just of the OS, but of the software too. It might take 4 - 6 clicks to install something in Windows, but in Gentoo it takes 1 line: "emerge vim". Or "emerge xfce", which also installs *everything* necessary for the XFCE desktop, including X Windows if you haven't yet.

      After getting the basics installed, all I had to do to install everything I wanted was basically, "emerge xfce eterm mozilla gaim openssh ...etc". Probably the best part is that it automatically downloads the files you need - you don't have to go searching for them online. And if you're not sure of the package name? 'emerge search "^kde"' lists all the packages starting with "kde".

      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.

Slashdot Top Deals

Real Users know your home telephone number.

Close