This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
Lindows 2.0.0 Released
Related Links Top of the: day, week, month.
You can now buy more gates with less specifications than at any other time in history. -- Kenneth Parker
should i? (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:should i? (Score:2, Insightful)
Personally, I say if you're willing to give enough effort to try out a new OS and learn a thing or two, hop straight over to 'drake or RedHat, but if not, then yeah... give this one a try, or hold out for When the new Corel-Linux gets released.
Don't necessarily completely overhaul your current box unless you really want to, but it wouldn't hurt to try something new, wouldn't you say?
Re:should i? (Score:2)
Re:should i? (Score:4, Informative)
Just an addendum, a lot of older CD-writers (like mine) will not burn Knoppix since it is 700MB.
Or try the new Gentoo [slashdot.org] and play some UT2003 while you're at it.
CD burners (Score:2)
(Lest someone just say "download it and try it", it would be nice to save the bandwidth if it won't work!)
Not if you don't have broadband (Score:2, Insightful)
Why don't you find out yourself?
Download it? High-speed Internet access isn't available in my area, and in order to get to another area, I'd have to move house. That has its own drawbacks [slashdot.org]. And even if it is available, it may be capped so that it takes a week to download a distribution.
Get the CD? How can I know the quality of a product I'm purchasing sight unseen? No, I don't want to have to spend $30 each on 10 distributions of free operating systems every release cycle.
Re:should i? (Score:2)
Have you actually used Lindows and compared it to WinXP. I haven't got a chance to try Lindows itself, but I've seen a demo of it, and it actually looks much simpler than WindowsXP.
Re:should i? (Score:3, Funny)
Some things to consider (Score:5, Informative)
I'm assuming when you say you are a Microsoft user you mean that you have only ever used Microsoft products. At this stage, any Unix-based operating system, be it a Linux distribution, Lindows (I do not personally count Lindows as a true Linux distribution), FreeBSD, or whatever, will be like jumping into a cold swimming pool. That is to say, it will be a shock at first, but if you are reasonably intelligent and you have picked a newbie distribution (Mandrake [mandrake.com], Lycoris [lycoris.com], Lindows [lindows.com], ELX [elxlinux.com]), you should be able to adjust.
Some things to keep in mind:
1. You will not have perfect compatibility with Windows apps like MSOffice. You can use OpenOffice [openoffice.org] and most of your docs will look fine, but some will have visible display glitches (although I have never seen one that was unreadable). You can also download browser plugins for Mozilla [mozilla.org] (the best Linux web browser) which give it virtually all the worthwhile functionality of IE. Ximian [ximian.com] Evolution is an excellent replacement for Outlook. OpenOffice, Mozilla, and Evolution all come with most new Linux distributions today. Another solution is Codeweavers [codeweavers.com] Crossover Office and Crossover Plugin, which let you use Windows office apps and browser plugins. However, this option requires a subscription fee.
2. Many/most Windows games will not work at all, or without a good deal of tinkering. If you are a hardcore gamer, check out Transgaming [transgaming.com] WineX which can let you play some of the most popular Windows games with a minimum of glitches. This option also requires a subscription fee.
3. A Linux installation needs either its own hard drive, a free partition of space on a Windows drive (at least a few gigabytes) or its own machine. If you have only one machine with one partition on one hard drive, and that is for Windows, then you *might* damage your Windows installation installing Linux. Your best bet if you don't know what I am talking about is to ask a friend who knows more for some help in the installation.
4. While most hardware I have ever purchased is supported, some things just don't have support yet. One example is the "winmodem". Most modems sold today are sneakily designed to work only with Microsoft Windows. Yes, this is a conspiracy between Microsoft and the manufacturers of those modems. If your modem doesnt work, you will probably have to buy a new modem which specifically says it is a "hardware modem". As someone in [your local computer/electronics store] for help.
**Aside from all that, a tonne of things are different in the actual underlying operating system, but if you aren't a developer, you proably won't be intersted in those details. (Feel free to continue this thread if you are, I will be happy to answer more questions.)
With all this, I was trying to provide full disclosure of pitfalls to migrating, not to discourage you. I definately think the switch to Linux is worthwhile in the long term.
If as you implied you have only ever used Microsoft products, the best path you could take is to switch to OpenOffice and Mozilla running on Windows, then if you are comfortable with them, try to dual-boot with a newbie distribution like the ones mentioned above.
Thank you. (Score:2)
Re:should i? - Serious Answer (Score:2, Insightful)
What does the file system have to do with partitioning?
Most of you new Linux toys will need to be compiled.
How well do you know C++?
Since when do you need to be a programmer to compile something?
Got Quicktime?
Yes, the crossover plugin cost me like $10.
Everything is either compiled or mounted.
I think you forgot to mount your brain.
Re:should i? - Serious Answer (Score:2, Insightful)
A newbie user isn't going to care about disk partitioning, and there are plenty of partitioning tools that can take care of ext2 partitions, fdisk included.
You do not need to compile most linux programs. Almost all are distributed with binaries, and, from the looks of it, the new click-n-run interface will make software installation a snap. Even if you did have to compile a program you don't need to know a programming language.
By Quicktime I assume you mean Sorenson Quicktime. Unless you are big on watching movie trailers this is not an issue for most people. If you do need to decode this format, though, there are beginnings of support for it in Xine, and until it is fully developed there is Crossover. A commercial Lindows may even come bundled with it.
Your last statement has no bearing on the issue whatsoever. The compiling issue has already been addressed, but who cares if everything is mounted? The GUI takes care of this for you transparently if you are talking about removable media or remote volumes. You don't have to mount anything manually.
My advice to the Windows user is to give it a try. Wait for the commercial version, though, and don't delete your Windows partition. If you have specific Windows needs, you probably won't be able to find support on Linux, yet. There are suitable office and groupware replacements. There are also some basic software packages for financing and image editing which aren't up to par with what professionals need, but are great for dabblers and/or home users. Games and CAD-like programs are still largely unsupported.
Mounting Shares (Score:5, Interesting)
I hope someone pulls all this into the free distributions.
User space mounting would be very nice, as it is mounting my digital camera and various nfs/samba directories makes quite a mess of my fstab
Re:Mounting Shares (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Mounting Shares (Score:2)
In fact, I have a lot less problems mounting Windows' shares on my Linux machine than I do mounting them Windows -> Windows.
What do I know though, I am just a big geek.
User vs Root (Score:2)
That works if you're root.
It does not work if you are a user.
Doesn't solve the problem.
Re:User vs Root (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:User vs Root (Score:3, Informative)
eww. there's an easier solution.
(i hope the lindows people are reading...) use sudo. from the sudo website [www.sudo.ws],
"Sudo (superuser do) allows a system administrator to give certain users (or groups of users) the ability to run some (or all) commands as root or another user while logging the commands and arguments."
I use sudo almost exclusively for mounting (including smbmount).
there are ways to easily configure it so that
it doesn't need a password to perform some (or all) actions.
Re:User vs Root (Score:2)
Re:User vs Root (Score:2)
Making a huge fstab is my complaint to begin with.
Re:Mounting Shares (Score:2)
findsmb [samba.org] seems to do the trick, though iirc there's a way to do so manually with smbclient or nmblookup.
Re:Mounting Shares (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Mounting Shares (Score:2, Funny)
You already can with most distros (Score:3, Informative)
You can already browse the network easily in, say, Red Hat 7.3 if you create your own initscript - its really slick. But most people who need these kinds of apps won't do that because they can't be bothered (and why should they have to be?).
If you want this to be fixed, then maybe add a supporting comment to [redhat.com]
Bug 72114 - Reslisa needs an initscript
Misleading? (Score:5, Interesting)
This is what will run.
Everything else will not.
I wonder how busy their 800 number is. If they are stupid enough to provide one.
I love the idea, but not educating new users about what exactly they are buying seems very misleading. I can see the mindless drones going:
"Windows computer, $899"
"Lindows computer, $399"
Lindows says it runs some "Microsoft Windows Compatible" software, and it is cheaper... I'll go for that one.
Only to find out that, two weeks later, their new version of The Sims just won't run.
I wonder if they get a lot of returns?
-S
Re:Misleading? (Score:3, Informative)
Actually, they changed directions a little while ago. Their website now says almost nothing about running standard Windows applications. They changed their tune to now simply give easy access to the many native linux applications that are available.
They call it the Click-N-Run Warehouse [lindows.com]. It allows a user to just select an application from their warehouse and it will automatically be downloaded and installed. I think they realized that they were going to run into the problems you describe and decided they were biting off more than they could chew.
Re:Misleading? (Score:2)
Now *this* is what I call smart marketing. Make big noise and PR to attract attention and then deliver anything to the original plan.
Lindows will become just another Linux distributor or will fade away.
Re:Misleading? (Score:2)
Re:Misleading? (Score:2)
Nevertheless, it's a good thing. Anything that levels the playing field a bit is nice to see.
Re:Misleading? (Score:2, Informative)
Re:Misleading? (Score:5, Interesting)
I've been pretty bitterly disappointed with how Lindows has backed away from Windows compability. Early on, they was the big deal: That they were going to take Wine and expand it dramatically with the goal of having near-full Windows compatibility.
Apparently, they've decided that was too hard and/or expensive, and decided to market this ridiculous click-and-run as some "revolutionary" feature.
Sheesh, when will SOMEONE figure out that the key to HUGE fame and riches is to come out with an operating system that is FREAKING COMPATIBLE WITH WINDOWS. This is not rocket science. It just takes money and guts.
And just to head off the typical replies to this, let me deal with them:
1) But RM101! They APIS are undocumented!!!
True, in many cases. So what? Do what Wine does-- figure them out. And that only applies to Microsoft applications. There are a LOT of applications out there that use the standard ones.
2) But RM101! They'll just change the APIs!!!!
No, they can't, or they break everyone's software out there. Microsoft was built on backward compatbility.
3) But RM101! They'll just sue anyone who tries!!
First of all, Microsoft has ZERO history of suing companies in order to destroy them (See Apple for an example of a company that uses the lawsuit as a weapon). And even if they did, so what? Like I said, money and guts. They'll lose.
PLEASE!! SOMEONE OUT THERE GET A CLUE!!
I thought Lindows had one, but apparently not.
Re:Misleading? (Score:2)
Re:Misleading? (Score:2)
So do it already. If it's so straightforward, what are you waiting for?
If I had a few spare 100 millions of dollars lying around, I would. That's what galls me: Robertson has the freaking money and contacts. He could do it -- if he had the guts to see it through. Unfortunately, he's either a) lost focus on the real target, b) he's decided that he the risk is too high, or c) has deluded himself into thinking that "click-and-run" really is revolutionary and you really don't have to have compatability with the HUGE shrink-wrap and installed-software market (GAH!)
Re:Misleading? (Score:2)
Why do you need that money? Where would it go?
Well, maybe not 100s of millions, but certainly a lot of it. Windows is not exactly a small product. You need engineers, LOTS of testing staff (including lots of different hardware, lots of different apps, etc), as well as a commitment to a solid marketing campaign. I've always wanted to see something like "Absolutely, positively 100% compatible. Only better."
To do it right, you need big engineering resources, as well as enough money to keep you afloat without income for a few years.
Re:Misleading? (Score:4, Funny)
*cough* OS/2 *cough*
And before that DR-DOS.
-Peter
Re:Misleading? (Score:2, Interesting)
That's a funny thing to say with respect to this post! Microsoft suied Lindows over their name.
Re:Misleading? (Score:2)
But you'll note that's a legitimate complaint, based on the similarity between Windows and Lindows. You may not necessarily agree that it infringes (I do agree, actually), but it's legitimate.
What you'll note is that it's NOT a technology lawsuit.
Re:Misleading? (Score:2)
I'm just thinking here, but won't it be easier to come out with an OS that is compatiable with the new OSX, since it is build on *BSD?? Image that, now you have a market of users on mac and pc platform that use the same software, if it's cheaper, how long do you think that MS could stand against that?? There already seems to be a fair number of Mac Apps.. even MS products, so what would happen if you could run them on your brand new PCX/OS?? Doing the same thing as a mac user on cheaper hardware.. hehe.. this might piss off both Apple and MS..
Re:Misleading? (Score:2)
Not only that, but the GNUStep project [gnustep.org] is based on the OpenStep spec, just as OS X is. I believe one of the current design goals of GNUStep is to achieve source compatibility with OS X.
Re:Misleading? (Score:2)
But RM101, they won't *change* the API's, they will instead add more and more *new* API's, not document them, and use them in their latest office suite, so no one could reasonably keep up compatabilitry in a competing operating system.
I've seen this type of thing from them regularly over the years.
-me
Re:Misleading? (Score:2)
So explain to me why I can install Office XP on Windows 98 [microsoft.com].
That's not to say that Microsoft won't add new APIs (as they certainly have a right to do), but it's not the picture you paint. Microsoft WANTS to sell Office apps, even on older operating systems.
Re:Misleading? (Score:4, Insightful)
OS/2 is the PERFECT example! Do you know what killed OS/2? No, it wasn't IBM's marketing. It was lack of Win32 compatibility, as well as lack of hardware compability. All the apps and drivers were being written for Windows, and IBM had to run around begging developers.
I mean, IBM used to ship OS/2 AND Windows 3.1 (3.1!!) on the same boxes. You had to go through a rigamorole to delete OS/2 and install Win 3.1. Yet everyone did, because the software selection and hardware select for OS/2 completely sucked.
Compability is everything! It's been proven time and time again.
Re:Misleading? (Score:2, Informative)
Re:Misleading? (Score:2)
That lack of compatibility was urged along by the successive versions of win32s.dll, which kept breaking compatibility. IBM finally gave up, and MS stopped changing win32s.dll, after version 1.30 of win32s.dll came out, which added a call to request memory out of range of the 512 MB limit on DOS sessions under OS/2--a fairly fundamental thing to break, and a limit only recently, long after it would make much difference, eliminated. There's no real reason to be picky about the base address of memory one allocates--so it was added solely to break OS/2 compatibility. Gee...you just claimed that MS couldn't possibly do something like that. Looks like a counterexample to me.
Speaking of breaking existing software--checked MS's EULA lately? To get security fixes, you have to agree that MS has the right to automatically install OS upgrades that may prevent software from running. So nowadays, with Windows you can either live with security holes or accept "DOS isn't done until Lotus won't run" as SOP.
Compatibility is a Catch-22. Without it, people kvetch about not having it. With it, developers see no reason to bother to write for anything but Windows--and indeed, you complain about both the lack of OS/2 native software and the lack of compatibility.
Re:Misleading? (Score:3, Interesting)
so when you finally get it, it'll cost as much as windows, because of all the effort and expense.
So what? I have absolutely no problem with paying for software. What I want are Windows-quality applications on a Unix core running on commodity hardware.
Re:Misleading? (Score:2)
Note the phrase: commodity hardware. I will NEVER give money to Apple for their hardware.
Wrapping Windows drivers. (Score:2)
You're kidding, right?
A large part of Windows instability comes from buggy drivers. Using these drivers would do Linux no favours stability-wise.
The API requirements of both operating systems are also different at a very fundamental level. A Windows driver exposes device features in the way that Windows wants/expects/needs. Wrapping something this different would give you a very slow driver that wouldn't have all of the features Linux applications and OS functions use.
A driver also generally messes with many structures in OS space. You'd have to provide emulated hooks where hooks are used, and build fake memory structures where direct access is used. This, too, is slow.
In summary, trying to use Windows drivers under Linux (or any other *nix) is a just plain Bad Idea.
Re:Misleading? IMHO why OS/2 failed (Score:2, Informative)
XGA apparently solved dual screen. I was never able to find XGA video cards that would work in my clone dispite several calls to IBM tech support.
The single message queue problem was to the best of my knowledge never solved - hense the machine locked up quite often.
There were dosen's of trouble calls for this that and the other. Most of this I could have fixed myself if it was documented. Little things - like changing the domain of the system.... I even have the red books for OS/2 and subscribed to the OS/2 developers network. Nothing in there how to change even a domain name. I gave up and just used the numerical IP address. Well - the HDD crashed about 2 years ago and good riddence.
Now - those trouble calls. I lost HOURS on hold. The intake operators asked the same stupid questions over and over for 3 years. These people were not even able to set up a database with a phone number index. Even Sears can do that - but apparently not IBM.
How much memory - how much disk - what make of disk - what kind of video card and so on. Stoopid questions that had nothing to do with the problem. 3/4 of what was in config.sys was a mystery including the "undocumented" video configuration I ran with "undocumented" parameters that brought my dual head system up - complements from a senior tech from Boca Raton.
Oh the nightmare. I offered to WRITE a utilty for them to spin through the HDD and spit out version numbers and config info so we didn't have to wait on hold. This _could_ have been popped into an email. Nope - sit and wait on hold. Arrghh.
OS/2 failed because IBM never fixed the problems. OS/2 failed because IBM spent huge sums of money on intake operators that wasted people's time. A simple little file in the machine that the installer created that carries config and version info - simple things like placing the amount of memory, HDD size, drivers loaded and so on - things that could be emailed to the response tech were never done.
When I switched to NT4.0 (which has its own problems) it was like a breath of fresh air. NT even runs the text mode OS/2 apps (like Breif for OS/2) better than OS/2 ever did.
Something else to consider... (Score:4, Interesting)
What you said is true... (Score:2)
Re:Something else to consider... (Score:3, Insightful)
Another example is the kiosks at our campus. All they do is run all day and display one webpage (the institute's webpage) to let students subscribe to lessions.
Or I saw a laptop in a bar whose sole purpose is to play mp3s all day long.
Nobody can tell me that these machines have to run Windows.
Re:Misleading? (Score:2, Informative)
It's not bad (though my PC came with a bizarre installation problem - the partition containing the OS was bigger than the disk it was on, I'd have lost data had I not gone and reformatted it all for Slackware anyway.) The major issue with the "Windows compatability" was that the usual WINE problems came up - standard installers tend to put their dialogs in places where they can't easily be reached, and then they fail anyway because they're looking for system requirements that, apparently, haven't been met.
I tried with the types of app Lindows needs to run to "compete" with Windows, namely a proprietry database frontend of the sort sold by corporations to other corporations, well below the radar of open source projects (who gives a stuff if Office XP or Outlook works? There are plenty of open source/free software alternatives to those applications.) This was Pilot Administrator, for those who've heard of it, an OLAP product. It didn't install, and, from what I can see, wasn't doing anything special.
Lindows is user friendly. Setting it up on my network was a piece of cake. I suspect some Windows applications work well if you can find a way of installing them. But at the same time, it's not something I'd dump in front of a typical Windows user and say "Hey, use this, it'll run most of what you want it to run." Rather, the WINE features are better described as useful bonusses, for the few applications that run.
When did they release 1.0? (Score:2, Insightful)
Maybe they just went straight to 2.0 to make it sound like they are somewhat stable.
Re:When did they release 1.0? (Score:5, Funny)
Michael Robertson Is Cooperative (Score:4, Informative)
Bruce
Re:Michael Robertson Is Cooperative (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Michael Robertson Is Cooperative (Score:5, Interesting)
2) Have you talked to him about the "always running as root" issue? That's a big security risk that puts Lindows on the same level as Windows 95.
Oh....wow (Score:5, Insightful)
Seriously...the more we make a big fuss about things like this, the worse Linux looks. Anyone not familiar with Linux would think "So does this mean that Linux users couldn't see Windows shares until just now? What else does Linux not have?"
Re:Oh....wow (Score:2)
Sure, there are programs that let you mount them, see them, etc, but there has not been anything to make it look like Windows mounting.
I particularly don't care for the way that Windows mounts or displays it, but that's why I don't use it
"Linux users couldn't see Windows shares...?" (Score:2)
"So does this mean that Linux users couldn't see Windows shares until just now?"
No, it just meant that non-geeks couldn't use them without a lot of hand-holding or obnoxious manual reading, logging in as root, and never forget, The Typing Of The Arcane Commands ("Can't I have just a *little* peril?").
I guess they could always have done The Abasement To And Begging Of The Smarmy Elitist Linux Weenies, Keepers Of That Which Is Tediously Arcane For No Good Reason.
But then, who really has the time to travel to the retro gothic temple in Finland?
I guess you really don't get the idea that most people not only don't know about computers, but they would just as soon not have to learn any more than they have to to get by?
-- Terry
Re:"Linux users couldn't see Windows shares...?" (Score:2)
2. In corporate environments, there usually is someone readily available who can help.
3. People really need to get their heads out of the sand and learn a little bit about computers. I'm not comfortable creating a huge gap between those who have technical knowledge and those who don't. Once it's basic for the techies, it should at least exist to everyone else.
Note for the cheapskates among us (Score:2, Informative)
If you want a free version, you'll need to wait for the LindowsOS General Release later this year.
FAQ's may be found at: http://help.lindows.com/cgi-bin/visitors.cfg/php/e nduser/std_alp.php [lindows.com]
predicted comments (Score:5, Funny)
In this discussion, there will be:
13 posts about how it dumb it is that this looks so much like Windows.
5 of which will also predict the death of Linux on the desktop.
21 responses to those posts about how looking like Windows is a good thing.
18 posts suggesting alternate desktop-oriented distros, including Mandrake, Red Hat, Lycoris, and Xandros.
7 responses to those posts claiming that Debian is far better.
5 responses to the Debian posts about source based distributions like Gentoo and Source Mage being far more up-to-date and superior.
14 posts will praise Lindows for being easy-to-use and with plans (that will not actually happen) to install it for their parents.
8 of those will commend the new networking setup and resolution switcher and wonder why other distros haven't done these things yet.
5 people will explain that other distros HAVE done that.
3 posts will make fun of the name Lindows.
6 will ask about if the Windows emulation actually works (nobody will have a supported answer).
5 posts will question if this release is truly worthy of being called "version 2.0.0".
4 posts will point out that you can buy computers with Lindows preinstalled from Wal-mart.
6 posts will offer mirrors of the screenshots/article.
Of the 17 posts modded up to 4 or 5, at least 13 will begin with the phrase "I'll probably get modded down for this, but..."
And finally, there will be THIS post, which tries to redeem itself for being dumb with a self-deprecating final statement.
You forgot: (Score:2)
- 1 all your base reference, even though the joke's been dead for well over a year and a half
- 5 "Stephen King Dead at 54" posts
- 8 "First Post" posts.
Re:predicted comments (Score:2)
1 post crying for mirrors to the screenshots - this one!
Aaaaaah!!!
Re:predicted comments (Score:2)
Re:predicted comments (Score:3, Funny)
These are so common, I am getting nostalgic for the days of the 15 redundant BSOD jokes every topic. 8{
We tested Lindows.... (Score:5, Interesting)
...here at work. I work for a corporation that sells everything from distributed fax databasing software to cameras. The only Linux stuff around is the few servers that I have set up for rumedial intranet and inter-departmental data management tasks. So when Lindows came along I thought that maybe it could be used to demonstrate how easy Linux really is (thus gaining some support for driver writing and new software projects, et cetera).
Boy were we (me and the other two Linux users in this company of thousands) when we sat down with Lindows to set it up as a workstation running a few printers, a scanner, some software through Wine, etc. We quickly realized that it was nothing more then a really bad, ugly, poorly concieved, library lacking Linux distribution. It offerred nothing more then your conventional Mandrake or Redhat boxed sets (in fact far, far, far less) and innovated nothing. It was laughed at by the few managers that saw it. Lindows failed us, as it will hordes of other people.
Re:We tested Lindows.... (Score:4, Insightful)
Of course many will upgrade to real Linux distributions, but as a bridge from Windows, Lindows seems quite nice for me.
EarthLink on Lindows (Score:2)
Make sure you read the Release Notes!! (Score:3, Informative)
2.0 cannot install to a secondary slave drive yet - Can't get a new hard drive after Lindows is installed
Advanced Install options needs improvement in drive labeling and drive order - If you have more than one drive, good luck installing and setting up your drives
Due to problems it was causing, we had to turn off the "Restore session" option when rebooting. We'll work on getting this fixed and back in. - If it crashes, your out of luck
No support for DSL (PPPOE) - Well, there goes DSL users
Re:Make sure you read the Release Notes!! (Score:2)
Another step in the wrong direction (Score:3, Insightful)
Why are we all deluding ourselves into thinking that X11 and it's KDE/Gnome companions are viable desktop environments for consumers when they really aren't. It does the open source movement a disservice to constantly hype up an inferior platform while ignoring it's many shortcomings, simply because it says "open source" or "Linux".
Re:Another step in the wrong direction (Score:2)
>GUI, and come up with something new. Something
>developed with the general consumer in mind.
People are working on alternates - see DirectFB, Berlin, GGI, etc. Guess what? Aside from DirectFB, which has its place in embedded systems, virtually noone uses or cares about them.
The fact of the matter is there's nothing seriously wrong with X11. Most of the "X sucks" crowd are parroting something they read somewhere without any real understanding.
>Something that doesn't require KDE or Gnome to
>patch it's many shortcomings.
KDE and Gnome are outside the scope of what X11 does. What you're saying is roughtly equivilent to saying you shouldn't buy a house that requires you to buy furniture to "patch its many shortcomings".
Matt
Re:Another step in the wrong direction (Score:2)
The perceived 'problems' with X are non-issues or more easily solved through extensions. Toolkits (ala qt and gtk) as well as things like SDL take care of any API strangess that could scare developers.
Already, desktop environments are pretty complete, except when it comes to configuring the X server itself on the fly. Now I know there is or is in the works an extension to configure displays on the fly, and desktop environments incorporating config tools that utilize this would help greatly. Although this is becoming less and less important. When was the last time you had to change color depth/resolution for your windows desktop (note that switching resolutions is more comonly done by games, and linux games also change resolutions).
X is a solid, proven, good system. By the time the supposed 'X replacements' develop the functionality they found lacking in X, X gets an extension before the project is done..
Re:Another step in the wrong direction (Score:2)
>would take alot more than a slashdot post to list
>them.
Give even a cursory summary of what you think the biggest issues are.
>Please, go ahead and list any benefits to X to the
>consumer, I've never heard anyone from the X camp
>list any, so if there are, I'd love to hear them.
It displays graphics. What do you want it to do? Perform oral sex?
You're the one who claimed it was a detriment in the first place, so the burden of evidence is on you.
>I've heard thus far are either knee-jerk rhetoric
>damning my anti-X heresy, or benefits of X that
>regular computer users could care less about.
And you're not going to hear anything more until you stop talking as if its a given fact that "X sucks" and present a well reasoned argument backing it up.
Re:Another step in the wrong direction (Score:5, Insightful)
1) There are no good alternatives. Period. DirectFB doesn't support nearly as many cards, and Berlin isn't even ready.
2) Network transparency. Some people claim that it's useless today but that's just false. It's still being used in corporate environments and it's becoming more and more important in the embedded market. If you want to create an alternative, it better be network transparent.
3) X is proven. It's more than 15 years old now. Don't think X sucks just because XFree86 isn't the best implementation.
4) X is extensible. Nearly all shortcomings can be worked around using extensions. Take a look at XRender for example. Or DRI. Or DGA. And in the near future: translucent windows, screen resizing and rotation (RandR or something).
5) X is fast enough. No X isn't slow. Moving windows doesn't seem to be smooth, but that's because of the communication between the window manager and the window, not because X is slow. When I switched to Metacity, moving windows suddenly became *a lot* smoother.
Yes, X communicates through sockets. But locally, pixmaps (95% of all traffic) are transferred through shared memory (at least XFree86 does). CPUs are becoming faster and faster, so socket overhead should become smaller and smaller.
Of course, assuming that the driver is good and fast.
6) XFree86 configuration is currently complicated. But that won't stay that way. Why ditch XFree86 and replace it with something new and incompatible when you can just improve XFree86? The developers are already planning on getting rid of XF86Config completely and go for hardware autodetection.
Re:Another step in the wrong direction (Score:3, Insightful)
Want some examples:
1. "Extensions" should not be allowed without a library that detects the extension and simulates (however crudly) the extension when it is not there. The purpose is not to make your program work on older systems, but to make it so you don't have to put any "if" statements in there when writing software that uses the extension. Becasue of the lack of this, NO extensions since about 1986 have ever been successful, all the ones that anybody uses are assummed to be there by the software (shared memory, shape). The only example I know of a correctly-written extension is Xft, which does emulate itself on old X11 servers, and you will notice that it is being used quite a lot!
2. Get rid of colormaps. I mean totally, they are GONE. The server should not report any "visuals" other than a single "true color" visual. If the hardware is not true color then it simulates it by using a color cube, the contents of this cube cannot be accessed or queried by an application and it cannot tell this is being done.
3. Absolute guaranteed support of every image format of 1, 3, and 4 channels with any number of bits that is a power of 2 from 1 to 32. Currently a library that wants to do this has to make an NxM set of translations, from an arbitrary input image format to an arbitrary one depending on the X server. If this crap was moved to the server it would only be an Nx1 set of transformations, vastly less, because the server knows exactly what the output format is. Also do alpha mixing of 4 channels images. I don't care how freaking slow it is, just do it so we don't have to do something even slower in the program. While you are at it, you should be able to read back an arbitrary image format from the screen and the server does the conversion. And it should use shared memory or whatever the fastest possible communication is *automatically*, not by me setting up the shared memory extension!
4. Keith, if you are writing Xrender extension, please try to make the interface so it is not confusing! I have a window id, I want to say "draw_into(window)" and then "moveto(x,y); lineto(x,y),... fill()". The main thing is that there is no reason for a "context" argument. OpenGL has worked without one forever, even in multithreaded, and you will notice that OpenGL is portable between systems and toolkits.
Re:Another step in the wrong direction (Score:2)
I feel the opposite. Everytime people come up with reactions to mod down X, I've yet to see anyone actually come up with a compelling reason why X is worse than all the other windowing systems out there.
I said "windowing system", because that's what X is: a windowing system, not a GUI!
"It's goes some great features if you're a system administrator or an engineer, but the regular user any benefits of X are worthless to them."
And Linux offers many things that regular users will never use. So why not remove all those features?
Just because regular users won't use them, doesn't mean they should be removed. It doesn't harm regular users, but it does benefit others, so why remove it?
Re:Another step in the wrong direction (Score:2)
>but the various problems with X and the reasons
>they are affecting open source desktop
>proliferation. Now you back up yours.
Um, where? You've only said "the problems are too numerous to list on a Slashdot post". I reread the thread to be sure I didn't miss anything, and no,
you still haven't provided a SINGLE concrete explanation of what you think is wrong in X, much less proven that it can't be solved without a complete rewrite.
Does Lindows have a deathwish? (Score:3, Interesting)
Now their site appears to have striking similarities to Another [apple.com] well know OS/hardware manufacturer. I mean, come ON!
Not that I'm saying it's not funny though
Re:Does Lindows have a deathwish? (Score:2)
Re:Does Lindows have a deathwish? (Score:2)
Ironic that this Article (Score:2, Funny)
Source? (Score:4, Interesting)
Good business model, bad product? (Score:2)
However, this doesn't seem like a good deal. I mean, you are basically paying $99 for a version of Linux that is available for free (Xandros). It's roughly the same price as Windows with next to no compatibility with their favorite applications! I might as well buy Windows and get 100% compatibility.
I realize the average lay-person isn't going to know how to install Xandros for free, but Walmart is already bundling Mandrake with their cheap PCs and Xandros would be just as easy to bundle.
I really don't see ANY benefit from running Linux unless you merely want to promote open-source and/or free software. My hat's off to you.
Yep... (Score:2)
Call me a troll if ya like, but I think this is exactly the right thing to do in order to dethrone Windows.
However, be warned: Linux can't endlessly play catch-up to Windows. In order to make Linux PREFERRED over Windows it'll have to evolve to a point that it is substantially different. Wish I had an answer as to what direction to take there, but I don't. (hey! At least I'm honest!)
Here's a thought, though: Why not make a simple distro of Linux designed specifically for making a PVR out of an old computer? That alone would get me started playing with, and I'm about as hard core of Windows user as anybody can be!
Someone explain... (Score:2, Interesting)
-- Tino Didriksen
The screenshots don't sell the product well (Score:2)
I see differnt ones for QT, StarOffice and XUL, and a custom one for the MP3 player.
How can you sell something so inconsistent?
-ShieldWolf
Lindows surpassing Debian? (Score:4, Funny)
Hurh? What's wrong with X? (Score:2)
Re:finally (Score:5, Funny)
Re:EULA? (Score:2)
Many appliances have a "do not use until reading manual" sticker which could almost be considered a EULA, as it has the warning and precautions.
That cold be a legal defense. "Your honor, the plaintiff clearly removed the sticker, thereby agreeing that they had read the precautions on the Spaceballs Flame Thrower..."
Re:Looks good... but where's the Windows support? (Score:5, Insightful)
For a large number of businesses, StarOffice or OpenOffice will handle what they need. Are they perfect? No, especially in converting documents with Macros.
Moving to a Linux desktop is a COST and CONTROL issue. Linux/OpenOffice for 10,000 desktops costs $0 -- or maybe $79 if you want to buy a disk and save the download time. A knowledgable admin can then create a custom "Kickstart" for the install, and image the drives using "dd" -- saving money on Norton Ghost in the process.
A bit of effort on the part of company admins, coders and you can save a LOT of cash on licenses. Not to mention the $$ involved with keeping the licenses current, on file and in compliance.
But, you're right in the SOME Windows support should be offered. Maybe a partnership with the CrossOver or WineX people so people who *NEED* a Windows app have an option.
"Distinguishing" factor (Score:2)
Sounds like a good reason not to use them.
I looked all over their website. The fact that this is true is only mentioned IN PASSING in a section NOT related to their suppository [lindows.com] (which they call Click-N-Run). Its also mentioned here. [lindows.com]
Also, from what I've read, their support sucks, and they don't have any available downloads. They have an explaination here. [lindows.com]
While legal (I think?), these seem like dirty tricks; they're more expensive than any other distribution with these additions. Its like they're trying to become the next Microsoft, but with the upgrade system that Microsoft wish it used.
I was hoping to switch recommended brands, but I guess I'll keep telling all the newbies to start with Mandrake until they could be weaned to more solid food.
to distinguish? yes (Score:2)
the reason this isn't for public consumption yet (i.e. free) is that they haven't figured out a legal loophole yet that will allow them to break the GPL to ship their crap.
at least this is my understanding, from what i've read on their site only. if i'm wrong, please correct.
otherwise, someone please tell me how they're selling this legally outside their "beta testers" in the group thing?
Re:walmart? (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:EULA? (Score:2, Insightful)
So if I install Lindows on my laptop, I'm not allowed to lend my laptop to a friend who needs to make a presentation, take a class, etc?
Re:And where is... (Score:2, Informative)
You have to pay Lindows for a license before you get the source code. Doesn't this violate the GPL?
Re:Where's the code? (Score:2)
Point is, read the GPL