Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Linux Software

Xandros 1.0 320

Posted by michael from the simple.-compatible.-proprietary. dept.
Mr. Smoove writes "Despite the quick-off-the-mark review from Newsforge this morning, the Xandros 1.0 desktop is finally here! No free download so you'll have to shell out US$99 for it but you do get an enhanced (?) version of KDE 2.2 and built-in Cross-Over Plugin and Office! Finally a decent challenger to Lycoris and also what Lindows should have been..." There's also an interview with a Xandros executive.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Xandros 1.0 More

Xandros 1.0

Comments Filter:

  • damn it....... (Score:2, Interesting)

    by the_2nd_coming ( 444906 )
    no free downloads....that sucks.....even if they gave away a less featureful version.

    and $99 for an unprooven peice of software....nope, Im not paying.

    • Devil's Advocate post... (Score:4, Insightful)

      by MsGeek ( 162936 ) on Tuesday October 22, 2002 @12:42PM (#4505646) Homepage Journal
      Buying both Crossover Office and Crossover Plugin will set you back, in total, almost $99. KDE 2.2.2 has seen some improvements recently, many of them given back by Lycoris. I have a great way of thinking about Xandros. Think of it as a braindead simple way of getting Debian and both Crossover Office and Crossover Plugin in the bargain.

      Of course, if Xandros is trying to pull the same Lindows crap and charge $99/year "subscription"...then screw that, I'll wait for Debian to put out 3.0 with the Progeny installer. :-P At least with Lycoris' "Iris" simple software installer it costs you only $20 per seat, forever.

    • Re:damn it....... (Score:5, Interesting)

      by jasonditz ( 597385 ) on Tuesday October 22, 2002 @12:42PM (#4505650) Homepage
      Its not that unproven.

      Seriously, Xandros is just the new version of Corel's Linux. Corel also has part ownership in Xandros.

      Its definately not the OS you stick on your webserver... its not meant to be. Its a desktop distro that is supposedly very good at what it does. I sure wouldn't pay that kind of money for it, but for those who are interested in Linux but don't know where to begin, it might be a good thing.

      I know a few people who really honestly loved Corel's distro and can't seem to get their minds around any of the others, so for them its probably a no-brainer.

    • Re:damn it....... (Score:2, Informative)

      by supun ( 613105 )
      I think that charge comes from including CodeWeavers's CrossOver Office, $55, and CrossOver Plugin, $25. CrossOver Office will run MS Office 97 and 2000, via wine, on your Linux box. And CrossOver Plugins will allow you to view Quicktime and other formats.

      That looks like where the cash comes in, but do you really need it. OpenOffice is a great replacement for CrossOver Office, and Xine is a great replacement for CrossOver Plugins. And then you are getting a KDE desktop that in one revision behind the time.

  • Viable Alternative? (Score:4, Insightful)

    by webword ( 82711 ) on Tuesday October 22, 2002 @12:36PM (#4505591) Homepage
    Is this a viable alternative to anything? Seriously, I can't believe they don't offer some sort of free trial version. I don't understand how companies expect they will ever gain traction in the marketplace when they don't do something substantially better. Incremental improvements, if that is what they are in this case, are not enough. Sure, I admit it, I haven't used the product. But what is my incentive? Why should I shell out $99? Based on a review? No chance of that. Not when I can get something almost as good for free. Or, not when I don't see a major improvement for making the leap. Of course, I suppose you could rain on my parade by saying this is an OS so the rules are different. But, I don't think that is a good argument; not when I can get an OS for free. Do I want to run Windows? OK, then I'll use Wine or maybe I'll go for Lindows. This is just my quick, early post, $0.02 and I'm probably wrong in a major away. Here are some rotten eggs to throw at me -- have a blast throwing them at me.

    • Re:Viable Alternative? (Score:3, Insightful)

      by webword ( 82711 )
      One more thing. I've said here, and in other places, that Linux stuff isn't easy enough. (How many other people have said this too?) I've also talked beyond usability and about marketing, or lack of marketing, regarding Linux and open source. (How many others have done the same?) Geez, you know, you would think these companies would get a clue. A poster in the eWeek article summed it up [newsforge.com] quite well:

      "Unfortunately, in the world of ignorant desktop users, marketing counts for much more than good product. Lindows is selling pre-installed on computers in multiple countries already. Xandros? The only reason I've heard of it is because I read geek sites like Newsforge."

    • Re:Viable Alternative? (Score:5, Interesting)

      by twistedcubic ( 577194 ) on Tuesday October 22, 2002 @12:53PM (#4505751)

      Try this:

      Let me tell you: Internet Explorer 5.5 runs beautifully in Xandros. I've used Crossover to install Explorer on Mandrake and SuSE, with only partial success. But everything about Explorer is right this time: the fonts, the javascript, the layouts, the speed -- everything.

      Unless you think the reviewer is lying, this may indicate that this particular distribution did it right with the MS compatibility. This is a big deal, if you like to use the MS stuff.

      • Re:Viable Alternative? (Score:3, Informative)

        by HiThere ( 15173 )
        What it really indicates is that Xandros is using a more recent (i.e., not otherwise commercially released) version of Crossover Office.
      • Let me tell you: Internet Explorer 5.5 runs beautifully in Xandros.

        This could revolutionise the browser experience. Features available in IE 5.5:

        • No tabs
        • No zoom
        • Partial PNG support

        Wooo!

  • Big mistake (Score:5, Insightful)

    by GreyWolf3000 ( 468618 ) on Tuesday October 22, 2002 @12:38PM (#4505602) Journal
    No free download so you'll have to shell out US$99 for it but you do get an enhanced (?) version of KDE 2.2 and built-in Cross-Over Plugin and Office! Finally a decent challenger to Lycoris and also what Lindows should have been...

    Big, big mistake. In fact, if they don't provide some kind of live-cd, ala SuSE, they'll completely flop. It's that simple. No one will pay for an OS that they haven't used at a friends house or can freely try it out on their own, especially when the packages are so out-of-date (all these "Windows-killers" seem to use that same outdated version of KDE). Check out the Xandros page at distrowatch [distrowatch.com] and see for yourself.

    LindowsOS saved itself by coming pre-installed on WalMart PC's--Xandros will have to try and pull some similar maneuvre. As I see it, there's no way in hell other *NIX users will pay for something they already have, and Windows users are skeptical of change as is ("You mean to tell me they're making this for free?" usually sets them off).

    If Xandros were the best desktop distro ever, it wouldn't matter if they couldn't get people to try it, and then buy it. I hope they do in the future, because I'm actually interested in this.

    • Big, big mistake. In fact, if they don't provide some kind of live-cd, ala SuSE, they'll completely flop. It's that simple. No one will pay for an OS that they haven't used at a friends house or can freely try it out on their own, especially when the packages are so out-of-date (all these "Windows-killers" seem to use that same outdated version of KDE). Check out the Xandros page at distrowatch [distrowatch.com] and see for yourself.

      Hm.. well.. what about MacOSX and all the new developers, admins and 'high end people' going to it? No, not all of them are, all of the ones who have :P

      • why MS and apple have credibility for there new OSs....becasue they have been around for more than 20 years selling products that just work and a consumer can therefore make a good bet that there new products will just work.

        back in the day, MS had to give IBM DOS toplay around with and test before they licensed it.

        apple gave test computers to schools.

        in the begining, giving stuff away is part of how you build your credibility.
        • But you see, the companies gave their OS to selecet people. I'm sure Xan. had a closed beta. I can't download OSX. It was me, going to someone who decided to try it out, reading the articles about it, that got me to try it.

          So you see, downloading for free is only one venue out of many that can be tried.

      • Re:Big mistake (Score:2, Interesting)

        by H310iSe ( 249662 )
        I bought Suse for ... around $70 as my first linux distro. If I had Xandros as an option at the time I would have bought that instead, it seems like a really great first distro that bridges nicely between windows and linux.

        Maybe once I'm a 1337 linux d00d then I'll just download and build my own linux but for now linux is hard (a lot of pride-swallowing as I wallow around practically like I've never seen a computer before, taking a half hour to figure out that I can pipe things to grep (still can't write regular expressions) and a couple hours until I finally got rc.d). Anything that made linux more useful, more quickly, is great.
        • Which is exactly the point. You tried out Suse only 'cause it seemed great in articles/on the site and may have tried it somewhere else.

    • Re:Big mistake (Score:3, Insightful)

      by ACK!! ( 10229 )
      That is a such a load. Xandros first off would have to come complete except for the CrossOver stuff which is both proprietary and the smooth integration is a huge reason a lot of people would try it out. Without this piece Xandros is just another user focused distro. Hence, you have a serious reason to buy the full copy.

      However, even without this, I buy my big upgrades. I am going from SuSE 8.0 to Redhat 8.0 and I plan to buy the CDs for both convience and to support the research and time Redhat contributes through its employees to so many projects.

      Redhat is not saintly corp or anything. For example, I would love to see them devote some people full-time to a couple of major projects that need resources. However, any business as a corporation is founded for profit. Still it is the corporation that pays the bills for a lot of good folks putting in time on so many projects.

      ________________________________________________
      • The fact that you know that both KDE and SuSE are good is because they've been tried and tested by others. Both can be installed via ftp, and both have established themselves as viable solutions.

        Crossover is also already established. A trial without Crossover could work.

        At any rate, Xandros has given up a once-in-a-corporate-lifetime opportinity to quickly get a user base. Now it will be significantly harder to convince potential customers of their merit--word-of-mouth is arguably the most important advertising method in a new product's life.

    • In fact, if they don't provide some kind of live-cd, ala SuSE, they'll completely flop. It's that simple.

      Agreed. Why should I bother buying a copy, if I'm a corporate user, when I can demo Linux for free?

      If they're not expecting end-user sales, why not make a personal edition available (for $50 or free, either like SuSE's live demo, or totally free), without the Codeweaver plugins and without a couple of other corp-centric features? That way it'll get mindshare, and when my boss (hi!) asks me which Linux we want to standardize on, I can say Xandros.

      That being said, best of luck to them - the product should rock. I used CLOS1 for a year and a half, and loved it. It actually put me onto Debian, although I still miss some of the features of CLOS.

      For the end user, Xandros should rule. I just wish I could find out without ponying up $100.

  • Just to get this over with: (Score:5, Informative)

    by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday October 22, 2002 @12:39PM (#4505614)
    Let me clarify this as early in the thread as possible:


    Yes, it is legal to make a GPLed project only available for pay.

    The fact a product is GPLed means basically two things:

    • If you give someone a copy of the binary to the project, you have to either give them a copy of the source with it, or else provide them the source code upon request.
      If you give someone a copy of the product, they are allowed to give it away to anyone they like, and you cannot stop them.


    That's ALL. There. It's said. Now you don't have to complain about the $99 thing, right? Becuase you all get it now. So shut up. There's a nice FAQ here [gnu.org] if you're still confused.

    I'm too late by now, aren't i?

    • Re:Just to get this over with: (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Hallow ( 2706 ) on Tuesday October 22, 2002 @01:03PM (#4505851) Homepage
      Keep in mind that not all of the product in this case falls under the GPL. Portions are commercial software under seperate copyright terms, and as such they only need to provide access to the source to those components that are GPL/LGPL, and nothing else, resulting in quite possibly a broken, useless distro.
    • In this case, you can not simply copy and give it away. This particular distribution includes Codeweavers Crossover Office and Crossover Plugin, two proprietary wine implementations that have a per-seat price. I do believe that Xandros allows you to install on any machine you'd like (if you have more than one box); but you can't distribute the non-free code/apps. Not that I'm against this methodology, in fact, I brought it up to Jeremy White a long time ago, when I was trying to make a Mandrake+Mosix+LTSP distribution (now dead). There is nothing wrong (legally, morally is a different issue) with bundling non-free/non-GPL apps in a Linux ditribution and charging per-seat licensing. There is something wrong with pirating commercial software. If you don't want to pay for it, don't use it.
      I know lots of folks here disagree with that, but if you want people to respect the GPL you must respect the licensing of the software you use.

  • crawling already (Score:4, Informative)

    by gritwit ( 575087 ) on Tuesday October 22, 2002 @12:40PM (#4505624)
    'Tseems the site has all but yielded already. You can find some info at Distrowatch [distrowatch.com]

    Don't forget the roots, either: http://linux.corel.com/

  • Not the kitchen sink (Score:5, Insightful)

    by ceswiedler ( 165311 ) <chris@swiedler.org> on Tuesday October 22, 2002 @12:43PM (#4505660)
    We're not following the traditional Linux distribution approach where you've got six calculators, four text editors, three of this and two of that -- you get one of everything with us.

    Thank god. This is something I wish more distros would do. Most seem to think that if I get eight different crappy ways to set up PPP, I'll be happy.

  • KDE 2.2 (Score:2, Interesting)

    by Joe Tie. ( 567096 )
    I'm sure it's been said before, and probaly will many times now, but seriously...KDE 2.2? While I can see the point that using older software will decrease the possibility of having to deal with bugs, does KDE 3.0 even have enough bugs to bother worrying about. I've been using it since 3.0.1 and in all versions it's seemed more stable than windows explorer.
    It just seems rather a damper on the whole experience of using Linux on the desktop. Part of the fun for me was finding and playing around with the various themes, most of which are kde3 oriented now. I'd find it rather annoying to shell out that much money only to find that my system was uglier than someone who'd just downloaded theirs from the internet.
    • From the interview with Ming Poon at consultingtimes [consultingtimes.com]
      The shipping version of Xandros has two CDs. One is the main desktop that we think is good enough and stable enough, and easy enough for people to use. The second CD is basically KDE 3...

      So, contrary to what most people here are saying, you do have the option to use KDE 3. Xandros is not really aimed at something for the majority of /. readers to play with and argue about how bleeding edge they are. They're focussing at the business market. sure, it may not be the latest and the greatest versions of all the packages, but it will work and be stable. Do most large offices in the 'real' world use WindowsXP on every desktop, no. How long did it take for many of them to even get up to Win98, well, many I know of still aren't! Large organisations want usability, stability and don't like the hassle of being bleeding-edge. I'm sure plenty people who've worked in large organisations will attest to this.

      Xandros appear to be focussing on a very particular market segment and fulfilling the needs of that market as well as they can. Whether it will work or not, i don't know, nobody does, but I think many are missing the bigger picture and bashing Xandros because it isn't what they need.

      As a final note, one things that this venture will definitely do is improve Linux's stance in the more general business world. They're rolling back all there modifications to KDE et al (as they have to do) into the main trees. Doesn't this really show off one of the things that is good about these Licenses and the open-source and Linux world in general. Someone sees a market, wants to try to exploit it, works out a business model to attempt to do this, takes the 'raw-materials' available, improves them and has to give them back, therefore benefitting the community. Agree with their business model, idea, product, etc or not, it certainly shows the community is alive and working.

    • Re:KDE 2.2 (Score:3, Insightful)

      by ninewands ( 105734 )
      Quoth the poster:
      I'm sure it's been said before, and probaly will many times now, but seriously...KDE 2.2?

      Xandros is based on Debian, which is designed and developed to be a production system. As such, it often lacks the "latest-and-greatest bleeding edge toys", sacrificing newness in favor of tried-and-true KNOWN rock-solid stability. In a corporate environment, most managers would avoid EVER upgrading software if they could, which is why there was so much fear and uncertainty about Y2K.
      It just seems rather a damper on the whole experience of using Linux on the desktop. Part of the fun for me was finding and playing around with the various themes, most of which are kde3 oriented now. I'd find it rather annoying to shell out that much money only to find that my system was uglier than someone who'd just downloaded theirs from the internet.

      Again, corporate managers would really prefer to specify a mandatory standard for desktop appearance that applied company-wide. Your "half the fun" is ALL of there problem when they have to bring in a temp to cover for the receptionist or a secretary and the poor temp's eyes are hemorrhaging before noon because of some atrocious color scheme the regular employee "designed" to "improve" the appearance of their workstation. Computers in the corporate environment are supposed to be tools, not toys.

      Xandros is going to have a tough go of it. They are taking on Microsoft head-on in a market that MSFT deems critical. The road will be long bumpy and dusty. I truly hope that they have the fortitude to stay the course. I don't think this distro is the Windows-killer, but It does seem to be well thought-out and put together.

  • Uh no. (Score:3, Interesting)

    by teamhasnoi ( 554944 ) <teamhasnoi@yahoA ... inus threevowels> on Tuesday October 22, 2002 @12:46PM (#4505682) Journal
    Don't we get enough of this already?

    Next was the license agreement. It was one of those (quickly-becoming typical) EULAS that mention the GPL stuff and then the proprietary stuff. Interesting about this license: There was no license to read BEFORE I opened the box, no shrink wrap or seal on the package, and yet the final paragraph of the EULA states that if I don't agree with the license and haven't broken the seal on the software I can return it for a refund. Oops! Too late. Of course, this is a review copy -- perhaps yours will be shrink-wrapped with a copy of the agreement on the outside.

    Sure the Mac OS theme is intriguing, but I can get my mac jollies out using Basillisk. And 99 bucks for what? Lindows with a different name? Let me download it, and we'll see. Frankly, I'm happy with my win98. When I can run Adobe software, Acid & Soundforge on linux, I'll switch. Until then, OpenBeos gets my vote for 'alternative OS'.

  • Or you could just... (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday October 22, 2002 @12:48PM (#4505708)
    Use Redhat.

    Sorry, but what is the point in Xandros, Lindows, Lycoris, etc?

    Infact, what is the point in the millions of distros we have now, (apart from special distros for non X86 hardware, and specialised applications)?

    If you're a corporate user, use Redhat
    If you're an ordinary user migrating from Windows, use Mandrake, or Redhat
    If you're an average geek, use Debian
    If you've already got *nix experience, use Slackware

    They are all freely downloadable, (although I suggest buying an official disk set - it's usually cheap anyway, and it does help the distros to keep funding themselves).

    I know this could be interpreted as a troll, but it's not meant to be. We don't need 'united Linux', we don't need a lot of distributions pretending to be Windows. All that does is to confuse the end user.

    When people ask me why they should switch to Linux from Windows, I usually ask them, 'Well, does Windows do everything perfectly that you want it to', 'Yes!', they usually say. I tell them to stick with Windows until they can think of something about it that they don't like. Usually within about 10 seconds they think of something. Then I show them a Linux machine, and tell them that the reason it's better, is because it's nothing like Windows. If they want to benefit from Linux's superiority, they need to invest time to learn it properly. Otherwise, they're better off just putting up with their current in-adequate system.
    • I wish you were right, but honestly, Red Hat and Mandrake still have a lot of room to improve in terms of being easy for Windows users to pick up on. I just helped my roommate install Mandrake, and believe me, there's a lot for him to learn (though he's doing an admirable job, I think he would have given up by now if he wasn't fairly adept with computers). The truth is that Red Hat and Mandrake are not 100% intuitive to Windows migrators.

      Lindows, Xandros, and Lycoris are trying to make this migration much easier. In particular, the file management in Linux tends to be a bit difficult to grasp for Windows users (root directory? huh?), so I think Xandros is very smart to work on improving this area. Also, finding/installing new programs tends to be a little trickier than it should be, and I think Lindows is working hard in this area.

      The bottom line, though, is "why complain?". There is a hole in Linux that needs to be filled, and there are a bunch of companies trying to fill that hole. For now, more is better, so we the users can benefit from the progress that these companies make. I agree that not all will survive, but I definitely wouldn't be surprised to see one of these newer distros end up threatening the big boys, as long as they play their cards right.

    • Then I show them a Linux machine, and tell them that the reason it's better, is because it's nothing like Windows.
      Why is that better? If you told me that you'd get nothing but a blank stare. Would you elaborate a bit more? How's it nothing like Windows? It's an OS right? People can 'benefit from Linux's superiority' without the time investment. They can benefit immediately just be installing it. Not everyone needs to know how to edit smb.conf in order to make a shared resource, distros like Xandros make sure of that. That's the point of all of these Windows mimics. Make it easy. When they switch they can take it as far as they want; but why not make it easy for them to run Quicken, M$ Office, Lotus Notes and Quicktime Plugin. Xandros is designed for people who will never need to configure a webserver or ldap. It's designed to let them use their computer, in the way they want, and in a way that's familiar/easy. That's it. Oh, and on the RedHat front, I use it everyday, along with several other distros; but RedHat is the easiest way to lose new users to dependency hell. Why RedHat doesn't incorporate urpmi into the distro baffles me. I suppose it's a marketting decision to not give any sort of a nod to Mandrake, but I digress.
  • It's called KDE 3.1 beta 2 (OK, KDE 3.0.4 for the people that like stable software more than testing new stuff).

    They gotta have done a whole lot of revamping KDE 2.2 to make it worth switching to it instead of KDE 3.1 (which will be out shortly).

    Not that 2.2 is bad mind you...but the UI has made a lot of progress since 2.x....

    This is always a problem with Open Source software and for-pay software: Open Source is developped too fast to compete with; the for-pay software is often too much behind to really take on..

    Some people might also read this as 'Open source software never has stable (enough) API's because it's developped and changed all the time', which is also partly true, and is a problem in some cases.
    • the UI has made a lot of progress since 2.x....

      While I'm certainly a big KDE3 fan, let's be honest (at the risk of being modded down as flamebait). Can you actually list offhand all the progress that KDE3 has over KDE2?

      Okay, so it has a few nicer-looking themes, but let's think more about substance - Xandros isn't going for all-out flash. KDE3's got a better version of Konqueror, but that's not so important given that most Linux desktops use Mozilla. KDE3 has better printer support and an improved file manager, but Xandros has already heavily modified the file manager anyway, and it's not hard to imagine them including a printer setup wizard. Improvements to KOffice are kind of irrelevant given that this comes with CrossOver Office. Multimedia stuff (Noatun, etc.) - not important, there are non-KDE apps that can do much better still. Basically all that it's missing is a bit of a speed boost and some changes to KDE-PIM.

      Just to clarify, I'm not saying that KDE2 is better in any way, just that if Xandros has already put this much work into KDE2 to improve it, then it's not so bad that they're sticking with it rather than going with a more vanilla version of KDE3.

      • It's not only the nicer-looking themes that make KDE 3.1 worth it...the KDE Usability theme has changed the Control Center quite a lot - OK I guess the Xandros people will have done this as well, it would make sense anyway.

        On top of that KDE 3.1 is quite a bit faster (esp. compiled with GCC 3.2, which won't work with 2.2 I guess, but am not sure about that).

        I agree that KOFfice is indeed kinda irrelevant, as is noatun (XMMS is much better) and most other kdemultimedia apps.

        For companies it might actually make sense, if it runs MS Office really good and opens and writes MS Word docs without a hitch...you wouldn't care about the greatest themes and whatnot, in that case (as a company).

        So yeah, you actually have a point, but as for me personally, I'm not going to switch back my desktop OS from KDE 3.x to 2.something. So it'll have to be big companies that buy their OS - which I seriously doubt is gonna happen (a very clear explanation why not is on top of this thread if you sort on highest score).
      • > KDE3's got a better version of Konqueror, but that's not so important given that most Linux desktops use Mozilla. KDE3 has ... an improved file manager,

        Uh, last time I checked, Konqueror _was_ KDE's file manager. It's a comprehensive file manager, that can also handle network protocols, which lets it act like a web browser, and ftp browser, as well as local file management.
    • The reason why they keep changing APIs is to correct design errors. They break APIs less and less often. Look at the changes beween KDE 1 and 2: they're HUGE! Now look at the changes between KDE 2 and 3: they're mostly source compatible. And compare GTK+ 2.0 with 2.1: they're planning on making 2.2 binary compatible with 2.0, because the API is good and mature enough.

      At least open source projects are willing to break compatibility for the sake of better designs. The APIs become more and more stable as projects mature.

  • No downloads? Get over it! (Score:5, Insightful)

    by jaymzter ( 452402 ) on Tuesday October 22, 2002 @01:05PM (#4505868) Homepage
    Reading over the posts, it seems many are miffed about Xandros not having a downloadable version for people to try. Apparently, the prevailing view is why buy it if you can't try it. Folks, this is so hypocritical. You see, I feel the same way about MacOS X. The only reason I would be interested in it is for the GUI, but if I can't even try that, I'm not shelling out the money so I can lock myself into their hardware. At least with Linux I can configure KDE 3 to approximate the look of OS X, and I've found I like it. But what I like best of all is that my desktop can look like Aqua, but I don't have to pay for the privilege to restrict myself to Aqua.

    As for using KDE 2.2, do you think maybe the emphasis is on stability, not having the newest stuff? Doesn't Debian do the same thing too? And if you don't like the version Debian stable uses, you can upgrade. Guess what, you can upgrade Xandros too.

    I await -1 troll (called posters hypocrites, mentioned Apple in non reverential tone), but I just can't get over the whining!
    • Uh looking like aqua and being aqua is prety much the diffrence between a pool of vodka looking like water and a pool of vadka being water.

      That was a nice analogy if I do say so myself :).
    • "I await -1 troll" Karma-whoring are we?

      I'm sorry, but having used both, I can say that KDE3 cannot even approach Aqua's usability, speed, or elegance. I love linux, and especially KDE, but don't try and kid yourself that you have a UI that even comes close to Aqua. I can make a web page that looks like the OS X dock, but that doesn't mean I've evaluated it.
    • Hm. I haven't heard of Xandros until this Slashdot story. Sure, I'll shell out a benjamin and try it out! I might just like it! </sarcasm>

      Your comparison to MacOSX is totally flawed. For one thing, OS X had an IMMENSE amount of hype, review, advertising, and buzz before it was released. I already knew what it was going to be like long before it came out.

      Furthermore, Apple has an awesome reputation. Anything they put out is going to have a clean interface, be easy to use, and when they say it's going to be all that and a bag of chips, I can believe it.

      Who are these Xandros guys? Why should I trust them? I've had experience with macs for the last 14 years. I've never touched a machine with Xandros on it.

      When I can use Xandros in my public library, in my schools, and at a few of my friends' houses, then I'll buy it for myself without a trial version. Until then... forget it.

  • KDE 3 is included (Score:5, Informative)

    by afra242 ( 465406 ) on Tuesday October 22, 2002 @01:10PM (#4505906)
    From the interview with the Xandros executive, Ming Poon:

    "The shipping version of Xandros has two CDs. One is the main desktop that we think is good enough and stable enough, and easy enough for people to use. The second CD is basically KDE 3, so the bleeding edge users can try it out to see what the fuss is all about. We are trying to satisfy both worlds, as opposed to just satisfying the bleeding edge.

  • I understand you can't download the crossover components et al but things like the kernel are supposed to be available aren't they? or, oops do they get around that by supplying a dozen cds in the box? but, then if they had a minor upgrade or patch that was downloadable wouldn't they have to have downloadable source for any GPL material?
    • > but things like the kernel are supposed to be available aren't they?

      The GPL doesn't stipulate this at all.

      If I made a GNU tar derivation called faulTAR, I could sell the binary for $4,000. I wouldn't have to give anyone the source except for people who bought the binary. Even then, I don't have to make it available online (in fact, this is the secondary method), but only available by post mail on request.

  • Devil's Advocate time... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Obiwan Kenobi ( 32807 ) <evan AT misterorange DOT com> on Tuesday October 22, 2002 @01:14PM (#4505937) Homepage
    It looks like I'm gonna have to stand up once again and go against the grain. I love everything I've seen on Xandros. I think the client is a great, great thing, and basing it on stable, bug-free code (KDE 2.2 instead of 3) is a very smart idea.

    These guys are off on the right foot. They don't want /. readers buying the distro: They want corporate accounts. And by the looks of it, they're going to get them.

    Why? Simple. The file manager [xandros.com] is brilliant in terms of what it does, how it looks, and how it can be incorporated with existing machines, and especially, domains. You ever wonder what Linux has been missing? Well, this is it.

    Does anyone else here, especially those bitching the loudest, actually administer users? I don't know about you, but any tiny change will cause an uproar. A rollout of Mandrake, Redhat, or SuSE would cause numerous heart attacks where I work, with users complaining about everything from clutter in the menus (why are there 4 different configuration menus in Redhat? No one's really sure...) to lack of a decent resolution changer, something Xandros already has. Training is a big issue in large companies, and the more you can port from Windows to Xandros, the easier (and more compelling) a choice it will be.

    OpenOffice should save companies lots of cash. It's compatible with Office 97->XP docs, and the savings on the lack of licensing on that product alone will be worth raising an eyebrow for the upper execs. Those who still need it for Outlook, Powerpoint and/or Access can keep their copies at little to no cost of what businesses are paying now, or simply buy the products seprately instead of the whole office suite. The only thing needed now is a true, open source Exchange-connecting email client (I know Evolution can use the calendars, but it costs $70 and I love Linux because 95% of it is free) and then they'll really be in high cotton.

    I know everyone's balking about the cost, the GPL source tinkering, and the rest, but from a sys admin's POV, this OS has done more in one release than Redhat did in five.

    • Re:Devil's Advocate time... (Score:5, Interesting)

      by Lumpy ( 12016 ) on Tuesday October 22, 2002 @02:02PM (#4506448) Homepage
      yes, I do. and the rollout from windows NT 4.0 to redhat 7.3 worked great... yes we had the whiners and moaners for the first 2-3 days... but you NEED management to back you on big things like this... to allow you to tell users to "shut the hell up and think for once in your life!" and to allow you to ignore them when they piss and moan about not being able to install gator or elf bowling.. (Gawd i LOVE linux on the corperate desktop!) in 3 days they start shutting up... in 12 days they start asking if Open Office is available for them to use at home and they jump up and down and almost piss themselves with joy when you hand them a copy.

      Supporting users is easy in the switch from win** to linux, IF your management has the balls to do it and your IT depratment is willing to stand behind their decisions.
      • Perhaps you or the parent poster could answer this question:

        Why the hell should users have access to any configuration items? These are the company computers. The company is the one to pay for your changes to the system. The company is the one who pays to settle with the EEOC over your 'bikini babes screensaver'. If it weren't for licensing costs, we'd be all over Citrix. As it is, I can swap any two machines in our network (only about 40 terminals) and nobody is the wiser.

        We have about 90% employees who made it out of high school. (The other ten percent are physicians and three others, including myself). We switched from a minicomputer with dumb terminals (some bastard vt100 rig) to Windows NT. Guess what? No problems. Users didn't have access to CD's, minesweeper, solitaire, control panels, floppy drive, etc. There is a network share in the off chance they need to save something. We spent one month training. And had almost no problems.
    • OK. But what bothers me is the "we can run windows applications" line. I find it impossible to find out just *which* windows applications. Is it anything more than Crossover office runs? Or not? They don't seem to say. At least codeweavers has a list of programs that are "work perfect", "work well", "will work soon", "are reported to work", and "don't work". It isn't a large enough list, and makes me suspect that the things I'm interested in won't work, but it's something. Currently Xandros doesn't appear to list *ANYTHING*.

      Also, there's no comment about the results of using apt-get on the debian site against a Xandros install.

      This may be the best thing for a slice of the market, but how will they ever find out? And if they've already gambled on Lindows, will they be willing to gamble again (it appears to be aimed at the same market slice).
    • Why? Simple. The file manager [xandros.com] is brilliant in terms of what it does, how it looks, and how it can be incorporated with existing machines, and especially, domains. You ever wonder what Linux has been missing? Well, this is it.

      Does anyone else here, especially those bitching the loudest, actually administer users? I don't know about you, but any tiny change will cause an uproar. A rollout of Mandrake, Redhat, or SuSE would cause numerous heart attacks where I work,

      FYI, Mandrake 9.0 installation allows you to join a windows domain. After installation, any domain user will be able to log into the machine.

      Then, fire up konqueror, hit the services button, and double click the Network browser, and you will be able to browse Windows/samba shares, FTP servers, web servers, and with KDE3.1, ssh servers (via kio_fish).

      The only thing needed now is a true, open source Exchange-connecting email client

      Await next KDE release ...

      I know everyone's balking about the cost, the GPL source tinkering, and the rest, but from a sys admin's POV, this OS has done more in one release than Redhat did in five.

      Off the backs of all the other distros, contributing none of their stuff back to the community (ever wonder how they do the windows domain thing?, they use winbind from samba, just like Mandrake).

      It's a good thing they are around (provide focus to other distros), but it's not where money should be spent, it would be much better spent on a fully open-source distro.

  • A Step in the right direction... (Score:4, Interesting)

    by kwilliams ( 617679 ) on Tuesday October 22, 2002 @01:18PM (#4505972)
    The reason Linux has the market on servers and covers less than 1% of the dektop market is because consumers are computer illiterate. (Which is not their fault)

    The only way for Linux to have a shot at becoming a major OS and compete with Microsoft is if it can become dummy-proof and easy to use for the average PC owner.

    Xandros may not be that solution, but it's a step in the right directin to bridge the gap between linux and user-friendly needs.
  • It is obvious from their website that, as has been stated already, they are not marketing to you or I. This is being marketed for businesses and for individuals who are getting sick of Microsoft but need to stay compatible with its productivity software and needs everything graphical. You don't have to sell to everyone to make a profit in business.

    In fact, having a niche is a strength, not a weakness. Think about the rise of the SUV. So many people liked the functionality of a truck (riding high, cargo carrying, not being tied to pavement) but many didn't want to drive a truck, either because of the look or because of less passenger room. The SUV fits the niche between the two nicely, and you can't drive 10 seconds without seeing one. Of course, some will stick with their trucks, others loyally to their cars, but the SUV makers will rake in the dough. What's $99.00 for a functional solution that is taylored to someone's needs.

    I think that they will do well with this.
    • "Think about the rise of the SUV."


      But aren't SUV's a rich man's Mini Van ... which are a working man's station wagon?

      Same applies here ... Xandros is a rich man's Red Hat, which is a working man's version of Debian.

      Niche's are nice, but masses are better ... take it from Microshaft :)

  • The problem is.. (Score:3, Insightful)

    by shatfield ( 199969 ) on Tuesday October 22, 2002 @01:30PM (#4506059)
    ..that they are putting non-free software in with the free software and restricting usage of the non-free software. This means that you cannot buy the software and redistribute it... you can only redistribute the free software that is included in their distribution, and I'm sure that they have made it so that it is not a working product sans the non-free software.

    This is the business model for UnitedLinux, so you best get used to it. The days of freely copying linux CDs are numbered. Per seat licensing, here we come!

    Use Gentoo or Debian. It's the only way to protect your freedom.
    • I agree with this. The essence of Freedom remains -- but the days seem numbered as far as being able to freely distribute whole distributions. I guess this is how the money will be made hu? I thought it would be more of the bottled water methodology. I can freely drink all of the water I want -- but if I want to drink water from fancy plastic containers with sealed caps -- I pay around $1 for 16 oz. It is beyond me how these companies that sale bottled water are profitable, but they are. (A six pack of bottled water will be priced right up there with soda pop and beer -- yet the stuff still moves off the shelf in droves.)

  • Perhaps I'm paranoid but... (Score:4, Interesting)

    by JohnnyCannuk ( 19863 ) on Tuesday October 22, 2002 @01:34PM (#4506100)
    ..Xandros is just a new version of the old Corel Linux distro, right? Corel is still part owner of Xandros, right?

    Guess who is currently "part owner" of Corel? (MS!)

    Is anyone else getting the "extend and embrace" jitters or have I had too much coffee?

    Maybe I've been posting here too long.....

    • I don't think you're paranoid at ALL!
      You are on to something....
      ok..
      so microsoft likes to "embrace and extend", right?
      stay with me...

      this new Xandros distro(partly owned by Corel, which is partly owned by Microsoft) is meant to
      deceive us! how?

      look at the word Xandros....
      let's just rearrange it a little to : rosandx...
      (stay with me....)
      ros and x...
      don't get it yet?
      ros, in business means Return On Sales
      x, means extend..
      get it yet?
      (stay with me...)

      microsoft, through corel and xandros will embrace(substitute ros) and eXtend(notice the X!) linux for it's own EVIL PURPOSES!!!!
      think of the EVIL!!! embracing and extending linux for it's own return on sales...
      PURE EVILLLLLLLLLLL!!

      My friend, THANK YOU, so much! You have saved the hundreds or so people who might actually buy Xandros from being unwilling pawns in Microsoft's WORLD DOMINATION DIRECTIVE #4....

      nbfn
      I've got to go. My tinfoil hat is all crinkled, and you know what that means! (LOL)

    • Xandros != Corel (Score:3, Informative)

      by KPU ( 118762 )
      When MS bought part of Corel, they had a hard time keeping their linux line and Xandros bought it. Xandros is an independent corporation with its own management. Quoting their investor page [xandros.com], "Linux Global Partners provided the initial equity financing for Xandros. Other stockholders include Corel Corporation and vested employees." Xandros is the continuation of Corel's Linux OS and it was designed to isolate the Linux portions from MS control. Remember, Corel still develops WordPerfect Office, a direct competitor with MS Office.

  • Reasons for adoption (Score:3, Insightful)

    by 1984 ( 56406 ) on Tuesday October 22, 2002 @01:57PM (#4506388)
    All this speculation about how it's a bad thing it's not all available for download or free ISO, how it won't be adopted because Linux types won't push it in companies seem to ignore an important point from the Newsforge review:

    It just works.

    You can run Office on it, you can run IE on it, you can browse domains. When you're plumbing in corporate IT, the number one selection criterion isn't "is it cool?" and the number two isn't "is it free (as in speech)?". Those criteria actually are: "does it work?" and "is it cheap?". Right behind those comes "can we push it on the users?".

    I'm constantly suprised by the software centric outlook of many people here. In a corporate environment, it's not about the software. If you make it all about the software (is it "Free", is it Linux?), congratulations: you're not doing your job properly.

  • I wonder what else is behind the times.

    Since its a 99$ download just to see, ill wait until someone that DOES spend the money for the binaries, then requests the sources which they then legally can post to the world.

    Perhaps its worth the money, but its not worth spending $ just to find out.. Unless there is a unconditional guarantee of course.
  • I don't ilke the idea of such a commercial-centric distrobution. Even RedHat, a commericial company, offers their distros for free. For one, there is little or no cost savings over Windows. Also, a distrobution so heavily reliant on a commercial company, they have a habit of going under quite a bit.

  • So what is it really? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by bfree ( 113420 ) on Tuesday October 22, 2002 @02:52PM (#4506962)
    Disclaimer: I worked in Corel as part of their Linux Support Team
    What is this distro really? And how does it compare to Corel Linux 1.2/Second Edition? What have they removed/replaced and what have they added? I have established the following so far:
    • CrossOver Office and Plugin are installed but the versions supplied are NOT supported by Codeweavers
    • Non-destructive (will you backup?) NTFS partition resizing is in as part of the install, and that I must say is a great innovation!
    • OpenOffice is present
    • It's basically Debian Woody at heart
    • It seems the Corel File Manager and Samba integration suite are still alive and kicking
    • The Corel X control panel seems to have gained multi-monitor support!
    • They've gained a switch user function like WinXP
    • Extended hardware autodetection including drivers for WinModems!
    • They've put back in a text installer!!!!! No more you can't install if your video card brings down the installation system.
    • Xfree86 4.2! Not the debian 4.1. I wonder if this is a homebrew or the test debian packages from X-Strike-Force (presume homebrew).
    Right what has anyone else figured out, or even better does anyone out there have Corel Linux 1.2/SE AND Xandros 1.0 to compare and contrast? Some specific interesting (to me anyway) questions would be?
    • Can it play DVD's
    • Does it do anything to prevent you using official debian apt sources (libc or ...)
    • If this is really "A system that is complete and functional as soon as you finish installing" does it still gracefully handle the power of dpkg/apt through XandrosUpdate?
    • What java suite do they use and how is it packaged and what licence is it under?
    • How compatible are their chat tools and will they remain so? Are they actively developing or contributing to their devopment or just hoping for the best?
    I presume there are a million and one other questions I have forgotten as I wrote this but I'll sum it all up by saying:
    I think Corel Linux was a great start to an OS project. I went far beyond anything any other Linux distro had done to reach out to the non-enthusiasts out there and offer them an alternative to Windows for their x86 computer. It wasn't perfect, it was a work in progress, and I hope that Xandros are actually able to take the ball and run with it as it had promise. The only things I question are the shift away from the home market, the lack of a Free CD and the inclusion of CrossOver Office which diminishes the impact of OpenOffice (Corel supplied a WP8 with their distro and let you choose the office tools you wanted on top of that, i.e. gnumeric or WPO2000 or StarOffice).
  • Just wait until someone buys it, asks for the source and then makes their own distro without the commercial components and puts it up on the web for free.

Slashdot Top Deals

I had the rare misfortune of being one of the first people to try and implement a PL/1 compiler. -- T. Cheatham

Close