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


Forgot your password?
Debian Operating Systems Software

Extensive Xandros 2.0 Deluxe Review 126

Ms Pacman writes "This article is the fifth and final installment of Barry Smith's series on Debian-based commercial distros in a Small Office/Home Office (SOHO) environment. In this in-depth article, the newly released Xandros Deluxe 2.0 is being reviewed and compared to all previous distros Barry Smith used and reviewed the past 2-3 months. Of special interest is the blurb about Xandros' customer support."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Extensive Xandros 2.0 Deluxe Review

Comments Filter:
  • by CreamOfWheat ( 593775 ) * on Monday January 05, 2004 @11:18AM (#7880983)
    The fact that the distros are competing among themselves as much as with Windows is disturbing; the linux market will only grow significantly if a large number of windows users get interested in Linux. If won't make much difference to Xandros that all Lindows users defect to them but it will be some effort. But any small number of Windows users adopting Linux will make a BIG difference. Granted distros still compete against each other to get the biggest slice of these new customers. But normally, industry lobbies (ever heard about the Agro business ?) fight united to make their common market bigger and make internal competition less cutthroat. Linux companies (and the author) don't seem to get it.
    • by Sarojin ( 446404 ) on Monday January 05, 2004 @11:23AM (#7881020)
      but, this competition isn't particularily harmful - many publish their tools under the GPL to give back to the community, just as they all will use pretty much the same software underneath the packaging.
      • but, this competition isn't particularily harmful

        i disagree.

        currently we are in a position where the big distros are fighting it out for a bigger chunk of the existing linux market pie at the expense of other distros. a better tactic might be to go after the 90 % (or whatever) of the market that is using windows[1] by presenting a united front (or at least the semblance thereof)

        let's grow the pie instead of fighting over the crumbs.

        notes: 1. except for, oddly enough, sun - who seem to be doing a g

      • I understand what you're saying, but consider this: there are dozens of distros out there that are claiming to be the nest best Linux desktop. Sure, there are only a half a dozen true contenders for mind share. However, to someone who doesn't understand the Linux market, Lindows, Xandros, Red Hat, etc, etc, etc all look like companies offering different products. Yeah, they're different but built for the same purpose.

        Consider also the development efforts going on. Each distro is customized to a certai
        • Inevitability (Score:2, Interesting)

          by C.Batt ( 715986 )
          Right now, the insane variety of choices available is just a sign of the relative immaturity of the solutions. Unifying at this time would be detrimental to the overall efforts. I'm all for waiting for the right time. If that means losing the impatient opportunists along the way, then so be it.

          For instance, when Linux is really truly ready for the mainstream desktop, when the office software has standardized and the features solidified (for instance), it should be because of an obvious evolutionary prog
        • I think you hit on a big key to the computer industry that will make it very hard for linux to overtake windows, and if linux does overtake windows make it incredibly hard for windows to make it back in to the arena.

          The key point is this, users in general want to use a single product that works, a commodity. Most people will pick the application that has the most other users provided its at an affordable price to them. Thats why office and windows keep growing in popularity, they work, they are affordable,

        • OpenOffice and KOffice exist seperately for the same reason MS Office and Apple Works exist. One is complex and feature-packed, but heavy and bloated. The other is lightweight and well-integrated into the desktop. OpenOffice and KOffice also have totally different document models. OpenOffice uses the (IMHO very shitty) MS Office model. KOffice uses a frame-based model.
      • I disagree. This is amazing similar to the problem in the 90's with Unix Workstation vendors. I was working at the HP/Apollo workstation division. We spent so much time worrying about Sun, SGI, DEC, and IBM, that we had very little time to worry about MS. Furthermore, each Unix flavor was different, making it hard to get a unified market. Although it was not perpetrated by the evil empire, they benefited from the babelonian Unix market.

        IMHO, unless all Linux distros band together, MS will most certa
      • Too much competition fragments the struggling market. IT only breeds confusion in the people we want to bring on board.

        We need one unified platform to be able to truly compete and capture market share away from the 'alternative'.

        Later, sure we can have some healthy competition to advance the quality and technology, but now isn't the time.
    • by Anonymous Coward
      The problem with this theory is that Linux is still not quite where it needs to be to be accessible to Joe Six-Pack. This competition is beneficial in that regard as it encourages Linux to evolve more quickly.
      • I would have agreed with you up until the point I tried a recent release of Mandrake. I don't think installation and configuration could have been easier.
        • Agreed, installation worked like a charme on any recent "user"-distro that I've tried (Mandrake, SuSE). Also the default install tends to be a lot more streamlined today than it once was. Unified desktop themes, less choices, sane menu-entries etc. The progress is very visible. I can very well remember my first contacts with older distros where often you'd be left with a very rudimentary X install and application menus that are cluttered with all kinds of stuff nobody would ever want there (basically /usr/b
    • No no no no no.

      Don't we all hate Microsoft because it would rather kill the competition than make good software? Why do Linux distros not need competition to keep them looking for improvements?
    • It's also inevitable, and I for one am glad to see it's happening. More distros means more geeks trying more ways to do things better. Overall, the effect is to improve the product. Neither KDE nor Gnome would be what they each are today without the other to provide competition. It's obvious the current distros are taking cues from each other and improving their own products as a result. Someday the result will be a handful of great distros that can go up against Linux. To me, it's all one big laborat
    • I believe that the main aspect of all this, is not what distro of linux a person is using but just the fact that they aren't using windows. I've worked for companies and explained to them how much they could save by switching to Linux, ironically they would rather pay for familarity that functionality. Sort of the "cut your nose to spite your face." As soon as we begin to see a trend to the home user converting to linux then we will be able to take back the OS.
    • WTF? You're saying it is a bad thing for them to try to make better distributions? That Xandros should deliberately make their Linux version worse to avoid taking sales from Red Hat?
    • The agro business is also one of the stupidest, most heavily subsidized, inefficient industries in the United States! There is a reason why we have a free market rather than a planned one.
    • How is Xandros targetting Lindows (for example) users more than Windows users?

      I've never seen any cut-throat marketting by an Linux distro. RedHat doesn't trash Suse, Xandros doesn't trash Lindows. They all say "Linux is great, and we think our flavour is the best".

      Besides, this whole 'get users to switch' discussion is silly. Not only is Linux perfectly acceptable on the Desktop (I use it full-time for work and home use) but it doesn't have market share goals like Microsoft does. Debian will never have i
    • The fact that the distros are competing among themselves as much as with Windows is disturbing;

      No - not true - plain wrong!

      Competition is what is making OSS software great.

      Competition is what is lacking in the M$ world. Not only that, but forking is great - it breeds more competition. If the blood of battle between the distros disturbs you, you may have become a socialist by listening to too much NPR. OSS is NOT about everyone getting along - it is about freedom to choose and use the best of the be

    • I've been wanting to dump Microsoft Windows for years, the main problem I found with most Linux distributions in the past was they were not user friendly to the average home user; my time is important and it is better spent not trying to compile stuff that may not work. I tried many Linux distributions Red Hat, Mandrake, Suse, Debian, Corel, and the list goes on... I found Corel Linux version 2 nice but not quite there yet. Xandros Version 2 is what I need because we live in a Microsoft world and I need
  • by jest3r ( 458429 ) on Monday January 05, 2004 @11:24AM (#7881027)
    This review is needlessly long .. when its all said and done Xandros 2.0 didn't make the cut.

    Final Decision:

    Primary system - Libranet
    Secondary system - Lindows

    • The "needlessly long" parts are intended to give a full impression of the distro. He makes it obvious that, while those distros fit his personal needs best, Xandros has strong points and would be the best choice for some users.
    • Obviously you didn't follow the entire series of articles -- this was the 5th of 5 reviews of commercial Debian distros the author reviewed. In the first page of this particular one, he even notes that it will be long as he'll be comparing Xandros 2.0 features to those of the other distros he'd reviewed. Admittedly, I think it would have been better to do a shorter review of Xandros, and then a sixth article summing up, but he did make his intentions clear in the intro.
      • His intentions may have been good, but as you said:

        "Admittedly, I think it would have been better to do a shorter review of Xandros"

        I did follow the series and the Xandros review is needlessly long.

    • Which of the distros will welcome all those lusers who were just left with no support for their old Win98 boxes ? Countless of them are still used in those SOHO environments

      So, which distro will best welcome those users with open arms ? You know, low-end systems, of Celery333 age, couple of gigs of HDD and 64MBs of RAM.
  • Conformality (Score:5, Insightful)

    by vpscolo ( 737900 ) on Monday January 05, 2004 @11:27AM (#7881051) Homepage
    As nice as it is to have choice one things Windows brings it is a constant. Things normally work on most PC's. With each distro of Linux things aren't the same from one point to another which can be seen as a strength, however if things aren't careful it could come as a bad thing if infighting gets worse. Of course KDE and Gnome do help but in this case standard should be a good thing Rus
    • Re:Conformality (Score:2, Interesting)

      As nice as it is to have choice one things Windows brings it is a constant. Things normally work on most PC's. With each distro of Linux things aren't the same from one point to another which can be seen as a strength

      Frustration with inconsistencies is one ( just one ) of the things that helped sink Java Applets.

      People got fed up wondering if they had the right browser with the right jvm, the right browser version, the right jvm plugin, the right plugin version etc etc.


    • As nice as it is to have choice one things Windows brings it is a constant. Things normally work on most PC's.

      This is completely true, but it also shows the uphill battle that desktop Linux has. Almost every single PC and PC-compatible device is specifically designed to work with Windows. I pop open the lid on my laptop and there's a little label that says "Designed for Microsoft Windows 2000 Professional." All of the hardware vendors test their devices with various versions of Windows to make sure th

    • What PC's are you working with? I've got three windows machines at home, and all three of them have something working improperly. One has networking issues, another has random glitches (checked for hardware issues, there are none), and another refuses to use DMA on the hard drive (even though Linux uses it just fine).

      So yeah, Windows brings a constant. A constant source of problems, that is...
    • As nice as it is to have choice one things Windows brings it is a constant.

      Which constant would that be? Windows 98? Windows NT? Windows XP? Windows CE?

      Server edition? Professional edition? Home edition? They're all freaking different.

      Even between service packs, Windows undergoes fairly radical changes.

      Constant? Not on this planet.

  • by gantrep ( 627089 ) on Monday January 05, 2004 @11:27AM (#7881067)
    Screenshots here [xandros.net]
  • by SuperDuG ( 134989 ) <[kt.celce] [ta] [eb]> on Monday January 05, 2004 @11:28AM (#7881074) Homepage Journal
    It drives me nuts to think that someone who uses a distro for a little while after an install actually thinks they have the ability to review said distro.

    Let me further clarify, all linux distros have a user base (size varies), and in that user base there are many things that bring a distro to its full potential. There are distro specific forums and IRC channels as well as distro specific webpages and 3rd party packaged binaries for specific distros.

    You can't possibly learn about a distro completely until you've also had a chance to explore its community surrounding it. Such as debian, redhat, and mandrake I know have special file and community repositories for such things as music ripping and DVD playback. While not included in the distro did you know that with a broadband connection and in one command you can turn your brand new installation into a fully functioning multimedia system?

    Then theres the all important part of linux, the security aspect, while some installers download updates in the install perhaps a review of the distributions updater and the time for the updates for security notices to hit the repositories would be nice to have.

    I stopped reading OS news because it wasn't anything about actually using operating systems it was just a club of people who wanted to say that they installed every operating system they could get their hands on and they watched it boot.

    In closing the last part of this entire article that urked me was that the reviewer didn't even bother to take a look at Knoppix (maybe they did, but it wasn't in the wrapup summary and I'm not searching osnews to find out). If they only want to use an OS for the time it takes to grab a screenshot and find out that something doesn't work just like redhat then possibly knoppix would fit their operating system attention span. At least with knoppix their poor overly formatted harddrive would get a break.

    • Addendum:

      Okay so the user did use knoppix, I stand corrected.

      So in closing what now urks me is that the user didn't even bother installing Debian Vanilla, there I know mr. point and click didn't do that!

    • by reallocate ( 142797 ) on Monday January 05, 2004 @11:41AM (#7881163)
      >> You can't possibly learn about a distro completely until you've also had a chance to explore its community surrounding it.

      The market these consumer distributions are targetting -- home and corporate desktop users -- have little reason to be aware of any pseudo-community surrounding a distribution. If a distribution requires people to go online and start asking questions before it works, it is a failed distribution.

      Linux enthusiasts and hobbyists comprise these so-called communities. These are people who are interested in Linux for its own sake, not as a means to an end. These are the people who will install a new OS just to play with it. On the other hand, pretty much everyone else could care less. For the people these distributions are targetting, Linux is about as interesting as their refrigerator. They don't want to depend on a refrigerator community, either.
      • "If a distribution requires people to go online and start asking questions before it works, it is a failed distribution."

        Simply the most insightful post I've seen in a long time. While an extensive community knowledge base is a nice "feature", it shouldn't be necessary to get the distribution to do the basic necessities.

      • If a distribution requires people to go online and start asking questions before it works, it is a failed distribution.

        Perhaps. But perhaps it's a different idea in software.

        Consider this. Consider software that is designed by it's very nature to requiring humans to interact, and needs you to converse with other people in a 'community' to fully use it. To become a part of said 'community.'

        If we look at the popular programs of the day (IM, most P2P, etc) we see the software is becoming increasingly a thi
        • by reallocate ( 142797 ) on Monday January 05, 2004 @12:39PM (#7881635)
          Having access to knowledgable people online is as valuable a resource as having access to the same people offline. But, to follow your argument, receiving the benefits of that online community requires a working OS and apps. As I said, if you need to go online for help before you can get a distribution to work, it is a failed distribution.

          Participation in a support community should be an option, not somethig that is required to use a tool effectively.
        • That's all very well and good, but if I paid money for software, then I expect some support from the company or person providing it. I'm not interested in "community", I'm interested in getting on with my business. I don't buy software to interact with people, I buy software to do work.

          That, I think, is probably the attitude of most users.
      • You missed the point entirely.

        What I Was trying to make clear is that you can't base an entire review of a distro by simply ignoring the parts of it that make it better. Even Jo Average Computer user who just happened to install linux is going to do a search with the distros name as the criteria, and when they do, they will more than likely come across this community.

        You seem to have no grasp about what these "so-called" communities are. These are regular people throughout the world linked by one comm

        • Don't disagree with your opinion of the shallowness of most Linux reviews. Linux distributions are all essentially the same. They only differ in how badly the distributor has gummed up the works. So, naturally, reviews are shallow and pointless. It's rather like comparing one brand of white bread with another brand of white bread.

          I'm not questioning the value of these so-called communties. I said that any distribution that doesn't work until the user goes online for help is a failed distribution.

          Why sh
    • Although not reviewed, the reviewer did mention Knoppix.

      He mentioned that last years Knoppix did a better job than this years reviewed releases in finding and configuring for his video card and that Knoppix is a free CD-ROM-based Linux.

      But yes, the overall point that reviews tend to be 'once-over-lightly' is well taken. This reviewer did appear to take at least some time to get work done in their enviroment using each. That is about as much as I feel I can expect with these things.

  • I use Xandros 2.0 (Score:5, Interesting)

    by MaxQuordlepleen ( 236397 ) <el_duggio@hotmail.com> on Monday January 05, 2004 @11:29AM (#7881083) Homepage

    .. and I like it a lot. I've used it pretty much only on IBM laptops, and the Radeon 3D support is quite lacking. Other than that, it's a dream to work with and use, especially for an experienced Debian user. Xandros has been my primary work desktop since 1.0 and I'm sold.

    Besides, as far as I know it's my only option if I want a made-in-Canada distro.

  • One thing he missed (Score:3, Informative)

    by LittleLebowskiUrbanA ( 619114 ) on Monday January 05, 2004 @11:42AM (#7881168) Homepage Journal
    He mentions towards the end how happy he is w/ Libranet since nothing in Libranet is proprietary code. As far as I know their (wonderful) XAdminMenu utility is NOT released under the GPL.
    • by damiam ( 409504 ) on Monday January 05, 2004 @12:14PM (#7881408)
      He never says anything of the sort. He even paraphrases the Libranet EULA as saying, "Hey, this stuff is GPL, except for what isn't. Look at the individual packages to find out which is which. Don't blame us if it blows up your system. Do whatever you want with this stuff, just don't get us in trouble over it." Oviously, he knows there's non-GPL stuff in there.
  • by Ars-Fartsica ( 166957 ) on Monday January 05, 2004 @11:43AM (#7881179)
    What is the market for the Lindows/Xandors distros? I mean, I know what they describe as their audience, but I don't see much market presence. People who tend to not want to worry about the details of their software ("it just works") seem to be using the Windows that came preinstalled on their systems. The techie crowd seems to have zero interest in these types of distros also. I would be surprised if Lindows and Xandros are still around in two years. It seems the Sun/Novell (Suse) approach of focusing on business desktops has more momentum.
    • I am that target audience.

      I am a professional Java and web (javascript, xslt, CSS) programmer and full time student finishing my BS in Computer Science and a minor in math. I manage my parents Red Hat 7 server/router, and help our sometimes with my company's Red Hat and Debian Servers.

      I love linux, but I'm not into spending time tweaking it. I don't play games, or have massive hardware needs. I simply need a stable system that can keep a lot of windows open, I can configure the way I like, and has a po
    • what's the market? small schools with tiny tech budgets and enthusiastic, but new-to-linux, tech administrators (ahem, me). I am _the_ technology department at a private high school, enrollment=65. we chose linux based on 1) philosophy 2) price. we chose debian for performance. and then we chose libranet to make up for not having an experienced administrator. maybe one day we'll go pure debian, but until we have ability/comfort-zone, libranet provides the right mix of user-friendliness and sophisticat
    The user may permanently transfer all of the rights under this EULA, provided that the user retains no copies or registration numbers, that the user transfers all of the Software Product, and that the recipient agrees to the terms of this EULA. The user may not distribute copies of the Software Product to third parties. The user may not rent or lease the Software Product. The user must maintain all copyright notices on all copies of the Software Product. The user may not reverse-en
  • We have used Xandros/1.0 for 6 months or so on our systems, and it was already wonderful. Xandros/2.0 went onto a couple of new systems last week and is simply excellent.

    If you have to support MS Office, go for the professional version, which comes with Crossover Office, a decent way of running MSIE, MS Office, and some other applications. It's Wine plus some extensions, and well-integrated into Xandros.

    If you don't need this, just go for the basic package.

    The best thing about Xandros is that it combines the 95%+ device detection we're starting to expect in modern distros along with a clean and lean Debian-based chassis. You get simple graphical installation of the standard Xandros packages, plus access to everything in Debian unstable via the normal apt-get interface.

    The Xandros/2.0 file manager handles pretty much everything you can throw at it. It mounts everything it can, lets you burn CDs, map network drives, and so on.

    Just for fun I installed a Lindows 4.5, then took a deep breath, and wiped it with Xandros. Lindows is so *full* of stuff, while Xandros shows the meaning of "less is more".

    There is no shame in paying for good software, and Xandros/2.0 gets my vote as the best office distro of 2003. Install it, forget about it. You can't ask for more.
  • ...if Xandros' Crossover Office runs Microsoft Access? Love or hate it, a lot of quick and dirty internal apps are written in Access. Unless it functions correctly, Xandros' Crossover Office support is not useful. I personally already use OpenOffice for all my document needs, even though I have copies of Microsoft Office. And being able to run Internet Exploder is not a plus. (Well, maybe for testing. But that's about it.)
    • by damiam ( 409504 )
      You could have taken 5 seconds and looked it up yourself [codeweavers.com]. Yes, Crossover does support Access, although only Access 2000 and they say it's not 100% flawless (but then again, neither is Access on Windows).
      • Just because vanilla Crossover supposedly works, does not mean that the Xandros version will work. Given how slow many business deals are forged, it is not uncommon for bundled software to be out of date upon shipping. Still, it's good to know that Access 2000 works on vanilla Crossover.

        However, It might be a good idea for them to get Office XP working now. Many companies are (unfortunately) moving to XP licenses thanks to Microsoft's "scorched earth"^W^W "forced upgrade" policy.

  • Re: Xandros etc (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward on Monday January 05, 2004 @12:07PM (#7881360)
    This is from a post I made on osnews, but it fits for Xandros as well.

    Personally I think if your new to Linux you should stay clear of distros like Suse, Lindows, Xandros etc. Try Fedora,Mandrake, or maybe Debian with that new progeny installer first. If your going to bother to ditch Microsoft and their Proprietary Windows might as well do it right. These distros are as good Xandros et al and are Truely Free and totally Open Source. That might not mean too much to you, but long term its REALLY important. Being Truely Free and Open is what got Linux and its ever improving Desktops where they are today. Having the core of say Gnome of KDE proprietary would have just held these products back and prevented them from becoming what they are now. If for example a key developer of Gnome came up with some ubber cool addon for Gnome that made it great and then was hit by a bus or decided to stop coding, Boom. There goes Gnome's neat feature because it can't be maintained or built into future versions of Gnome. You'd think this is just common sense to Slashdot visitors, but I'd bet my life that of the overwhelming number of IE users here some still don't get open source.

    To be frank, I'd propose that if your set on cutting a check to Xandros you might as well buy Windows XP. At least that way you'll get a decent stable proprietary desktop that will be around in a few years. Going with one of these semi-proprietary Linux distros is just trading one fault for another. Your just buying into closed technology which literally may or may not even have a future. When/If Xandros goes out of business who is going to be making updates to its proprietary packages? Like I said, long term it just makes NO sense being tied to these sorts of issues.

    All proprietary software is Not evil and when it comes down to it, you need to use what gets the job done. You won't hear me rallying against some neat game because its closed source. But please don't shortchange how important Truely Free and Open Source software is to the world and especially Linux. If your going to start using Free software at least "try" to go all the way and see how far you can get with open source. Using and promoting this type of software is what got Linux where it is today and its what is leading to better software for ALL of us now and in the Future.
    • I disagree (Score:3, Interesting)

      by HangingChad ( 677530 )
      You make some good points but I disagree with the conclusion. I see Xandros and others like it as stepping stones away from the Windows world and a transition zone where proprietary and open source software learn to co-exist. It's perfect for my wife. She can use Word for her office docs and Photoshop without booting back to Win98. I like it because the install was dead flat simple. One disc, 30 minutes and it was up on the network printing test pages off the network printer. Bam, done.

      The best part

  • by occamboy ( 583175 ) on Monday January 05, 2004 @12:20PM (#7881463)
    Nobody (except perhaps Ellison and McNealy) wants to see a desktop distro, other than Windows, that is usable by non-misterwizard types.

    I've been keeping my eye on Xandros for some time, as I thought that they were the most likely candidate to build a non-sucking desktop distro. Roots are with Corel, a technically superb company that couldn't market. Xandros's focus was on an easy-to-use GUI desktop from the beginning; all of the other distros that I know of either started with a view towards misterwizards or a hatred of Microsoft - not a recipe for success.

    The problem is that Xandros needs to capture the hearts of nerds before it can be successful at spreading out to the masses - this has been true of all micro-based hardware and software, and even how Micrsoft became what it is. In the case of Xandros, the average nerd must have it in his head that "Oh, grandpa wants a cheap computer, I'll use Xandros". However, if the average nerd never uses Xandros, Xandros won't gain mindshare. And if one has to shell out cash just to try it, very few nerds will try.

    For example, I'd be interested in checking out Xandros to see if it would make a good OS for my non-tech-savvy friends and relatives. It might even be good for my personal use, if it has fonts-that-don't-suck, i.e., fonts that are as good as those that Windows had eight years ago. But am I going to shell out $89, along with my time to test it out?


    The only glimmer of hope here is that the Xandros main download page states "Xandros Desktop OS is not currently available as a free download". I suspect that "currently" means that free is Plan B. Since momentum is such a precious thing and so easy to lose, I hope that Plan B takes effect in the very-very-near future, or I fear that Xandros is history.

    A shame, and a big blow to Linux on the desktop.
    • Nobody (except perhaps Ellison and McNealy) wants to see a desktop distro, other than Windows, that is usable by non-misterwizard types.

      Amen to that!

      The greatest problem with Linux adoption is that developers want windows users to learn *nix and the windows users would rather just use it without having to actually learn anything about it. And when you take away everything from linux that is easy to use and accessible for the average windows user what have do you have? Just a bad copy of windows. This is
      • >The greatest problem with Linux adoption is that
        >developers want windows users to learn *nix

        Please back up this claim with even a little bit of evidence. Some of the *users* (especially the vocal group here on /.) exhibit that elitist attitude, but to paint the developers with the same brush is quite rude.

        If the goal of the developers of Gnome and KDE was to make unix more difficult for users and developers, they are not doing a very good job.

        • Please back up this claim with even a little bit of evidence. Some of the *users* (especially the vocal group here on /.) exhibit that elitist attitude, but to paint the developers with the same brush is quite rude.

          If the goal of the developers of Gnome and KDE was to make unix more difficult for users and developers, they are not doing a very good job.

          If I had offended the small minority of developers that really do care about the vast masses of the unwashed, uneductated and disinterested users I apolog
          • >But I stand by the claim that untill program X
            >easily doubleclick installs and does not require
            >any sort of knowledge of bash, unix principles of
            >configfiles to be run at full capacity it isn't
            >really userfriendly, it is merely paying lip
            >service to it and assuming that all serious users
            >will and should learn the "good old ways".

            So you're standing by a claim you hadn't previously made... very nice :-)

            Your actual claim was that the situation that you describe above A) exists and B) is
  • Xandros 1 (Score:2, Informative)

    by jbyron ( 667449 )
    is a decent distro - I switched from RH 7.x in an attempt to get my family to switch over (didn't quite work). Good: networking, Debian, stable, mostly intuitive. Bad: older version of KDE. Looking forward to finding a few Ben and getting the upgrade.
  • by dJCL ( 183345 )
    No joke, I interviewed with them to setup and run their Tech Support department. I was totally underqualified(but might have succeded anyway) so it's probably good that I did not get it...

    I still like the company thou.

Competence, like truth, beauty, and contact lenses, is in the eye of the beholder. -- Dr. Laurence J. Peter