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

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Announcements Software Linux

Xandros Recruiting Beta Testers 155

Posted by samzenpus from the try-it-out dept.
An anonymous reader writes "Looks like the folks at Xandros are getting ready for a new release of their Linux desktop. They're recruiting beta testers so those of you who like to try something new, you can sign up from here. No details about when or what to expect in the new release. Xandros always lets the other distros get the bugs out of the latest bleeding edge software before they do a new release so this should be another solid release with updated KDE, kernel, X, drivers, etc. Can't wait. Gotta get me on that beta list."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Xandros Recruiting Beta Testers More

Xandros Recruiting Beta Testers

Comments Filter:

  • pointless (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Coneasfast ( 690509 ) on Wednesday October 20, 2004 @09:19PM (#10582253)
    why would i want to give my phone/address/etc information, to do a beta test, for a linux distribution that isn't even free!

    • Re:pointless (Score:5, Insightful)

      by spagetti_code ( 773137 ) on Wednesday October 20, 2004 @10:05PM (#10582496)
      Because finally someone really *gets* what the problem is with linux - the damn thing is uninstallable by the rest of us. Sure - propeller heads can twist linux every which way, but if we really want to create a broadly acceptible, viable alternative to Windows, we need a distribution like Xandros.

      If I had a $1 for every time a linux-head answered a question with "thats easy, you just... " and then typed a sequence of line noise... well, I'd be doing ok.

      Xandros provides a simple way to get a user up and running with all the *main* needs met - word processor, browser, a well laid out control panel etc. Sure, down the track I'll figure out how to install that weird app I really want, but I'm up and running without so much as a mod-probe or apt-get.

      Go Xandros!

      • Re:pointless (Score:4, Insightful)

        by Osty ( 16825 ) on Wednesday October 20, 2004 @10:33PM (#10582638)

        Because finally someone really *gets* what the problem is with linux - the damn thing is uninstallable by the rest of us.

        IMHO, the "installation problem" has been solved for quite some time now. Most Linux installers (Debian excluded :) are easier to install than Windows. Therefore, it's also my opinion that distro developers are still spending too much time on initial installation and not enough time on the real problems. As I see it, the real problems right now are two-fold:

        1. Linux is still hard to come by pre-installed, so in that case you're correct - installation is difficult. That's relative, though, because the installation of a pre-installed Windows PC is 0, while installing Linux will always require some work so long as it's not pre-installed.
        2. Everything else. Applications. User interfaces. Hardware support. GNOME and KDE have made great strides in the desktop area, as have a number of applications, but there's still no coherent UI guidelines. As a developer, you get to make the choice between GNOME's guidelines, KDE's different guidelines, or something else entirely. Too often, applications opt for the "something else entirely" route (Mozilla's XUL, for example). That results in applications that don't share a common look & feel even within the same desktop environment. Part of that is due to the large number of environments (competition is a good thing, but it has plenty of downsides), part is due to the open source process itself (most developers have no UI sense at all, and the lack of oversight for UI cohesiveness doesn't help), and part is due to the fact that GNOME, KDE, etc are not cross-platform (Mozilla won't follow GNOME guideliness, because then it won't be right on Windows or OS X).*
        I don't have the answers to solve these problems, but I'm confident they are solvable. The biggest requirement I see is a coherent user experience, which is where distributions become very important. However, so long as distro makers continue to focus on installation (face it, how many times have you seen a "review" of a Linux distribution that focuses only on the installation of that distro?), they're going to get nowhere fast.

        * To be fair, Windows has problems with this as well, and it stems from a large, diverse, and active development community. It also can result from ego. For example, Microsoft makes excellent Macintosh software, and they generally follow Apple's guidelines whether the software was for OS 9 or earlier, or OS X. Apple, on the other hand, is either completely ignorant of Microsoft's UI guidelines for Windows, or they don't care. Therefore, you get crap like Quicktime or iTunes on Windows that don't follow any of the standard Windows interface guidelines. They're not "bad" applications, but the best that can be said about them on Windows is that they're Mac apps wrapped in a Windows frame. Not good for the overall user experience, and shame on Apple in my opinion.

        • Mozilla won't follow GNOME guideliness, because then it won't be right on Windows or OS X

          It certainly doesn't look good on OS X either. If it did, I'd be running it instead of Safari.

          For example, Microsoft makes excellent Macintosh software

          Well, that is certainly true for Office, which most people (Windows users included) is better on Mac than Windows. But The horrible abomination called MSN Messenger for Mac is not a good OS X application. For example, it doesn't support any scripting.

        • To be fair, Windows has problems with this as well, and it stems from a large, diverse, and active development community. It also can result from ego.

          I'd also like to add to that paragraph, Microsoft themselves. Compare buttons and menus in say, the latest version of Office (XP?) to the ones you get in Explorer.

          Some distros are doing great work with themes so that Qt and GTK look identical out of the box, which is brilliant. The only other point is the guidelines as you mention...

      • No. We need people that can... (Score:5, Insightful)

        by Man in Spandex ( 775950 ) <prsn@kev.gmail@com> on Wednesday October 20, 2004 @10:35PM (#10582642)
        That is not the problem with Linux and Xandros haven't even pinpointed the problem.

        There are various problems on why Linux is "hard" for new users. The simple one that I can say is "UI". Everybody sees computer, that computer better have an interface like explorer or they are doomed! Let me go into detail with some points.

        - no unified DE.
        The silly "competition" of kde and gnome isn't helping too much. Having distributions lately taking preferences of a DE over another makes a user think that distro "A" sucks because distro "B" does not use what "A" use. In the end, they don't understand that it's all linux no matter what you choose.

        - No universal "format"
        This I'm afraid will take a long friggin time. Having rpm's for some, deb's for others, tgz for slack does not solve the main problem. Companies/organizations taking preference of a format/package over another. Look at ATI who take in favor of RPM-Based distros to provide their drivers (I am aware that they suck. This was simply an example). It's great to see that some provide .deb's and specific rpm's but it's not enough.

        A bit out of context but just to tell people that, yes Xandros may seem easy for some people but it's still Linux. You will have to face a challenge sooner or later. Linux isn't windoze where you don't need to understand what a certain action does in the background or how we can improve it. It's still an enthusiast "Operating System" (or Kernel. call it whatever you want) if you ask me which requires nonstop tweaking and you won't manage to do all of that from exclusively clicking your mice.

        Until we find a perfect "format" (??), different people will always take a preference over another.

        - package managers
        We need a way to track down what we install, modify or remove. In other words, something like apt but more global. This again I'm refering to the last point I made. Maybe if we had a universal format, maybe then we'd see various package managers available to almost all distributions to make the user's life easier. YES COMPILING "MIGHT" BE FUN FOR SOME But in a world like today, does every user care bout gaining those extra secondes on optimization which they aren't even aware of? Why should they care. They want to know how to install/upgrade/uninstall programs. This is why I show people new to linux the Debian distribution. They don't regret it.

        If I made mistakes of I need correction, please go ahead :p. I'm sure there are other reasons why it's hard to meet the needs of a migrating end-user and it would be interesting to know other people's point of views for me and you and YOU.
        • As someone who has just switched to GNU/Linux full-time from Mac OS X (ASUS M6BNe - barebones, with no Redmond tax!) I have to say, you hit the nail on the head point by point. I can't copy and paste between GTK2 and Qt apps unless I'm running KDE and Klipper. I'd be much happier running Fluxbox, but it's this kind of basic BASIC non-functionality that just annoys the heck out of me. And installation / global management.... yeah, I'm currently one of those for whom compiling is NOT fun.

          Back to getting S

        • Re:No. We need people that can... (Score:4, Informative)

          by Coryoth ( 254751 ) on Thursday October 21, 2004 @12:48AM (#10583412) Homepage Journal
          We need a way to track down what we install, modify or remove. In other words, something like apt but more global. This again I'm refering to the last point I made. Maybe if we had a universal format, maybe then we'd see various package managers available to almost all distributions to make the user's life easier.

          Apt is fantastic for managing a core set of distribution provided packages. Throw a nice frontend like Synaptic [nongnu.org] on it and it's user friendly too. Apt works fine for both deb and rpm packages, so you really have the majority of distribution provided packages covered. Those that aren't covered are source distributions like Gentoo, or other fairly hands on distributions like Slackware.

          The problem comes when users want to install something outside of their ditribution provided set. Sure, Debian has a very large repository, but it'll never have commercial software. Meanwhile Fedora has a very small repository (comparatively). For non-distribution provided packages I'd suggest you check out Autopackage [autopackage.org]. You download a packages, run it, and it will check dependencies, resolve them if at all possible, and install itself - it's like installshield but nicer and with dependency resolution. Autopackage isn't done yet, but it already has working packages - its just lacking nice to have features like integration with rpm and deb package databases etc.

          Given a combination of Synaptic and Autopackage for base and third party software I think Linux has a very bright future for installing and managing software.

          Jedidiah.

          • Apt works fine for both deb and rpm packages, so you really have the majority of distribution provided packages covered.

            The format is not really the problem, and it's great that apt can handle both deb and rpm. The problem is that different distros put things in different places and use different naming conventions. It's not bad enough to confuse a user who knows what he's doing, but it means that you don't get a single RPM package that works on all distros that support RPMs. Instead, you get one RPM

            • Yet Another Package Format is not what Linux needs.

              autopackage isn't "yet another package format". It's one that is universal - you can build one autopackage, and it'll install anywhere. Just like an MSI will install on any Windows (with the appropriate runtime, except that autopackages will install the runtime for you on first use).

              It's not necessarily easy, mind you. Developers have to put a bit of work in to ensure their software is easy to install. But it can be done.

        • I agree completely about package formats. I got so sick if trying to deal with compiled RPMs for Suse and Mandrake I switched to gentoo. So now I spend hours compiling from source code. However, I get a much more up to date system, larger package selection, and the packages almost always work with no dependency problems.

          However, I can't expect even most technically inclined people to spend this much time installing and configuring software. I switched to gentoo to get away from Mandrakes horrid URPMI.
      • Okay, but MEPIS already gives you this. It was much easier to install (at least on my hardware) than Windows XP, since it actually had up-to-date drivers for everything. On a desktop system, it takes about 20-30 minutes to install. Even on my laptop, it took me maybe an hour and a half to get it installed and set up properly (with about half that time spent Googling to figure out how to get my widescreen display working). As the other replies said, the installation problem is already solved. Though I w
      • There are MANY distros that make it brainless to install these days. ( sure some older style ones still are around too, just dont choose one of them )

        While there are other issues slowing the migration of 'the masses', installation woes is no longer one of them...

        This is 2004.. things have changed...

      • Re:pointless (Score:1, Funny)

        by Anonymous Coward
        Because finally someone really *gets* what the problem is with linux - the damn thing is uninstallable by the rest of us. Sure - propeller heads can twist linux every which way, but if we really want to create a broadly acceptible, viable alternative to Windows, we need a distribution like Xandros.

        Actually, the problem is worse then that. People keep getting dumber. So we keep lowering the required level of intelligence to use software, so people become dumber, so we lower the required level of intel

  • Xandros Motto (Score:5, Funny)

    by capz loc ( 752940 ) <capzlocNO@SPAMgmail.com> on Wednesday October 20, 2004 @09:22PM (#10582276)
    From the Xandros website: Xandros: Making Linux work for you So apparently Xandros uses the Soviet Russia PR Firm.

  • Their form (Score:2, Informative)

    by dephiance ( 158337 )
    how much personal information do i have to give? this is absurd.
    • Most of the info they want is about your hardware, which seems reasonable considering they're wanting to see where problems might occur with their upcoming release. I know it's a 'personal' computer, but don't identify with it so much... :-)

      Garg

  • Beta Test? (Score:1, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward
    Ummm, this is a linux distro right? Why do they need a private beta? Just give me the damn images, and you better give me all the source code too. Information (and music) wants to be free!! (As in movies!!)

    • Re:Beta Test? (Score:4, Insightful)

      by bogie ( 31020 ) on Wednesday October 20, 2004 @09:56PM (#10582452) Journal
      Not to defend Xandros but what the heck is wrong with a smaller focused beta? Perhaps they find that to be more productive than just throwing a beta out into the wild hoping that people actually test it out and report bugs. I see nothing wrong with this on the surface and its a Very common practice. Quit your bitching already.
      • try completing the application form. there is easily 40+ questions . by the end of it they know more about you than you know about yourself.

  • vs. Ubuntu? (Score:5, Interesting)

    by LittLe3Lue ( 819978 ) on Wednesday October 20, 2004 @09:26PM (#10582294)
    A friend of mine almost got a coop job working for Xandros. Would have been interesting to know from the inside what it is that they are doing over there.

    As it stands, I havent used the distro, but I have heard that it would be very comparable to Ubuntu in terms of target audience. And both debian based too. With the VERY quickly growing Ubuntu community, and what seems to be bleeding edge software that is incorporated with it, does Xandros even stand a chance?

    Sure, the article sais that they wait for other distros to make it bugfree.. but Ubuntu might get there soon, and it would seem to me, that no one uses such a distro for mission critial tasks, only as desktops. Most tasks/users of these two distros are likely already stable enough.

    Anyone know what Xandros could offer that Ubuntu cant?
    • Well, honestly, given that Xandros costs some money to obtain (unless you want the watered-down free version) and that Ubuntu doesn't (full disclosure: I use Ubuntu), I'd say that Xandros' days are numbered.

      But then, that's just me.

    • Re:vs. Ubuntu? (Score:5, Informative)

      by child_of_mercy ( 168861 ) <.moc.tcatoir-eht. .ta. .yobnhoj.> on Wednesday October 20, 2004 @09:35PM (#10582353) Homepage
      Xandros has been around a while, and they really iron bugs out and make life simple for the user.

      they have a completely free (as in beer) open release which doesn't include things like codeweavers wine gear.

      I use vanilla debian on my servers but for the desktop xandros is what gets the job done, for the work I need to do anyway.

      (just my 2c)

    • Re:vs. Ubuntu? (Score:5, Informative)

      by pr0c ( 604875 ) on Wednesday October 20, 2004 @09:41PM (#10582378)
      Well I'd say

      1.) Xandros has crossover office, very important for many businesses (whether you like it or not), it also has StarOffice (deluxe version)
      2.) Xandros has more than just community support
      3.) Xandros has more liability than Ubuntu for how the product behaves
      4.) Xandros, when purchased, comes with a VERY nice manual.
      5.) Xandros has a very nice installer, much easier to use than Anaconda, debian, suse, etc IMO.

      Having said all that, I dislike Xandros, I dont' like KDE among other reasons...

      • Re:vs. Ubuntu? (Score:3, Interesting)

        by LittLe3Lue ( 819978 )
        Okay, that pretty much answers the question.

        I know that many companies that want to try linux have been going to Red Hat for one reason. Not because they read that it was better, or had more support, or that it was easier to install.

        It was so that if it crashed, the guy who decided to buy it can point the finger at the company, and not at a group of hackers puting together a (better?) distro in their garage>

        paying the few bucks for the distro will sure be worth the company names, support, and few 'ni

      • Re:vs. Ubuntu? (Score:3, Informative)

        by jdub! ( 24149 )
        Note that Ubuntu is a commercially supported distribution.
        • Interesting, I hadn't noticed because it is VERY hidden on their site, its what.. 3 links deep and then just says "...or you can get formal support from Canonical Ltd or other companies.", doesnt' seem like they are, at this point, interested in supporting it commericially; I can't say that I blame them since it is a very new distro..
    • "and what seems to be bleeding edge software that is incorporated with it, does Xandros even stand a chance?"

      Alright, so pretend I'm "a business guy." Should I care about bleeding edge software for my employees? Why bother? If it works for them, it works for me. This is why I never understood the complaints that Sun's Java Desktop was running a 2.4 kernel. Who cares if it up to date? In the business world all that matters is if it works. When it doesn't work, you're out big bucks.

      Alright, I'm not i

  • File manager != distro (Score:3, Interesting)

    by anonymous cowherd (m ( 783253 ) on Wednesday October 20, 2004 @09:34PM (#10582339) Homepage
    It looks like this desktop is nothing more than KDE modified to look even more like Windows than it already does. The question is, do we need this?

    Okay, we, the readers of /. probably do not, but does this type of Windows-alike desktop environment really add anything to Linux? In my opinion, it does not. Windows users will find that Linux is a worse Windows than Linux, and experienced Linux users can install their own DE that is customized to their needs, either by tweaking KDE/Gnome, or installing a more minimal environment like Fluxbox, XFCE, FVWM, and adding apps as needed. This distro seems to target Linux noobs whose only previous OS experience is Windows, yet in a way that encourages them not to learn about Linux! I had that same experience with Redhat when I installed it, and I don't think it benefitted me in the least.

    I admit, the Xandros File Manager looks pretty slick. But, a file manager does not a distro make. The summary notes that Xandros lets other distros "get the bugs out" first, making for a quality, bug-free release. If I wanted that, I'd just run Debian. (Xandros is based on Debian Sarge.)

    I might download their file manager to check it out, but I'm not going to download the whole distro. It's just not worth it to me.

    disclaimer: I run an ~x86 gentoo system here at home and love it.

    • Whoops. Of course, that should be "Windows users will find that Linux is a worse Windows than Windows."
    • Well, if they're offering a stable, easy to use operating system that has a wide internet support base, what it might add to Linux is a broader user base for those that want to escape Microsoft bugs without paying a ton for an Apple. Even if it costs some money, if it's well made and user friendly, it very well may attract the casual computer users away from their Windows machines.
    • You're missing the point. They're targetting it for people who don't want to learn about linux. Not everybody shares your passions of computers. Don't think of them as being lesser than linux geeks like ourselves (gentoo, a few ~x86).

      I think Xandros has a viable future if they can come through and make a desktop that's easiest to use.
    • Windows users want things to be installed as easy as they installed windows (but without the inherent security complications, heh).

      As a dummy average Joe-user Windows hobbit, I just want to insert a CD and let it do what it has to do. I'm NOT supposed to know about filesystems, nor the directory structure and how to configure the xf86watchamacallit in case the GUI blows, nor what cryptic combinations of keypresses to do to make the frigging ctrl+shift+numeric keypad arrow work as it SHOULD.

      I just want a f
      • Joe User is in real trouble when something does break, if he does not understand [insert OS here]. Inevitably, by Murphy's Law, something will break. This is true whether Joe runs Linux or Windows.

        As for usability, note that 33 of those screenshots appear to be from the installer, which looks like it could have been taken from Debian (not sure on this). The remaining 109 appear to be from GNOME. Those could be duplicated on any Linux system having GNOME installed, including mine.

        I think what you are

      • Heh.

        I have been [very] idly following Ubuntu since it was mentioned on slashdot a while ago. I need an easy, stable distro to deploy on several hundred PCs in my school district. So, this time, since I have time on my hands, I throught I'd actually check out the screenshots of the parent post.

        (BTW, this was the actual order I selected the screen-shots in.)

        • Screen 1 (of 142): pretty mundane boot prompt.
        • Screen 2: Text-based install screen - no problem, the students won't see the install process anywa
        • Just an FYI, there have been an ungodly number of posts in the ubuntu-users list regarding this. That splash-screen/wallpaper combo has been removed as the default. It is still in the distro, but is no longer what is displayed when you install.

          I'm currently using Ubuntu on my main desktop, as well as testing it on a G4. It's ok, it has a lot of potential, but does need a lot of work. Plus, I've not cared much for Gnome since they stopped using enlightenment...

          DT
          • there have been an ungodly number of posts in the ubuntu-users list regarding this.

            Yeah, funny how all of that controversy surrounding the "human" theme cropped up a week before the official Ubuntu release. Nothing like hot chicks [img62.exs.cx], naked even [img61.exs.cx], to reel in the geeks right before the release!

            I'm not knocking Ubuntu - I think it's a great distro, and it's the first one I've tried where everything "just works". But I do think the timing of the "controversial" theme graphics is a bit suspect.
      • Sure, Linux is much more stable than winblows,
        it doesn't get viruses, etc.

        What about trojans? Your average Joe Sixpack will double click his GreatSrceensaver.sh, and happily enter the root password when it asks for it - Linux will not be any more secure for ignorant users than Windows is.

    • The question is, do we need this?

      Need may be a relative concept around here but I can tell you from experience I really like Xandros. It's a breeze to learn for Windows users and is easy to network with Windows machines. Printers, scanners, Windows domain...click, click done. The supported version comes bundled with CrossOver Office and runs most of the MS Office suite fairly well.

      It makes a great stepping stone distro for business users and makes a very nice introduction to non-Windows machines.

      Do

  • has anyone read the cathedral and the bazaar? (Score:3, Interesting)

    by patjenk ( 780006 ) on Wednesday October 20, 2004 @09:41PM (#10582376) Homepage
    I thought that book was required reading here. Eric Raymond discussed that linux has been successful because it was released early and often. This compared to comercial software built in the cathedral style which takes months to get to a buggy release. This beta signup sounds like a cathedral style.

    • Re:has anyone read the cathedral and the bazaar? (Score:4, Insightful)

      by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday October 20, 2004 @10:13PM (#10582538)
      1996 called and it wants its Cathedral back. That arguement was and is simplistic and lame. So what are open source workers in large corporations? People who copulate in the Cathedral? And what about commercial vendors contributing to open source - are they throwing their sacred shrines and implements out onto the street bazaar? This is the same sort of bullshit fad thinking that lead to the .com boom and bust.

      Linux works because:
      1) There is a good accessible model to base it on - UNIX.
      2) It attracts extreme types who generally have little social skill but lots of technical skill. Instead of sitting around bored they decided to write software - oh and look there's some free projects out there. These people are motivated zealots.
      3) A lot of people jumped on the bandwagon and thought they could make a ton of cash out of Linux
      4) The alternatives are damn expensive to own and run, and give you no control if you're a tech headed geek. The alternative is something where you can fix and change the code if something goes wrong...oh and it costs next to nothing. It requires techy skill but shit they already have that and it'll keep their friends and family talking to them even though they smell funny.

      Cathedral and Bazaar peh! Religion and BS.
      • I think you have missed some of the point of an analogy--it is a simplistic comparison by nature. Almost EVERY analogy falls apart under in depth scrutiny. Accept it for what it is--an educational tool to let people understand the open source philosophy a little better.

        I do agree with why linux works, even though that is hardly the whole of it. Remember, unlike unix or windows, if a single linux vendor dies, it won't matter because there are many others, and lots of people contribute. At some point, li
    • Just keep in mind Xandros (or whoever) isn't Linux and couldn't possibly be. I don't think your cathedral comment holds weight if you think about the thousands of hackers/developers working across the globe that enabled Xandros to do their beta. It boggles my mind when I think of how much work goes into any distro and I'm not even talking about the work done creating the actuall distro! Beta indeed! :)

      Beta is when you CVS into the developers site, download; configure; make; make install and then take the
  • ....I'd run Windows.

  • Wow, it's so innovative... a real break away... (Score:2, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward

    These guys sure do know how to blow everyone away with an operating system that is slightly less functional that Windows for the average user, and only half as attractive! All of this for a price too. If it weren't for the virus/spyware factor (which is honestly nearly enough... sadly) this sort of distro would have absolutely no foothold.

    When I run Linux, I run WindowMaker/GNUStep. It's really nice to have someone actually wonder what OS I'm running... instead of the chameleon act of a desktop environm

  • Cool! (Score:4, Funny)

    by commodoresloat ( 172735 ) on Wednesday October 20, 2004 @09:54PM (#10582441)
    Does it cost $500 to participate in the beta test?
  • Every time I see an article about Xandros, I can't help but think of Zathras [midwinter.com] from Season 1 of Babylon 5.

  • Slashdotted (Score:1, Informative)

    by Anonymous Coward

    Hah! Slowing down already! I guess they must be running Xandros linux on their servers!

    Hahahahaha-- huh? ... what do you mean that's not how it works here?

  • Xandros KDE rocks. (Score:2, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward
    I am a KDE convert. Converted from GNOME to KDE and must say that I find KDE absolutely usable. I have the feeling to work under a true Desktop Environment and I detect new stuff with every minute I am using it. I am impressed about the consistency, speed, interoperability. I today found out that you can drag&drop files from konqueror (be it local, webdav, ftp, http or whatever) to your kconsole and voila it downloads them exactly in the dir where you have kconsole. These are the things that make life e
  • First, the question...then some background. Would this be a good version of linux for me to try to convert to as a replacement for WinXP? (not necessarily the beta...)

    I am a relative novice to the Linux world, but have installed various versions of linux over the past few years to try. The ones I have used briefly are Suse, Mandrake, and RedHat.

    I found each had their own little quirks and bonuses just from the short time I used each, but I have never gone to the trouble of finding drivers for things lik
    • If you want to use it "as a replacement for WinXP," then I need to ask: What do you use WinXP for?

      If it's games, forget it. Stick with XP.

      If it's office-type apps, then any distro really will do. If you want something that will install and "just work," then I'd use something like Mandrake or Fedora Core. If you want to get really frustrated doing your first install, but come out of it having learned something, then Gentoo or Linux From Scratch are good choices.

      (This isn't to imply that other distro


      • I do game a bit, but have another system to use for that if I need to. This one would mostly be for surfing the web, playing around with various things, and probably some coding.

        This will be my laptop (ThinkPad T42) so wireless connectivity is a concern, but I would be willing to buy a card that is supported so it's not a huge deal. I figure the hardware should be standard enough to work in linux, since it has always worked in Knoppix.
      • > I need to ask: What do you use WinXP for?

        I should answer this from the standpoint of a geek who has tried time and time again to convert all his loved ones away from the dark side. Most Mom and Pop computers have uses that have very little to do with games or office apps.

        A musician friend of mine prints all his CD labels and covers on some Windows App that I can't get playing nice with Wine and CUPS. He also uses bleeding edge MIDI interface and sampler hardware that's way too new to supported under
    • From personal experience, I think this is a brilliant first distro to try.

      I installed Xandros Desktop 2.0 on a spare machine as I didn't have the courage at the time to go for a full Debian installation.

      I've since installed Ubuntu on another box - but for day-to-day use, Xandros remains.

      It has worked fine with all my hardware, including two different printers and two different thumbdrives, all with no tweaking or downloads.

      I would strongly recommend it as an introduction to Linux.

      And no, I _don't_ work

  • Poor (Score:1, Flamebait)

    by mistersooreams ( 811324 )
    I swear this is not a troll, but honestly, this is really poor. For a start, I thought Linux was supposed to be at least partly about freedom of information? Now I don't want to tie a philosophy to tightly to a product, and Xandros sure is one of those, but seriously... what is the point of all this harvesting of personal information? They can sell that for a mint as personal information of a cross-section of the market (the tech-savvy) to which it's usually very hard to target ads.

    Then, even if you get in

    • What in the world were you expecting from a beta test, a flawless distro that you are going to have the time of your life with? You seem to have missed that part of the story. This is purely for those interested in assisting with making Xandros a better distro, and there's nothing wrong with that.

      And everyone that says it's a bundle of otherwise-free apps keep forgetting that you get Crossover Office as well, which is most certainly not free. The cost for just Crossover Standard as a download is $39.95

    • then use some free distro, with linux YOU HAVE CHOICE.

      some people really like the way xandros does things, and are willing to pay for it too(or give their name to get on a beta).

      **but this doesn't seem to be a whole lot more than a bundle of otherwise-free apps.** and that's where you're wrong(you get support and some commercial, non-free, stuff integrated tightly into a working package).

  • Xandros, your mothers distro (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday October 20, 2004 @10:28PM (#10582618)
    As an avid Debian user I wanted to move my parents from XP hell to a linux distro. But not having used (daily) any other distro in a long time I went looking for a polished debian based distro. After a quick trial of Knoppix I tried Xandros.

    Basically I was amazed at how simply the install went. Four clicks, amazing. Way better than any other distro or OS for that matter. They love it. No problems.

    So while Xandros may not get a thumbs up from hardcore linux users it's definately the most polished and the easiest (IMHO) distro to switch a windows user to.

    btw, hint for ppl trying to install Firefox on Xandros, 'xhost +' ;-)

    • Re:Xandros, your mothers distro (Score:1, Informative)

      by Anonymous Coward
      Except doing an 'xhost +' is potentially horribly insecure on a networked machine.
    • About a 8 months ago I had a hard drive fail and decided to install Xandros to replace the RedHat 9 that was on my dead drive. I had been happily using apt-for-rpm thanks to the great guy[s?] at freshrpms.net [freshrpms.net] and had long since grown to love the Debian software management way:
      1. $ sudo -s
      2. # apt-get update
      3. # apt-get upgrade/install xxxx
      4. there is no 4, its done everything is up to date, nothing else to do.
      The web server that I inherited was running Debian, so I had general idea of where to look for conf
  • There's an "Open Circulation" version on the website http://www.xandros.com/products/home/desktopoc/dsk _oc_download.html I installed a 30-day demo of Xandros a while back, and it kicked ass. It installed flawlessly, all my hardware worked, and the Crossover Office was very useful. Also, the version I used was (somewhat) compatible with debian apt repositories, if you were willing to work at it. In fact, I'd say getting apt running on Xandros is easier than getting debian running =p

  • my experiences (Score:2, Interesting)

    by darthpenguin ( 206566 )
    I feel that I should express my personal experiences with various "easy to use" distros. My mother, who is quite unskilled with computers (what a surprise), kept on complaining how her computer wouldn't work properly. It was always down to spyware, or other background programs eating up resources, etc. I decided that enough was enough, that I didn't want to spend several hours per week cleaning the same crud off her drive.

    I tried installing Xandros on her system. It installed fine, configured everythin

    • [...] it was rather painfully slow, on a duron 1.6ghz + 256MB ddr box.

      That's strange. I installed it on a P3 700MHz with 256mb of ram and it was fast.

      • I have Xandros running on a Pentium 200 laptop and it is painfully slow, but workable. I installed it (the open-circulation edition) on a friends P3 600MHz system with 128MB of RAM and its not lightning, but it a lot faster than the Win2000 that was on it before.
  • I mean, seriously, they ask for the make and model of every single piece of equipment in my machine, and they require an answer. What make and model is your DSL modem, what make and model is your monitor, what make and model is your fucking cd-rom drive...what the hell, it is a standard fucking IDE cd-rom drive, what the fuck do you care what make and model it is! Screw this shit, I was going to try it out but I got better things to do then answer a billion pointless questions.

  • I liked Xandros the first time I used it..... (Score:1, Informative)

    by Anonymous Coward
    ....when it was called Windows 2000.

    Seriously, go look at the screenshots. All the Windows 2000 interface components just blatently ripped off. Stuff named just a little differently, but in the same place. (e.g. "Control Center" vs. Control Panel).

    Cmon guys, if people were totally ripping off some program or worse yet an entire OS that you wrote, you'd have to be angry about it. M$ or no M$, this copying/stealing/whatever stuff is getting downright ridiculous.

    Oh, and let me get this straight - I'm going
  • "Xandros always lets the other distros get the bugs out of the latest bleeding edge software before they do a new release so this should be another solid release... ... Can't wait. Gotta get me on that beta list."

    Hold on... You're telling us that the reason you love xandros is because of its non-bleeding-edge stability... ... and you can't wait to get on the _beta_ test? :)
  • OK, here's a screenshot [the-riotact.com] of my own desktop a moment ago (it's an old version big upgrade in the pipe, it is very heavily locked down and firewalled).

    Over in desktop 2 I've got two xandros file managers tiled to give me views of 4 locations on the network.

    Two of them are samba mounts, one is local, and one is ftp.

    But this way, in use, those network distinctions are transparent.

    In windows world I used to have two or three explorers open at any given time plus an ftp client.

    moving files around, and puttin
  • I notice on their site they have a link (in news) to pre installed linux laptops. Several models, the cheap one is 1099$, your choice fedora or lindows, if you want xandros it is 99 clams more. You could get one without xandros, save the 99$, add more RAM with that loot, and sign up for the beta test and get the xandros free that way. 40 questions, cross over office and star office comes with it, about two bucks a question to you to answer it, if you want to look at it that way. I'm not in the market but th
  • I've just signed up... to trial it on a laptop, and they wanted to know all the hardware details??? I haven't got a clue what all the hardware details were... and I'm damn sure the vast majority of potential purchasers won't know what all the ins and outs of what chipset and what northbridge etc. they've got either... especially with a clone manufacturer with no real manual for it. To get those details, I'd need to fire knoppix up. I just want to stick the disk in and have it work... and I want suspend to w
    • They aren't asking normal users to give them the information.

      What good is asking a complete beginner to Linux their exact model and make numbers? None at all. That's why this is a -beta- test and not a final release. They have to collect the model numbers so that when people ask (and they WILL ask) if their specific model of hardware is supported, they can say "Yes" or "No", instead of the typical Linux answer "Try it and see".

      Beta testers is for people who know how to test a system, not for people who ar

  • Xandros is very good, just not for us geeks (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Tools1911 ( 753205 ) on Thursday October 21, 2004 @03:27AM (#10584115) Homepage
    I used Xandros 2.0 for over a few months, and I loved it. Everything worked, I beat windows users at there own game, new hardware? plug-in and play, say why are you looking for drivers?, starting applications?, nice menu, Internet->Browser, Office->Writer, why are you looking at Start->Programs->MS Office->Word?
    Really while running Xandros, I beat the snot out of any windows instalation, it is that good, I loved that part, and hated it most of all, because I felt that I lost my Linux Control, so I'm back to Debian and Gentoo.
    But where not importand here, most of the Slashdot crowd has no problem using a distro like Debian and reading some manuals, where already using Linux.
    Now enter my Girlfriend, who hates, I state here, hates PC's, if they don't work, if they slip, she gets mad, real mad at the PC in 5 seconds flat. She kept screaming at here MS Windows, and I kept saying, hey, Xandros is on another partion give it a try then. And after getting mad she did, now she still get's mad at Xandros once in a while, but that's mostly websites that don't work because there IE only, and she's more pissed that she as a customer isn't getting respected for using an OS that does work.
    Since she can complain about absolutly everything, I signed her up for the beta test, because I believe she can saddle up the Xandros people with enough things the "average" user cares about that they have enough for Xandros 4.0! :)
    She found plenty of things she wanted "fixed", now ofcourse I fixed it, using "IT Ninja Tech Support" ( SSH ), but I think she sees the stuff we, the geeks miss.
    I don't care what system someone else uses when I don't have to fix it, but if the average user starts using Linux, we win also, because hardware will get Linux support, we can demand open source drivers ( hey, you want native support for 15% of the market and growing?, then you better get of you horse and give is stable debuggable code ).
    Not to mention that websites start taking care of there HTML code, maybe even force IE to be standards compliant, force MS Office into supporting KOffice and OpenOffice.org documents
    We might not like it, but we need these average users to be seens as Full
    • I fixed it, using "IT Ninja Tech Support" ( SSH )

      I love that line! :-)

      but I think she sees the stuff we, the geeks miss.

      I work in educational technology (developing software for humanities profs amongst others) and working with absolutely clueless users has led to some great interface improvements. We spend weeks or months writing up some interface or feature, but its the feedback from those who haven't seen it before that allows us to make things discoverable and usable by other new users without ha
  • Actually it looks like XFCE4 with a new Launch button and a slightly customized Panel, and a desktop manager from KDE or something. Of course, not having seen KDE at work in quite a while I could easily be fooled into thinking that.
  • I hear a lot of complaints about the level of information required to use Xandros. Whilst the ones concerning data mining are valid, the ones that bitch about having to provide your hardware configuration are just plain stupid. Xandros are providing a beta free, which represents their hard work. The pay-off is that you do a little bug testing for them. In order to know what works, they need to know what hardware you're running out of the millions of possible configurations. I mean, how many Linux BBS t
  • Is there any information availble about this, like what tasks are involved being a beta tested, will you be sent the CDs, or do you have to download, etc?

Slashdot Top Deals

Top Ten Things Overheard At The ANSI C Draft Committee Meetings: (10) Sorry, but that's too useful.

Close